Well actually, it's well documented that after having a historectomy that the husbands of the patients actually do stop having sex with the women. My mom had that problem with my dad after her historectomy. So there is evidence of other people suffering erosion of thier sex lives due to the procedure itself. Now unto the branding itself. Keep in mind we don't see the branding happen, and there is no statement from the doctor, so we don't know why it happened. There could have been bleeding. There could have been legitmate reasons for him to mark it before hand. I'd like to see a response from another ob to see wether they've seen this happen before and what reasons there would be to do it.

The issue is not that the woman was cauterized, but the manner, or in this case the pattern, in which it was done. What possible medical reason could there be for the doctor to brand the woman's uterus (and that of other women, apparently) with "UK"? And the lawsuit is over the alleged impropriety involved in the surgery (hence my comment about the strained marital relationship and how amused I was by that). Yes, reduced sexual interest on the part of both spouses is often an after-effect of hysterectomies. Since this IS so well-documented, why does there need to be a lawsuit about it? Because they are claiming that this reduction is due to the particulars of this case (the UK branding), which to me seems a little ridiculous. Just my $.02...




Alric has bats in the attic. ~Larisa