Probably has way more to do with where the tattoo was placed than anything else. Below the panty line, that's just not a smart idea. Actually this strikes me as a "What do you get when you put two idiots together? A lawsuit." type of situation.
Another one of those mindless "I burnt myself because the coffee is hot" things. Did the woman not know the Dr.? If so she must have known that he was a joker. What ARE we coming to?
Why would the doctor do that when he knows he would get in trouble for it? Common sense, use it people.
Even for a "joker" this is rather iffy. A temp. tattoo is one thing, below the panty line is going into dangerous territory, familiar or not. Thats not something any patient would feel comfortable with imo and I dont blame her for being a little upset. There are perverts who are priests, teachers, social workers etc, why not a doctor? If he was just trying to be funny or whatever, he needs to sharpen up his common sense, doing what he did is just begging for trouble.
One should clearly know that coffee is hot. I'm not sure why one should know that the doctor would put a fake tattoo of a rose on your panty-line while knocked out though; even if he is known for having a sense of humor.
That is a stupid lawsuit. I could see if it wasn't temporary or totally harmless. It might be yelling worthy. Lawsuit worthy, it is a waste of everyone's time.
It maybe stupid, but I could understand waking up and feeling a bit uncomfortable if not violated by this. We also dont know what the doctors response was when she got about it. If he laughed in her face I'd sue also.
Well if you have Jackie Chiles as a lawyer he can get you a good settlement, if you listen to him and dont put the balm on you can get more than free coffee for life!
Well, she wasn't wearing panties during the surgery. And, if it was L5, which is the most common site, the incision could have been below the "panty line" anyway. Sounds like a great physician, but yeah, when you get that prefix (target) in front of your name, you better stick to the standard or care.
like honestly, how would any of us feel if we go to the dr for an appendix removal and when we wake up the next day there is a fake tattoo of Donald duck on our hip... I can tell you I would feel violated.
If he'd have done that to my sister, I'm probably going down there to knock the guy out. Rose below the panty line? Up front?
Why didnt he put the tattoo on her arm, or shoulder? The placement of it makes it creepy and puts it out of the realm of a joke, and into the realm of offensive imo.
I can tell you I wouldn't feel violated. This is a stuipd lawsuit and a waste of everyone's time. Now if he raped her or sewed his initials on her, then yes. Lawsuit.
Dude deserves to get sued IMO, strictly because of placement. Just because you are a doctor doesn't mean you have any more right to go down their then anyone else unless its medically necessary. Which clearly this was not. I find it hard to believe that in this day and age a doctor would be that dumb.
If he does anything below the pantie line that isnt part of the precedure? It's absolutely creepy. He got permission to go below the pantie line for a specific job, he took liberties once he was down there. That's creepy.
So if your wife came home from surgery that was performed while laying on her stomach and you found a tat down front you would have no problem with it? And not only have no problem with it but feel no one should and that any doctor should be able to do the same any time they want? Because if this suit is frivolous that's essentially what you are saying, that this is fine behaviour and should not be grounds for any kind of legal action.
If the tat was anywhere else I would have no problem with it whatsoever. I mean sure, sooner or later some douch would sue but as long as the tat was not near the privates I would call it stupid lawsuit.
no i wouldn't. If I did I would have the same problem if he was cutting him. Yes, that is what I am saying. It is fine behavior and should not be grounds for any kind of legal action.
I guess thats the beauty of a free country, we all get to have our own opinions. We allow you to be wrong.
He violated her by performing an action below her panty-lines that he was not asked to do. I don't understand how that's fine behavior.
There are many areas below the panty line where nothing sexual happens. Also the man is a doctor and was cutting her in that region. What he did was not damaging in any way whatsoever. I do feel that if you have a problem with it to make it a lawsuit that either you are a huge prude with little to no sense of humor, a dick who wants to cash in or someone who has serious issues, such as molestation or rape in their background.
Ok he did the operation on her back. Now what right does he have to put any type of tattoo on her? None. It wasn't necessary at all. If he wanted to be funny he could have just told her a joke after she woke up. It may have not been damaging but that still doesn't make it right for him to do that. Alright, lets say you undergo surgery below your waist line. I never wish this on you or anyone else but hypothetically speaking. And after the surgery, you go home and you find that the surgeon did the same thing that has happened in this situation. Would you feel violated or think it was funny? Remember, its below your waist line, in the region of your manhood or your backside.
But making whatever assumptions you want and just saying " get over it " doesn't really make sense either.
