Erection & Scrotal problems- Who respected my wishes

Erection&Scrotal problems–Who respected my wishes

 

I have made many comments about the type of examinations some Urologists

 are doing on people. And with my complaints against Urologists, you must think
 I make a complaint against every Urologist. ...  Not so ....

I have seen many Urologists in my quest to find justice against those that didn’t

respect my wishes & abused me. But one has to be fair. Whereas one out of
3 Urologists abused me; 2 out of 3 did not. 66% respected my wishes. 

In respect to those that do respect the patients wishes, I am informing you of

those who respected my wishes & of those who did not. There are of course,
many  Urologists who I have not seen.

What does a patient want when they visit a medical specialist –

       1)      Our wishes to be respected

2)      To be informed
3)    Seek permission if they intend to do anything.
                                                                                                                                          

Urologists who respected my wishes (No particular order)

       1)      Mr Mark Fraundorfer , Tauranga  - showed a great deal of respect.

Acted in my best interests.  I  can’t recommend him highly enough.

2)      Mr John Tuckey – Auckland

3)      Mr Dirk Drent  - Auckland

4)      Mr David Merrilees – Auckland

5)      Mr Mischel Neill – Auckland

6)      Mr Michael Mackay – Auckland

7)      Mr Glen Devcich – Hamilton

8)      Mr Michael Cresswell  –  Rotorua (1988). I really appreciated

the value of this appointment.

.....Plus others.....

Urologists who did not respect my wishes

       1)      Urologist (deceased) – from 1987

2)      Mr N, Whangarei  - Despite advising him how things were

improving following Dr R’s examination, pulled up & under my

scrotum rather vigoursly resulting in a bleed, bruising & a

haemorrhage in the perinneal area.

 

Health Disabilities Commission (HDC)  response  – a normal examination

carried out. No comment on the haemorrhage.

So we can assume that for the HDC this examination was acceptable.

3)      Urologist , Hamilton – Out of all the Urologists I have seen, he was one

 of the most informative, yet he suddenly turned around & twisted the

top of my left testicle causing it to fall on its side. Considering our

discussion, it is hard to fathom this turnaround of events.

The HDC’s reponse. A normal examination.  No comment on the

twisting of the testicle.  So one must ask, if the HDC feels that the

twisting of ones  testicle causing it to fall on its side  is acceptable

to them . How many other patients are being compromised.  Is this

normal practice. Is it widespread, this abusing of patients.

As far as I am concerned, It is :

                                  unacceptable practice by this Urologist.

BUT acceptable by the HDC

4)      Dr M, Hastings – When I clearly advise a Urologist of the dangers

of doing a certain type of examination & he does it anyway, what is

his reason.

a)      Revenge

b)      He believes he’s God & can do anything he wants

c)       Hes trying to cover-up the results of the previous examinations

 

              Result : the septum drops resulting in a collapse of the perinneal area.
              Once again The HDC feel  this is a normal and acceptable examination .
 

This Urologist has changed everything, he has changed the direction.

 

Lastly,

Urologists who produce fraudulent reports from their consultations

             1)      Urologist, Auckland -  After a referral from Dr R, produced a 

fraudulent report, which in many  aspects  mirrored Dr R’s

fraudulent  report.