An Austrian surgeon allegedly let his teenage daughter drill a hole in a patient’s skull.
Following a forestry accident in January, a 33-year-old man was flown by air ambulance to Graz University Hospital, Styria, southeastern Austria, with serious head injuries, according to Kronen Zeitung, an Austrian newspaper.
He needed emergency surgery, but the doctor allegedly let his 13-year-old daughter take part in operating on him.
The newspaper reported that she even drilled a hole in the patient’s skull.
While the operation was said to have gone off without issue, the patient is still unable to work and investigations by the Graz public prosecutor’s officer against the entire surgical team are continuing.
It wasn’t until April that an anonymous complaint was logged to the public prosecutor’s office about the allegations, the newspaper reported.
The alleged victim initially learned about the case in the media before later being told by authorities he was a witness in an investigation.
My understanding is that the drill is fixtured in position in procedures as delicate as this, so that it really can’t move and drill anywhere except where it needs to. Likely why Dad thought (wrongly) that it was harmless.
Surgical tech here!
In craniotomies, once the skull is exposed the doc will use basically a handheld dremel to punch a few holes, then connect the dots with a side-biting bit.
Well not only has Hollywood lied to us again, I now feel 10 times more horrified about this story.
Could she have done the initial drill in such a manner? Mounted drill etc
I’ve never seen a mounted drill in the OR (though I imagine there is an option for it - bed-mounted instruments and equipment are pretty common).
Here’s a video that kinda shows how craniotomies go - this is just an animation, nothing gory. The drill in the animation is different from the onces I’ve seen used for cranis (pistol-shaped vs just a cylinder like the one I linked earlier) but either way, it’s very much a hand-held device.
Even micro surgery like when we’re drilling in a tympanoplasty or cochlear implant placement - literally done under a microscope - it’s still just a little dremmel looking thing.
I just wanted to be sure to say thank you for your thoughtful replies with sources, I have learned some things and enjoyed it.
Worked in orthopedic surgery for years (just a big nerd, not a surgeon) and it’s always strange seeing other surgical disciplines talking about the equipment used in a procedure. Like, ya’ll don’t just use a Dewalt in a sterile bag? Really?
ya’ll don’t just use a Dewalt in a sterile bag?
They like to pretend it’s more than that, but anything that requires power really just boils down to carpentry that bleeds.
It likely was harmless, since the article infers ther surgery went well. It was just inappropriate and looks bad. When suing in the US you have to show damages. The patient may have a hard time winning his case.
I think that’s an entirely wrong starting point. Operating on a person without their informed consent is bodily harm. You have to prove the patient agreed. (Ignoring for the moment situations where they can’t.)
The patient never agreed to a surgery in part performed by that kid, but to one performed entirely by trained professionals.
But there was no bodily harm. If the procedure had failed or an infection happened there would be, but from the light bit of info in the article, the procedure was successful. No damages incurred due to the 13 year olds involvement.
But there was no bodily harm.
Opening up the patient - by itself - is bodily harm (“Körperverletzung”) already. It is only legal in the context of consent, and that consent only carries any weight if it was informed. Even if nothing goes wrong and no damages occur the lack of informed consent makes the act illegal.
This is probably https://gesetzefinden.at/bundesrecht/bundesgesetze/stgb/para-83 by the child, who is too young to be tried or punished, but should be https://gesetzefinden.at/bundesrecht/bundesgesetze/stgb/para-282 by the mother.
Maybe https://gesetzefinden.at/bundesrecht/bundesgesetze/stgb/para-110 is also relevant, if we assume the deficient consent also has consequences for the other medical treatment that occured from other people in the room.
Life saving emergencies constitute implied consent. It doesn’t actually need to be given beforehand if it’s to save/help someone who can’t currently make a choice.
Okay, sorry, I didn’t realize this wasn’t a scheduled surgery, I only read the German article from the comments.
Yes there is the concept of implied consent for those cases where a patient can’t make his will known. But in those cases you have to act along the presumed will of the patient. That will of the patient would regularily be presumed to contain the lege artis, at least in a setting where the hospital has been reached already and the option was available. So that again precludes untrained people participating in my view.
Which part of the US 🇺🇸 is Austria 🇦🇹 in?
Missouri. The capital is Vienna.
I wasn’t inferring this was a US case. But a lot of law isn’t very dissimilar in most countries, so just taking a guess I would assume you’d have to show damages in Austria, as well.
I was thinking this as well. Headlines, no matter the story, are frequently meant to rage bait people.
Is it pretty messed up? Yeah, I’d say that meets the definition. Was the guy actually in danger? Idk? I’m not a rocket scientist.
Edit: Side note, I just saw a “cranial fixation system” for the first time where I work about a week ago. I do not work in a medical field so this is just a really strange coincidence. I won’t be elaborating on my career.
Was the guy in any danger?
He was receiving emergency brain surgery.
It sounds like the patient is doing fine.
That’s not the point really, now is it?
The point of medicine? I think it is.
So you’d feel fine if the pilot of the plane announces after the landing that his kid did the landing?
These are the policies of take-your-daughter-to-work day. The doctor’s hands were tied.
I feel like there was something like this in one of the Naked Gun movies. If not, there should’ve been.
I missed this in the news, then saw link refers to Kronen Zeitung report which is not a great newspaper to cite so thought for sure it cannot be entirely true? But it is! And here another link from Die Presse (google translate works fine here) which tells us it was not a jerk dad who brought his kid to drill holes but an idiot mom.
An intern got experience that made her more knowledgeable the rest of this is nonsense
…bro what the fuck was everyone else in the OR doing? Craniotomies take a full team of people, and every single person in that room should have lost their shit when a 13 year old got anywhere near it, let alone scrubbed in to the damn surgery and fucking practice medicine.
Why didn’t the nurse unplug the thing? Why didn’t the tech cut the fucking cord? Why didn’t the anesthesiologist scroll more aggressively on his iPad??
This story represents a metric shit-ton of failures, not just the surgeon/daughter.
It’s only brain surgery, not rocket science. You can calm down 😅
Maybe the ananymous report came from a member of the staff. I suspect that the kind of doctor who allows his unqualified daughter to operate on a patient is also an asshole to whom it is hard to say no as a subordinate.
So an average surgeon
I suspect that the kind of doctor who
Badabadam badabadabadabam oooooweeeeoooooo
I like how hating on anesthesiologists is universal. Thank you for the chuckle.
Bold of you to assume she scrubbed in and didn’t just put her flaming hot Cheetos down and jump in
Workplace politics, the surgeon is likely an asshole who shoves shit down the throat of anyone who disagrees with him.
Real answer: the drills are battery powered, there’s no cord to cut (sometimes)
There’s a reason we call neurosurgery the arts and crafts department.
I mean we called this an apprenticeship for a thousand years or so, right?
I don’t understand either if this is even a problem.
Sounds like you’ve had brain surgery by a 13 year old.
Sounds like you just want an snswer.
Allowing a literal child with 0 medical training/education to drill into/near a vital organ of someone experiencing an acute head injury while they are unconscious and without their consent? Naw, nothing wrong there at all.
Well, I’m not a brain surgeon. So, I don’t take myself as qualified to make that risk assessment. I agree that all you said up to ‘without consent’ is a very reasonable starting point to think about it, the answer to it should be made by whomever is qualified to answer it.
As for consent, no pacirnt gives direct consent to who’s in/helping the surgery besides the head surgeon. Why do you claim its need in this case?
There is a trauma surgeon in the article stating she shouldn’t have even been allowed in the room, let alone allowed to drill into a patient’s skull.
Is it less ethical or more ethical if the patient had given informed consent?
No patient gives consent to who is helping in the surgery because there is an implicit understanding that it will only be performed by qualified licensed personnel. There are multiple regulating bodies that prevent unqualified people from practicing in a professional setting. So, it is not unreasonable to make this assumption.
My argument is that it would be one thing if this was a simple superficial elective surgery where the patient consented to allowing the doctor’s unqualified child “to give it a go” popping a pimple or something. It is significantly worse because it was a life-threatening emergency procedure where the doctor elected to increase the likelihood of failure/harm/death while the patient was in a position where they couldn’t consent to the doctor taking that unnecessary risk.
Thanks for the thoughtful answer!
Y’all just jealous she’s a brain surgeon with a 100% survival rate at 13.
I also lack basic judgment, and have no idea if there was a problem here
I too like to partake into cynical sarcastic self loathing , at times.
And I do like the layered ambiguity to whom your comment is addressed.
How else is she going to learn?
Can’t make an omelette without breaking a few skulls
I’m confused why she was there in the first place
Obviously it was take your kid to work day. Really it’s no different than letting them fly the plane, drive the Amtrak train, or run the hose on the riot police truck during a riot.
(I’ll let you figure out which one of those examples is real)
I’m gonna say “drive the train”
Oof, it was fly the plane. It’s okay though they never did it again.
Bring your kid to work day?
When “Bring Your Child to Work Day” goes wrong.
Aeroflot 593
Technically, it went really well.
The last time I remember children being invited to a high-intensity workplace ended up with them fatally crashing an airplane with 75 people on board.
Whilst this is absolutely true, I think it’s more constructive to focus on the failure in design that led to the confusion in the cockpit.
There is no doubt that children in the cockpit contributed to the incident, but that incident could have happened with some other distraction.
The failure for the aircraft to correctly notify the pilot of the change in autopilot configuration was clearly very dangerous.
Agreed. “Mistakes were made - but let’s blame the dumb dad who had his moron 15-year-old progeny bump the autopilot into total submission.” smh
But think of the shareholders, they could have been the real victims /s
Jfc, having the girl in the room at all is a liability, let alone letting her touch the patient.
I hope this guy’s malpractice lawyer has good heart meds.
Damn bro, women can be surgeons too. It’s not 1890 anymore.
Women can indeed. Not so sure about 13 year old girls.
deleted by creator
Didn’t you watch Doogie Howser?
In all fairness, I think it was a joke.
So many people not getting that lol
Sarcasm doesn’t translate well amongst strangers via text, it’s why we’ve got shortcuts like “/s” everyone should use
We would want to hope so
13 year old girls aren’t qualified brain surgeons any more than 13 year old boys
Congratulations, that’s the joke.
No one said any different. Read again.
In the US (the most sue happy place on earth) the guy probably wouldn’t get a payout.
At least from reading the article, it infers the surgery and everything done went off without any issues. In the US, if you want to sue and win, you have to show that damages were done to you.
So while it was wildly inappropriate to have a 13 year old there or touching a patient at all, the patient would need to show that it caused damages.
I’m no lawyer but I think drilling into someone’s head without permission might still count as assault.
Its a good thing you’re not a lawyer.
Brb, gonna drill into this dudes skull
But the surgery wasn’t assault.
Do you think the patient gave informed consent, where the information included the fact that the surgical team would include untrained people?
No, but there was still no damages. I don’t know about Austria, but in the US it has to be shown that damages were suffered.
Without informed consent a surgery is assault though
Emergency surgery or transport to a hospital from a patient such as this falls under implied consent. The patient got in a near fatal accident. He didn’t schedule a knee surgery or something.
According to a different source shared by @giriinthejungle, the attorney who has taken the case is suing the entire operating unit and expects whoever instructed the girl to drill the hole to be liable for assault. That is also the estimation of the chief regional patient attorney, provided the incident happened as reported by the media.
The neurosurgeon as well as one other doctor have already been let go by the hospital.
Police have not yet charged anyone, their investigation is still ongoing as of the time of the article (2024-08-26).
Not the first news story regarding weird stuff happening while people are under anesthesia.
