7,500 euros for breast zoom and fat removal, which is how the Albanian was affected by the Turkish surgeon

A Turkish doctor, plastic surgeon at a private hospital in Tirana, was sentenced to 1 year in prison by the capital's court on charges of unwary “ming”. Defendant Hakan G. It was blamed for the operation conducted in December 2011 on a female who had sought breast zoom and removal [...]
A Turkish doctor, plastic surgeon at a private hospital in Tirana, was sentenced to 1 year in prison by the capital's court on charges of unwary “ming”.
Defendant Hakan G. It was blamed for the operation conducted in December 2011 on a female who had sought breast zooming and the removal of wrinkles and fats on her belly. The aesthetic intervention, for which he paid 7,500 euros, not only did he not grace the patient G.B., but it has brought her serious health-sor problems and permanent loss to 25 percent of his work capacity. The process of medical doctor Hakan G., who was widely tried in security, began in May 2015 and ended in the early days of June 2017. In the same court ruling, he was deprived of the right to exercise a medical profession for a period of two years. To his co-ordination, medical doctor Rezarta K., the court ruled that the prosecution should not continue. The story of the Turkish aesthetic surgeon's medical error is highlighted next, referring to the Tirana Court's ruling.
HISTORY
On 21.12.2011, G.B. He has been subjected to a surgical treatment at a private hospital in Tirana in the breast and belly parts, where he sought to enlarge his chest through this operation and attract his skin to the abdomen area. According to her, since her surgery she has had serious health problems as a result of the operation. A copy of this citizen's card has been administered, and the declaration of the injury has been taken, stating that for a year her condition has not been improved but that serious physical injuries have been caused as a result of the operation performed by physician Hakan G. From the statement of the citizen G.B. It has resulted in doctors Hakan G. and Rezarta K. They paid her a visit.
They asked him what interventions he was interested in. She told them she wanted to operate her stomach and zoom in. According to her, the Turkish doctor has explained that it is possible for these surgical interventions to be performed simultaneously and the Turkish doctor has promised that the result of the operation would be excellent. Since the doctor who had promised him was also the one who was going to do the intervention explained that the expenses for the operation were 3900 euros for the womb and 3500 euros for the chest.
Based on the doctor's predictions and his promises, the composer has decided to perform the operation on the date of 21.12,2011. With the doctor's promise that physical appearance would improve, she has decided to perform the operation by agreeing to the payment of the corresponding amount.
OP ERACTION
On the day of 21.12.2011, the caller showed up at the hospital in question at 8: 00 a.m. He met the coordinator and signed several letters she gave him, but that G.B. He didn't read it. Around 11:00, he went into surgery and left the operation around 7:00. Then she's been in hospital for four days. The moment the narcosissary was exposed, he felt great pain in his belly and chest. The doctor who had made the intervention, Turkish doctor Hakan G., explained that it was normal to have pain. Four days later she got out of the hospital, although she wasn't able to stand up, but they told her she was normal and had to leave, or she had to pay the hospital every night for 80-120 euros. Because it was bad, she explains that two days she has been steadfastly enduring after the plague ran out of blood, while doctors told her that she was normal.
“INS NORMAL”
G.B. has claimed that the doctors had placed two pipes with one of them, and the other was to extract the blood that was collected in the wound. The day she got out of the hospital, she was pulled off her urine channel tube. She paid 7,500 euros and then left the hospital. Her condition was bad, for she was in a lot of pain and her belly started to get infected. She called Dr. Rezart and told him she was in pain, and she said she had to be patient because she was normal. After four days he came back to Tirana, after the wound had been opened.
OP It's over.
After he went to the private hospital, he was received by two doctors who operated on him. They put him back into the operating room and operated again, which lasted three hours. This time he's only been in the hospital one night. G.B. She has returned to her hometown in the south of the country and has been in the same state of intense pain and flow of blood, lying and lying a month without moving out of bed. While he kept calling the hospital about his concerns. He explained to the doctor that his chest wasn't normal either. He stood up after three months and because he had to make some documents for permission to stay in Italy he went there.
For a year and 3 months she has been unable to work because of this intervention that has caused her serious health problems and could risk her life if she does not perform further surgery. When she returned to the private hospital, the doctors stopped seeing her.
Unrefundable damage, court: The surgeon had to predict
In evidence given before the court, experts who have compiled the act of forensic experimentation have found that the apparent damage to the G.B. corrugation. “are chosen as permanent, irreparable damage, with damage to body aesthetics, chest-level deformity deformity and abdomen”. According to them, shifting the edge of the wound and asymmetry of the breasts is the result of careless treatment. The court in its assessment said: “The defendant, with active action, extended over time, has formed the conviction of the injury to make the intervention unconfirmed, without correct drafting of the clinical folder for this fact, which has later brought severe injury to the patient”. But according to the court, defendant Hakan G. had the obligation and the opportunity to see that such surgery would bring health consequences to the patient. The defendant did not want the resulting consequence, but had the obligation and the opportunity to predict it”, the court indicated. /panorama












