A bit like a Robin Cook novel . .

OldMotherTucker

jackyann wrote: »

Many (not all) women get specific symptoms of ovulation, sometimes on the side it is taking place, so sensing an ovary's absence is very likely.

I wonder who she raised this with initially? I have the sense that she was fobbed off and this made her upset & resentful - hence the distress that lingers today.

Tissue for "experimentation" is donated by consent. I think the cases you may have read about relate to the keeping of post-mortem samples without consent.

Most likely scenario is the one proposed by many: that the ovary was removed for a very good reason, that the patient was not informed at a time she could take it in, and that the letter to the GP has gone astray.

However, it is also quite possible that the ovary is still there, that it was not a large or well-functioning ovary to begin with (sometimes only one functions well) and cannot be seen now for a variety of reasons.

So:
It is most likely that your SiL is correct (although she may not be)
It also appears that whatever happened, she was not properly informed and/or recording was poor, and this has quite rightly distressed her.

She is conflating several issues, and if she is to follow this up, needs to be very clear.

It would be most helpful at this point to ask for records simply in order to know what has happened. She does deserve an honest answer - and it is sadly possible that she may not get a definitive one.

However, she is more likely to get help towards her answer if she approaches this as a question that deserves an answer, rather than using emotive terms that make people defensive.
.
People in medicine and medical records know that theorising about "stealing" an ovary is rather ridiculous; they also know that poor record keeping and bad communication are highly likely. I suggest you ask about the latter, and don't mention the former until you are in a better position.

Thank you for such a sensitive post. You've summed it up better than I could.

SIl broached the subject to her Gp years ago and has seen her records - there is nothing to indicate there was any problem with the tube or the ovary or that it was surgically removed.


I've suggested to Sil that we stay 'private' for now and get a more detailed scan and possibly some legal advice.


I will add that human tissue has been taken without consent in the past.

FBaby

I do agree, what does she want to achieve? She won't be able to prove anything. The defense could make a case that maybe she was born without the ovary in the first place. Her saying that she felt ovulation every month will not constitute medical evidence.

OldMotherTucker

FBaby wrote: »

I do agree, what does she want to achieve? She won't be able to prove anything. The defense could make a case that maybe she was born without the ovary in the first place. Her saying that she felt ovulation every month will not constitute medical evidence.

I guess she's not okay with possibly having had a body part removed without being informed or giving consent.



As to other comments about me being paranoid and stirring her up about it, SIL's missing ovary conspiracy theory has always been a family joke - 30 years is a long time NOT to let something go. I honestly believed the scan would show 2 old withered egg sacs- and a small deficit to my bank account.

As it whas, SIL had an appointment with a GP she had never seen before who immediately sent her off for a scan - on the NHS!!

thorsoak

Sounds as if SiL needs some counselling - and needs to read up on the anatomy of the human reproductive system - THERE WOULD BE NO "EGGS" in the ovaries, just gametes which require the influence of the FSH hormones before they become a gamete which might turn into a sac capable of being fertilised.

theoretica

I have a quote floating around in my head of 'it is usually wrong to ascribe to malice anything which could be more easily explained by incompetence'. I can't remember where it came from, but agree that a failure in record keeping sounds fairly plausible to me. How rigorous were records 30 years ago by current standards?

LilElvis

thorsoak wrote: »

Sounds as if SiL needs some counselling - and needs to read up on the anatomy of the human reproductive system - THERE WOULD BE NO "EGGS" in the ovaries, just gametes which require the influence of the FSH hormones before they become a gamete which might turn into a sac capable of being fertilised.

Already pointed out, already ignored.

The OP seems to be so fixated on the idea of organ theft that they won't look at the reality of the scenario.

What are the chances that the surgeon was involved in some form of research which would involve human ovaries? How would the surgeon remove a healthy organ, without consent, when a full theatre team of nurses and an anaesthetist would have been present? How would they then have removed the organ from the operating theatre whilst maintaining its viability for use in experimentation?

I only hope that the OP isn't fuelling their SILs worries about why an ovary would be removed during a sterilisation procedure. After 30 years she quite possibly won't be able to get a clear answer unless paperwork was both properly completed and preserved.

As you, and others, have advised, the most helpful way forward for the SIL would be to seek therapeutic help in order to come to terms with what she has gone through, whatever the reality is found to be.

OldMotherTucker

LilElvis wrote: »

Already pointed out, already ignored.

The OP seems to be so fixated on the idea of organ theft that they won't look at the reality of the scenario.

What are the chances that the surgeon was involved in some form of research which would involve human ovaries? How would the surgeon remove a healthy organ, without consent, when a full theatre team of nurses and an anaesthetist would have been present? How would they then have removed the organ from the operating theatre whilst maintaining its viability for use in experimentation?

I only hope that the OP isn't fuelling their SILs worries about why an ovary would be removed during a sterilisation procedure. After 30 years she quite possibly won't be able to get a clear answer unless paperwork was both properly completed and preserved.

As you, and others, have advised, the most helpful way forward for the SIL would be to seek therapeutic help in order to come to terms with what she has gone through, whatever the reality is found to be.

I haven't ignored anything anyone has said.

How will therapy help at this point - isn't that just fobbing her off? Doesn't she need to know what the 'reality' is in order to come to terms with it?

thorsoak

Therapy might help her realise that she is focusing on the sterilisation rather than the fact that she had regrets about the sterilisation itself.

It was only when I had a hysterectomy (for fibroids) after I had 4 children, that I was told by the surgeon that she had not removed my left fallopian tube because it was healthy - but that my right fallopian tube was non-existant! I simply did not have one.

FBaby

I guess she's not okay with possibly having had a body part removed without being informed or giving consent.

Of course, not, I wouldn't be myself either but what is she going to do about it now? My point is that she can either believe that her ovary was taken out now that the scan showed she doesn't have one, and turn the page satisfied that she has the evidence that she wasn't mad about it, or that's not enough and she wants to take legal steps. My point is that if she goes for the second option, I believe she will most likely only be wasting a lot of energy and time because she won't be able to find medical evidence that it did happen if nothing is there in her notes. Once again, it is possible that she was born this way, but that her one ovary produced an egg each month then stopped as she got older.

OldMotherTucker

FBaby wrote: »

Of course, not, I wouldn't be myself either but what is she going to do about it now? My point is that she can either believe that her ovary was taken out now that the scan showed she doesn't have one, and turn the page satisfied that she has the evidence that she wasn't mad about it, or that's not enough and she wants to take legal steps. My point is that if she goes for the second option, I believe she will most likely only be wasting a lot of energy and time because she won't be able to find medical evidence that it did happen if nothing is there in her notes. Once again, it is possible that she was born this way, but that her one ovary produced an egg each month then stopped as she got older.

I spoke to SIL on the weekend - I did ask f she had gone back to the GP to discuss the scan and she had. The GP is referring her for a more detailed scan - so it would appear there is something worth investigating.

I also asked her what she hoped to achieved and she simply said 'the truth and an apology!'


I remember the birth of my first child was complicated and not brilliantly managed resulting in me staying in Hospital for an additional 5 days after my son went home. I had 2 follow up meetings (one on discharge and one 6 months later) to discuss what had happened, why it had gone that way and why those decisions were made. It obviously helped me a great deal because I let go of that part of the experience and moved on with my life. If I recounted all the details, it would feel like it happened to someone else!


It's sad that there is such a lack of support for a woman's intuition - I bet if she posted on here that she had 'a feeling' her OH was cheating on her, there would have been a complete different set of responses:(