A doctor was sentenced to 3 years in prison, suspended for 3 years, for performing a preventive mastectomy on a patient who had no genetic predisposition to cancer. The Mixed Jury Court of Appeal in Thessaloniki found the surgeon guilty of grievous bodily harm with possible intent, as a misdemeanor, converting the charge from felony grievous intentional bodily harm. Additionally, the court recognized two mitigating factors – subsequent good behavior and genuine remorse. In the first instance, he had been sentenced to 5 years imprisonment.
The case began in 2018 in a city in Central Macedonia, with a complainant who is now 60 years old, who underwent regular preventive screenings due to a family history of breast cancer. According to her testimony, that autumn calcifications were detected in her breast and the defendant doctor allegedly recommended she undergo genetic testing for hereditary cancer predisposition.
Thessaloniki: What the doctor claimed about the preventive mastectomy
According to her complaint, the doctor informed her that the genetic test had come back positive, so he immediately proceeded with a preventive double mastectomy. Having complete trust in the doctor, with whom they maintained friendly relations, she did not ask to see the results and underwent surgery within a few days, as the 60-year-old victim testified in court. After the procedure, she faced serious complications – a situation that, as she stated, led to the removal of implants and months of suffering, while requiring further medical interventions.
According to her complaint, after the serious health issues, she contacted the Research Center responsible for genetic testing, where she was informed that this test had never been performed, although she had paid 800 euros to the defendant doctor, as she testified. When she finally proceeded with the examination, the results came back negative, which, according to her statements, if she had known beforehand, she would not have proceeded with this “irreversible procedure that constitutes a mutilating act,” as she said. “I had decided that if the genetic test was positive, I would have the mastectomy,” she testified, describing the ordeal she experienced that left trauma both to her body and her psychology.
In his defense, the doctor denied the charge, emphasizing that the decision for preventive mastectomy was medically “correct” and was made jointly with the complainant. The family history, her age, and the calcifications were – according to him – the factors that convinced the woman to proceed with the procedure. “The aesthetic aspect also played a role,” he added, while denying what the woman complained about regarding the genetic testing at the Research Center. “Most colleagues would have acted in the same way,” he emphasized, defending his medical actions and stressing that the whole case has affected him psychologically.
It should be noted that the 60-year-old woman appealed the case to civil courts, which ruled in her favor, awarding her compensation.
