Long time readers of this blog know that we go to fairly significant lengths to ensure that our posts are about the drugs, devices, and corporations that put patients at risk; not the victims themselves. Sure, at times, we’ve mentioned specific names when that information has been published for public knowledge. It is, after all, far easier to identify with a named person rather than an “unnamed plaintiff.”
However, in some cases, it is the people themselves that become larger than any one particular story, case, or trial. In some cases, the people themselves become the actual face of an issue.
Not since Julia Roberts made Erin Brokovitch a household name has that been more apparent than with the case of Drs. Amy Reed and Hooman Noorchashm and their fight against the use of power morcellators in gynecological procedures.
We’ve been watching and writing about the married couple and mother of six since it first became evident that everyone, from the medical community to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, was questioning whether the public had gotten all the facts about morcellation before the devices were unleashed on an unknowing public.
Most of our stories have been brief. After all, you come here for facts: this company did X to people and (hopefully) suffered Y consequences for their actions. There is only so much information that can be covered in that amount of time and in so many words.
Other publications are not as limited in their reporting and can bring more information to light with longer-form stories. And, it is with that understanding that we highlight a recent profile on the plight of the Reed and Noorchashm family as written by Sandy Hingston at Philadelphia Magazine.
To truly understand what is at stake for this family, you have to go beyond the overly-simplified and cautious tone taken by those who are limited by the confines of what may or may not be permissible to say in a purely legal context. You have to hear the whole story; from beginning to end.
You have to hear about the alleged misrepresentation of the risk of power morcellation by those who manufactured the devices.
You have to hear about the moment a husband learns that his wife’s life is jeopardy.
You have to hear about the moment they realize that a procedure meant to help Dr. Reed would be the procedure that would ultimately turn their lives upside-down.
You have to hear about the measures the medical establishment will go to in order to protect itself.
You have to hear about esteemed and well regarded physicians being abandoned and shunned by the very colleagues and system that once gave them comfort and camaraderie.
The story of Drs. Reed and Noorchashm goes beyond a simple news blurb on a legal blog; it is the story of the impact of medical negligence and corporate greed absolutely and perfectly personified. It is a story that needs to be told and it is a story worth reading.
This blog has never directly asked you to read something. We’ve made links available for those who would like to learn more about various topics but we’ve never directly asked you to read something.
Well, we’re asking you now. Please take a few moments from your day and read the story of Drs. Reed and Noorchashm. And, when you’re finished, ask yourself how the story would read if it had been written about you – because it could have been.
Statistically speaking, one in 350 women has an undiagnosed uterine sarcoma that can be upstaged by power morcellation. The manufacturers knew that a long time ago. We know it now – and that is largely because of Drs. Reed and Noorchashm.