Hello there. Thank you for taking the time to take this online survey. For your convenience we’ve split the entire questionnaires into 3 sections:

1] Were your legal rights meet

2] Right 4

3] Right to make an informed consent breached?

4] Right to health care that minimises the potential harm to, and optimises your quality of life breached?

At the end of the survey you will be receive a summary of questions and feedback any possible breaches of your legal rights under New Zealand Law

Things to consider:

• Once you move from a page, you will be able to return and make changes
• Any and personal information provided on this survey is not retained or pasted on to any party and if provided for, will be deleted

Final disclaimer note:

The information found on this survey and website is for information purposes only and is not intended to treat, diagnose, cure or prevent any disease. It is not a substitute for professional medical (or legal) advice.

Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health care provider with any questions you have regarding a medical condition.

Much of the information is strongly rejected by New Zealand surgeons and as it would seem, based on supporting (protecting ) ruling outcomes, the Health and Disability Commissioner.

Consider seeking additional medical opinions when conflicting discrepancies between medical opinions, medical research and patient testimony exist.

This survey is in accordance with the Health and Disability Advocacy Code of Practice, requiring health consumers, in order to receive informed consent and medical support services, to take their own direct action to improve health and disability services or even expose dishonest protected medial fraud harming health consumers.

From a legal perspective:

No one has the right to even touch, let alone treat another person. Any such act, done without permission (as a result of making informed consent), is classified as “battery” – physical assault and is a criminal offence.

NZ Law: A medical intervention, without valid informed consent, obtained in a complete absence of disclosure of side effects, chronic, life long or otherwise can be considered a breach of the Crimes Act 1961 No 43 (as of 28 September 2017) section 240. Consent obtaining by deception or causing loss by deception.

From a Medical professional ethics perspective:

A medical intervention, without valid informed consent The current Code of Ethics of the New Zealand Medical Association records: “Doctors should ensure that patients are involved within the limits of their capacities, in understanding the nature of their problems, the range of possible solutions, as well as the likely benefits, risks, and costs, and shall assist them in making informed choices”.

From the HDC Act, code of rights perspective:

The Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights (the Code).

Right 6 Every consumer have the right to the information that a reasonable consumer in his circumstances would expect to receive, including an explanation of the treatment options available and an assessment of the expected risks, side effects (affecting quality of life), benefits and costs of each option. Failing to disclose the risks during the informed consent process breaches Right 6(1)(b)

Right 7(1) Every consumer has the right to make an informed choice and give informed consent. Services may be provided to a consumer only if that consumer makes an informed choice and gives informed consent. Without this information, patients are denied that opportunity to legally give informed consent.

From the patients perspective:

Department of Surgery, Christchurch Hospital Study: A questionnaire was developed from the Disability Commissioner’s Regulations (1996) and was administered to patients and doctors at Christchurch Hospital. Results according to patients the five most important aspects of informed consent were:

(1) the major risks,

(2) quality of life,

(3) outcome,

(4) consequences of not undergoing the procedure and

(5) quantity of life.

Conclusion: “Both patients and doctors consider the explanations of risks and complications important, especially if the complication is serious and risk is greater than 1 in 1000. (0.01%)  Patients consider aspects of outcome, quantity and quality of life important”

Doctors including surgeons are required investigate a patents condition; provide a real cause of problem based on. Failure to correctly diagnose, carry out test, accurate assessment of any health problems in order to provide right course of treatment is grounds for medical malpractice. Simply confirming the presence of a gallstone through ultrasound does not provide clear diagnosis for removing gallbladders. Investigation tests can include:

Ultrasonography,

Trans abdominal ultrasonography,

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS),

Cholescintigraphy (HIDA scan),

Endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP)

“Gallstones are sometimes implicated as the source of symptoms in patients with dyspepsia. However, such an association should be made cautiously, since gallstones may silently coexist in patients with dyspepsia, and other causes of dyspepsia are more common.”

Dr David Maplesden, Medical Advisor, Health and Disability Commissioner

“A significant number continue to experience symptoms (PCS) and thus patients should be thoroughly assessed and evaluated preoperatively. Furthermore, the presence of dyspepsia in a patient with gallstones does not automatically imply that the gallstones are the cause. Patients should be advised of both the risks of surgery and the risk of postoperative persistence of symptoms.”

S.S.JaunooS.MohandasL.M.Almond. Postcholecystectomy syndrome (PCS) [ScienceDirect]

Right 4, Right to services of an appropriate standard

(Right 4(1)), and right to have services provided in a manner that minimised the potential harm to her, and optimised her quality of life

(Right 4(4)) Every consumer has the right to have services provided in a manner that minimises the potential harm to, and optimises the quality of life of, that consumer.

Right 6(1)) Every consumer has the right to the information that a reasonable consumer, in that consumer’s circumstances, would expect to receive, including (a) an explanation of his or her condition; and

Failure to appropriately investigate heath complications breaches patient rights under the Code, in particular her right to have services provided with reasonable care and skill/ Further reading : HDC investigation incorrect diagnosis for treatment

Doctors have a statutory obligation to abide by the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights (the Code). Under the Code every patient has the right to make an informed choice and to give informed consent. This includes an explanation and assessment of expected risks, side effects (affecting quality of life)

Having most likely been advised of Cholecystectomy surgery injury risk that can occur 1 in 400, 1000 or even 10,000 procedures we you also advised of the side effects risks post cholecystectomy that occur up to 1 on 2.3 woman know collective as Postcholecystectomy Syndrome (PCS)

Postcholecystectomy Syndrome (PCS) is a heterogeneous group of diseases and symptoms presenting following gallbladder removal. Symptoms occur in about 5 to 40 percent of patients who undergo cholecystectomy, and can be transient, persistent or lifelong. The chronic condition is diagnosed in approximately 10% of postcholecystectomy cases.

The onset of symptoms may range from 2 days to 25 years. There may also be gender-specific risk factors for developing symptoms after cholecystectomy. In one study, the incidence of recurrent symptoms among female patients was 43%, compared to 28% of male patients.”

Patients with cholecystectomy had more comorbidities, particularly chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, depression, and anxiety. Postcholecystectomy gastroparesis patients had increased health care utilization and had a worse quality of life.

After cholecystectomy 40% to 60% of patients suffer from dyspeptic disorders, 5% to 40% from pains of different localizations. Up to 70% of patients show symptoms of chronic “bland” intrahepatic cholestasis, chronic cholestatic hepatitis and compensatory bile-acid-dependent apoptosis of hepatocytes. In some of cholecystectomized patients with high concentration of hydrophobic hepatotoxic co-cancerogenic deoxycholic bile acid in serum and/or feces high risk of the colon cancer is found.

More detailed information found here http://hdcfraud.com/postcholecystectomy-syndrome-pcs-extended/

Note: Not disclosed to patients, specialist medical opinion and studies list the following expected risks, side effects, diseases, syndromes and conditions after the removal of the gallbladder and its function. The majority of these problems are not accepted by the HDC as a risk and are blocked from disclosure to patients during the informed consent process, or advised during post-operative follow-ups.

Receive an explanation of the following reconsidered side effects risks:

Receive an explanation of the following reconsidered side effects risks:

Doctors have a statutory obligation to abide by the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights (the Code). Under the Code every patient has the right to make an informed choice and to give informed consent. This includes an explanation explanation of treatment options available to removing your gallbladder for the treatment of gallstones or gallbladder dysfunction. Treatment options surgical or non-surgical include:

1] Ursodeoxycholic acid

2] Percutaneous cholecystostomy

3] Contact dissolution of cholesterol gallstones with organic solvents

4] Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy

5] Bile acid dissolution therapy

6] Watchful waiting help treat gallstones

Note In our opinion, doing nothing, also known as “watchful waiting” is the simple act of letting patients become sick and is part of the surgeons’ business model. Surgeons provide limited advice and the “wait and see” method of diagnosing and treating patients is meant to keep them sick, guaranteeing further business cash flow for surgeons, through surgery

Every consumer has the right to the information that a reasonable consumer, in that consumer’s circumstances, would expect to receive, including information how to obtain an opinion from another provider and readily available research in direct contraction to treatment options presented

“First of all, I believe it is nearly criminal what traditional medicine is doing to our public when it comes to managing this problem. It is RARELY ever indicated to remove someone’s gallbladder. If one ignores warning symptoms and does not address the reasons why their gallbladder is not functioning properly, than the disease can progress to the point where the pancreas is inflamed or the gallbladder is seriously infected and may have to be removed to save a person’s life”

“So, not only are surgeons removing these organs unnecessarily, but in their nutritional ignorance they are telling patients that their gallbladders do not serve any purpose and they can live perfectly well without them. This is a lie. The gallbladder serves an important digestive function”

Dr. Mercola, Licensed physician and surgeon.

There is a preference to withhold treatment options so that patients’ feel that surgery is their only choice, which equals financial gain for surgeons. This is fraud by false representation and is also a criminal offence under the Crimes Act 1961 No 43 (as at 28 September 2017), Public Act 240

Did your surgeon or Doctor make any of following or similar claims statements made without providing  balanced explanations

There is no evidence-based medical study known to mankind backing these patient safety claims presented to in order to obtain consent. These are nothing more than NZ Surgeons dishonest, delusional revenue based fantasies..

(See appendices for a link to a $100K reward tab for proof to back these NZ Surgeons claims) found here