[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Thats because depending on the size, the operations are different. If this had turned out to be what they thought originally, she would only have needed a relatively small op and would have recovered quickly, possibly with the need for a little radiotheraphy but not as much as she ended up having.

If it had been what they thought after she had the first small op..it would have, again only needed a slightly bigger operation, but not removal of the whole breast as ended up needing to be done.

They have to let you know the size as otherwise they would be dishing out masectomies to people who shouldnt have them and could have recovered without the big operation. I guess they could just say 'oh you need another operation' but then you would get frustrated not knowing exactly why and having no explanation for being told one minute that you would be fine, and the next that you need more surgery.

In a way, if they didnt get focussed so much on size then a lot of extra stress could be avoided, as I very much doubt my mother has been the only case where it has been wrong. But at the same time a lot of women might end up with a whole breast removed when they could have had minor surgery and still had their breast.

would it really make that much of a difference - taking the full picture into consideration. ?

I am close friends with a lady who had breast cancer diagnosed - told that full removal of breast needed and she was seriously recommended full removal, including nipple: even though the chances of cancer recurring were under 5%. Surgeons tried to tell her that there was every chance it would recur, even with such low odds.

Two weeks before her 5 years remission: 3 guesses what was found - around the nipple area that she chose to ignore what was recommended to her: because she wanted to take that chance. She was wrong - and the consultants were right. thankfully: through all of this: she was covered via private health care via her husband's work: but she chose to tell the surgeon and the consultants 'what to do at her request' despite being advised otherwise.

I'm not sure what you want here Vicky: I don't think your mum was correct is asking for what she asked for. Regardless of the size of the tissue affected: it had to be removed, irrespective of the difference in operation required. would she have preferred they lied to her and pretended it was only a tiny piece of surgery, tiny piece of tissue: or would she have preferred that they were honest in stating that the size of affected tissue was much larger, and would require far more surgery than first anticipated??

I can only speak for me (and possibly my mate who so wished she'd taken the surgeons advice way back then) - if it was me: I'd far rather lose the full breast - all in - if that is what my surgeon recommended. He/She is far more qualified and far more knowledgeable - all things considered.