A recent jury verdict in Staten Island, New York highlights medical malpractice cases focusing on cosmetic surgery. A jury awarded a Staten Island woman 3.5 million dollars during medical malpractice litigation over an alleged botched breast implant surgery. As part of her allegations, the woman alleged that she suffered significant disfigurement of her breasts as a result of a "double bubble," and claimed that her 17-year marriage came to an end because of her embarrassment of undressing in front of her husband. She underwent two separate additional surgeries in trying to correct the condition.

Claims related to cosmetic surgeries are often one of the most difficult type of medical malpractice claims to pursue. First, often times juries are not receptive to such claims due to the fact that the surgeries are generally elective in nature to correct a cosmetic "deficiency" which the jury may not view as "problematic". Rhinoplasty (nose jobs) and breast augmentation (breast implant) surgeries are typical types of surgeries that lend themselves well to this theory. If the jurors perceive that the original surgery as unnecessary or undertaken solely as a result of the vanity of the plaintiff, the jury may not be sympathetic to the plaintiff's claims. Although this does not relieve a medical doctor of his duties to abide by the appropriate standards of care, such non-sympathetic jurors may give the doctor the "benefit of the doubt" when it comes to deciding the issue of malpractice.

Another potential problem with these types of cases relate to the often subjective nature of the claim. While the plaintiff may view the surgery as unsuccessful for some reason (it doesn't look like he or she thought it would), the medical doctor may take the position that the surgery was a success. Because "beauty is in the eye of the beholder," there may be an issue as to what the doctor "promised" and what they actually delivered.

Finally, such cosmetic type malpractice claims are no different than every other medical malpractice claim, in that it must be proven that the doctor somehow deviated from the accepted standard of medical care in the treatment of the plaintiff. Despite the potential problems described above, there are many valid cosmetic surgical malpractice claims, which should be pursued as indicated by the above Staten Island jury verdict. As in all areas of the law, the nature of each claim is dependent upon the specific facts and circumstances under which it occurred and must be thoroughly reviewed by an attorney.