39 thoughts on “SUSAN A. LAUREN VS. SAUL BERGER, M.D.”

1. Susan A. Lauren November 17, 2015 at 11:25 pm

   I’m Susan A. Lauren.

   My reason for going to this surgeon was for a Medically Indicated Bilateral Breast Reduction; he was highly recommended by my physician at the time. I was fit, and healthy – happily running a business I loved at the time of surgery. Surgery was egregious. Overdone. In a multitude of areas. Against my consent. It disabled my life. I’m in so much pain, I don’t know what to do. I wouldn’t wish this on anyone.
2. Anonymous July 8, 2018 at 12:15 am

   I am familiar with this case; your legal system has failed to hold this surgeon accountable.
3. Susan A. Lauren January 10, 2019 at 7:39 pm

   From a doctor’s letter dated, 09.23.18

   “Dr. Berger has claimed in sworn testimony that he only performed procedures on Ms. Lauren for which consent had been obtained. This, however, is not true. Dr. Berger was asked in testimony if at “any point in time during the procedure, did you do any liposuction in the area of the buttock?” Dr. Berger’s response in testimony was an emphatic, “absolutely not.” Simple examination of Ms. Lauren’s buttocks reveals at least eight surgical incision scars on the buttock: three on each cheek, and one each being on either side of the infragluteal crease.

   Ms. Lauren has been scarred for life and disfigured permanently. She is in constant pain and her life has been irreversibly changed for the worse. This is all the direct result of the overly aggressive and unconsented surgical procedures that Dr. Berger performed on Ms. Lauren on November 8, 2011. This constitutes surgical assault at the hands of Dr. Berger. Dr. Berger perjured himself in sworn testimony when he flatly denied doing any surgery to the buttocks area. There are other doctors and experts that have demonstrated and testified that these areas were damaged and consent had not been obtained.”

   My opinion:

   The injuries I sustained in Dr. Berger’s surgical assault of me are so horrendous and easily apparent, that even untrained laymen can see that these injuries could not be medically justified under any circumstances. My injuries provide hard evidence of medical malpractice. My injuries are well documented. Any doctor, insurance company, lawyer, judge, medical board, legislator, or layman should not have been able to reach any other honest conclusion than that I was surgically battered, and a denial of this shows a breach of professional ethics.
4. Susan A. Lauren January 10, 2019 at 8:25 pm

   From the trial transcript –

   Pg 124, line 17, the Expert Witness For the Plaintiff (EWFP) said, “So when this patient was examined prior to my deposition, it was very easy to see that infragluteal crease only extended to this spot, and instead of extending another third to halfway into the normal position, it was just absent, It was gone.”

   Q. “Is that a common occurrence?”
   A. “No, it’s very – it’s the first time I’ve ever seen it.”
   Q. “So based upon skin laxity?”
   A. “No, I mean that’s just based on extremely poor technique.”

   Pg. 126, line 4. EWFP was asked:
   Q. “Is the procedure performed substantially different than the procedure indicated in the informed consent documents?”
   A. “Yes.”
   Q. “Is it your expert opinion that what you see here, the damage stated was caused by the surgery?”
   A. “Most definitely.”
   Q. “Is the damage we see here permanent?”
   A. “Yes.”

   Pg. 170, line 24.
   Q. “Does the word buttock appear in any informed consent document?”
   A. “No.”
   Q. “Does it appear on the deposit slip?”
   A. “No.”
   Q., “Your expert opinion, the surgery that occurred also occurred on the buttocks. Is that correct?”
   A. “Yes.”
5. Susan A. Lauren January 26, 2019 at 3:34 pm

   Another Doctor’s letter/s

   March 25, 2013

   Susan Lauren, my patient, medically needed a breast reduction. Drs. _____ and _____ have provided the medical necessity letters recommending medical breast reduction. The surgeon (Dr. Berger), however, did more extensive procedures than necessary of agreed upon at the same time as noted in the attached Surgical Planned, Signed Deposit Agreement, Informed Consent, and also the Doctors Notes…

   The (sic) surgery has irreversibly destroyed much of the patient’s subcutaneous myofasical and other tissues… Performing surgery without proper informed consent falls below the standard of care and is evidence of clear negligence…

   It is my opinion that much of the surgery performed by Dr. Berger was excessive and contra-indicated. This surgery fell below the standard of care, shows evidence of negligence, and has caused irreparable harm to Ms. Lauren’s life.

   Before surgery the patient was a highly functional, physically active, and employed person. Now Ms. Lauren is totally and permanently disabled, and her health continues to decline.

   Sincerely,

   ______ M.D.

   April 11, 2016

   To Whom It May Concern at the L.A. Superior Court:

   It’s my professional medical opinion that the surgical negligence by Saul Berger, M.D. has made my patient, Susan A. Lauren, permanently disabled. She’s in constant, progressive pain. She continue to have an increase of serious medical conditions that the surgery was both directly and indirectly the cause of. Some conditions are now life-threatening. She cannot complete many tasks of daily living.

   Please refer to my attached letter of March 25, 2013 for greater detail.
6. Susan A. Lauren January 26, 2019 at 6:52 pm

   SUSAN A. LAUREN VS. SAUL BERGER, M.D. was a valid claim of medical battery but there was no justice in this case. It is my opinion and experience that my case was neither adequately worked up or represented and along with multiple factors, (including but not limited to the lies from the defense), this led to the unjust outcome.

   At the end of 2015, I was pressured to sign a wholly inadequate settlement offer of $29,999.99 with a full gag clause. My first lawyer’s assistant had been fired, yet she kept calling me at odd hours as a “representative” of the law office. She said that the agreement was a cover-up and explained that it was a penny under the reporting amount of $30,000. When I refused this untenable so-called Release Of All Claims settlement with a full gag, the lawyer dropped me as his client just months before trial.

   On 11.15.15 I wrote the following to that lawyer:

   “I would be shocked if you’re considering dismissing my case with a paltry “settlement”, ($29,999.99), given the enormity of permanent and progressive damage Dr. Berger recklessly caused to me. This amount, (not much more than the bill for surgery), is not only insulting, but more importantly, does not seem to be in my best interest, given that it would leave me worse off financially than I am now, and jeopardize my well being. In addition to your percentage and costs, (which I haven’t even been apprised of), along with my post-surgical / surgery related debt and escalating medical needs, this “settlement” would leave me destitute, in a destroyed body and worsening condition, and facing eventual homelessness.

   I’m in the dark about my own case, I haven’t seen a proposal that your office submitted on my behalf, the records I requested, including Berger’s deposition, or anything submitted from Berger’s lawyers, yet I’ve gotten calls from ____, (a non-employee), seeming to try pressure me to settle for an outcome not even near what would be just or take care of my survival needs. I find this confusing and am terrified as to my future.

   I trusted a supposed “expert” surgeon, , with my life and he did unthinkable, heinous things to me/my body while I was unconscious under anesthesia. I’m a smart and good person trapped in a severely mutilated body that I don’t have control over. You told me the day we met that you understood how vulnerable that would make me. I would feel totally abandoned if you refuse to sincerely assist me in the way I need.”

   After this lawyer dropped me, I was pro persona for several months and got served with seven limiting motions that I wasn’t able to do anything to stop or challenge in my disabled state, without legal representation. Limines 1 – 7 are listed here:

   1) 04/07/2016 Motion in Limine (#1 – TO PRECLUDE QUESTIONING OF EXPERT WITNESSES REGARDING THEIR PERSONAL PRACTICES)

   2) 04/07/2016 Motion in Limine (#2 – TO PRECLUDE REFERENCE TO INSURANCE COVERAGE OR FINANCIAL CONDITION)

   3) 04/07/2016 Motion in Limine (#3 – FOR ORDER PRECLUDING PLTNF FROM INTRODUCING ANY WITNESSES, EVIDENCE OR CONTENTIONS NOT DIS- CLOSED IN RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY)

   4) 04/07/2016 Motion in Limine (#4 – TO LIMIT THE TESTIMONY OF PLTNFS EXPERT WITNESSES TO THOSE OPINIONS AND CONCLUSIONS TESTIFIED TO AT THEIR DEPOS AND TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY BASED UPON MATERIALS AVAILABLE BUT NOT PROVIDED TO OR)

   5) 04/07/2016 Motion in Limine (#5 – TO PRECLUDE PRIOR OR EXISTING CLAIMS AGAINST ANY OF THE DEFENSE EXPERTS)

   6) 04/07/2016 Motion in Limine (#6 – TO PRECLUDE PLNTF FROM ADVISING TEH JURY OF THE $250,000 GENERAL DAMAGES LIMITATIONS OR THE PERIODIC PAYMENT PROVISIONS)

   7) 04/07/2016 Motion in Limine (#7 – TO PRECLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY FROM NON-DESIGNATED WITNESSES)

   Below is the Release Of All Claims ((under-limits settlement with full gag clause)) that I was pressured to sign, but I refused. This is the exact wording except that I took the names off.

   RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS

   FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the payment to me at this time of the sum of TWENTY NINE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND NINETY-NINE DOLLARS AND 99/100 ($29,999.99), receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, I, __________, (hereinafter collectively the “Releasor”) individually, being of lawful age, do for myself, my heirs, executors, Administrators and assigns, hereby fully release, acquit and forever discharge ________M.D.and his attorneys, counselors at law, agents, representatives and employees, and all other persons, firms, insurance companies and corporations (hereinafter collectively the “Releasees”), from any and all actions, causes of action, claims (including liens, attorneys’ fees and costs), demands, damages, loss of services, expenses and compensation, on account of or in any way growing out of any and all known and unknown personal injuries, wrongful death and property damage resulting from or to result from or by reason of any acts or omissions on the part of the Releasees occurring at any time prior hereto, the facts of which are more particularly set forth in that certain action filed in the Superior Court of the State of _________ entitled __________M.D.being Case No.__________.
   Releasor maintains that the payments described in this Release are made in consideration for claims of personal injuries within the meaning of Section 104(a) (2) of the Internal Revenue Code. Releasees take no position on that issue, make no advice thereon, and do not characterize the payments other than that they constitute full consideration for the complete Release of All Claims.
   It is understood and agreed that we hereby EXPRESSLY WAIVEall rights under Section _________Civil Code, which provides as follows:
   GENERAL RELEASE – CLAIMS EXTINGUISHED.
   A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.
   I hereby declare and represent that the injuries sustained are permanent and progressive and that recovery therefrom is uncertain and indefinite, and in making this release and agreement it is understood and agreed that I rely wholly upon my judgment, belief and knowledge of the nature, extent and duration of said injuries, and that I have not been influenced to any extent whatsoever in making this release by any representations or statements regarding said injuries, or regarding any other matters, made by the Releasees, or by any person or persons representing the Releasees, or by any physician or surgeon employed by the Releasees.
   I hereby declare and represent that I am effecting this settlement and executing this Release after having received from legal counsel full legal advice as to my rights.
   I hereby authorize and direct the undersigned attorney of record to forthwith dismiss WITH PREJUDICE the aforementioned suit now pending, being Case No.___________to recover damages, general or special, for the aforesaid incident, accident, injuries or damages.
   It is further understood and agreed that this settlement is the compromise of a disputed claim and that the payment is not to be construed as an admission of liability on the part of the Releasees, by whom liability is expressly denied.
   It is expressly agreed that this agreement is confidential and is not to be discussed or published in any way to any person by Releasor or her counsel, except in response to any official inquiry initiated by a governmental agency. It is understood that this promise of confidentiality is a material part of this agreement and that breach thereof could result in a claim for damages.
   Releasor agrees that she will not disparage_________, M.D. or post any negative statements, reviews or comments about_________, M.D., his services or his staff in any written publication or online forum, chat room, or message board, including but not limited to Yelp, Facebook, Twitter or any other social media. Releasor further agrees to remove all written or electronic communication online previously posted about_________, M.D., his services or his staff. Parties agree that in the event it is established that Releasor has failed to comply with this provision, ________, M.D. retains all rights of enforcement to include consequential damages in the enforcement of this provision or agreement.
   This Release of All Claims contains the ENTIRE AGREEMENTand understanding among the parties concerning the subject matter hereof, and supersedes and replaces all prior negotiations and proposed agreements, written and oral. Each of the parties hereto acknowledges that no other party, and no agent or attorney of any other party, has made any promise, representation or warranty whatsoever, express or implied, not contained herein concerning the subject matter hereof, to induce any party to execute this release, and acknowledges that no party hereto has executed this release in reliance upon any such promise, representation or warrant contained herein.
   I further state that I have carefully read the foregoing release and know the contents thereof, and I sign the same as my own free act.

   END OF DOCUMENT

   AGAIN — I did not sign this. It is my opinion and experience that the medical / legal system in America is not just and our citizens are at risk.
7. Susan A. Lauren February 11, 2019 at 3:50 pm

   Below is the SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT that was presented to me after I experienced being on the receiving end of perjury, slander, lies, and bias in court. The idea of the Settlement Agreement with full GAG CLAUSE, (always a gag clause…), is that my silence would be bought if I waived my rights to bring an appeal and to freedom of speech and never talk about these atrocious, totally preventable surgical violations and cover up. If I did so I was told, I would not be charged for the cost of the cover-up in court. The surgical battery and cover-up left me destitute and at risk for homelessness; sadly, after a life of hard work and running successful businesses, I am unrecoverable. I DID NOT SIGN THIS ~

   SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

   This Settlement Agreement (the Agreement) is made and entered into on____________, by and between the parties Plaintiff _____________and Defendant____________, M.D. as follows:
   RECITALS:
   A. ____________filed a complaint against____________, M.D. in the Superior Court, County of_____________, Case No. _________(the Complaint), which arose out of certain alleged acts or omissions by__________, M.D. and expressly denied by___________, M.D.
   B. The Doctors Company provides professional liability coverage for ___________, M.D. pursuant to its agreement with__________, M.D.
   C. The parties desire to enter into this Agreement upon terms and conditions set forth below.
   AGREEMENT
   The parties agree as follows:
   1.0 RELEASE AND DISCHARGE
   1.1 IN CONSIDERATION of Plaintiff ___________’s waiver of her rights to file an appeal relative to Case No._________, Defendant_________, M.D. will provide to Plaintiff an executed Acknowledgment of Full Satisfaction of Judgment of the Action. In further consideration of Plaintiff’s execution and filing of Request for Dismissal of Appeal in Case No._________, Defendant waives his right to the balance of

   the cost bill in the amount of $___________. See Exhibit 1 (Memorandum of Costs).
   Releasor ___________ further agrees that she will not disparage__________, M.D. or post any negative statements, reviews or comments about_______, M.D., his services or his staff in any written publication or online forum, chat room, or message board, including but not limited to Yelp, Facebook, Twitter or any other social media. Releasor further agrees to remove all written or electronic communication online previously posted about_______, M.D., his services or his staff. Parties agree that in the event it is established that Releasor has failed to comply with this provision, _________, M.D. retains all rights of enforcement to include consequential damages in the enforcement of this provision or agreement, including but not limited to seeking the costs as outlined in the Memorandum of Costs.

   1.2 Release of Claims by Plaintiff In consideration for the payment and covenants set forth herein, Plaintiff, on her own behalf, and on behalf of her beneficiaries, successors, predecessors, attorneys, insurers, executors, administrators, heirs and assigns, and each of them, hereby fully and forever waives, releases, and discharges Defendant, its agents, employees, successors, affiliates, partners, directors, shareholders, parent corporations, related corporations, dbas, attorneys, adjusters, insurers and assigns, and each of them, from any and all claims, liabilities, actions, causes of action, demands, rights, claims for damages, claims for equitable or contractual indemnity, claims for contribution, costs, expenses and compensation whatsoever, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, which Plaintiff may now have or which may hereafter accrue, in connection with, related to, or in any way arising out of the Action and Judgment.

   1.3 General Release. It is expressly understood and agreed that there may exist, at this time or in the future, claims and/or causes of action herein released, the nature of which have not yet been discovered or fully appreciated. It is expressly understood and agreed by Plaintiff that the possibility that such claims and/or causes of action may exist or may arise has been explicitly taken into account in determining the consideration provided for in this Settlement Agreement and Release. Accordingly, Plaintiff hereby specifically waives the provision of _________Civil Code section ________which provides as follows:

   A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor.

   1.4 Attorney’s Fees And Costs. Each party shall bear his or her own attorney’s fees and costs.

   1.5 Parties Represented By Counsel. Plaintiff acknowledges that she has been represented in negotiations for settlement and preparation of this Settlement Agreement and Release by counsel of her own choosing, or has had the opportunity to seek the advice of counsel, and that she has read this Settlement Agreement and Release and has had it fully explained to her by her own counsel, and is fully aware of its contents and of its legal effect.

   1.6 General Release Not An Admission. The Parties represent that the claims, rights, liabilities and causes of action affected by this Settlement Agreement and Release are disputed by the Parties, and that this Settlement Agreement and Release is given in good faith, in full settlement and compromise of all such disputes arising out of Plaintiff’s claims as part of the Action, and in consideration of the sums provided for herein. No provision of this Settlement Agreement and Release shall be construed in any event as an admission of any liability of any kind by any party to the Action.

   1.7 All Representations Contained Herein. Plaintiff acknowledges that no other party, nor any agent or attorney of any party, has made any promise, representation or warranty whatsoever, express or implied, not expressly contained herein concerning the subject matter hereto so as to induce him to execute this Settlement Agreement and Release; and Plaintiff acknowledges that she has not executed or accepted this Settlement Agreement and Release in reliance on any promise, representation or warranty not contained herein.

   1.8 Right to Execute General Release. Plaintiff warrants that she believes no other person has or had, or claims any interest in any of the claims, demands, causes of action, obligations, damages or liabilities asserted by her and referred to herein; that she has the sole right and exclusive authority to execute this Settlement Agreement and Release and to bind herself and her assigns thereby; that she has not sold, assigned, transferred, conveyed or otherwise disposed of any claim, demand, cause of action, obligation, damage or liability, or part or portion thereof, involved or referred to herein.

   1.9 Enforceability. The provisions of this Settlement Agreement and Release shall be deemed to obligate, extend and inure to the benefit of the legal predecessors, successors, assigns, transferees, insurers, reinsurers, and grantees of Defendant, and each of them, who may assume any and all of the above-described capacities subsequent to the execution and effective date of this Settlement Agreement and Release.

   1.10 Severability. If any provision of this Settlement Agreement and Release is or may be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless survive and continue in full force and effect without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

   1.11 Joint Drafting. The Parties agree that, should any provision of this Settlement Agreement and Release be found to be ambiguous in any way, such ambiguity shall not be construed in favor of or against any party to the Action, but rather by construing the terms of this Settlement Agreement and Release fairly and reasonably in a manner to effectuate the intentions of the Parties.

   1.12 Entire Agreement. This Settlement Agreement and Release constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, understandings, negotiations and discussions, whether oral or written, of the parties. No supplement, modification, waiver or termination of this Settlement Agreement and Release or any provision hereof shall be binding unless executed in writing by the Parties in the same manner as this Settlement Agreement and Release.

   1.13 Law of ________. The Parties agree that this Settlement Agreement and Release shall be governed by the laws of the State of ____________.

   1.14 Execution in Counterparts. This Settlement Agreement and Release may be executed in one or more counterparts, all of which together shall constitute one instrument. A fax signature shall be deemed an original signature for all purposes.

   IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Settlement Agreement and Release is executed as of the date specified.

   CAUTION: READ BEFORE SIGNING

   Dated: _____________________ _______________________________________
   PLAINTIFF

   APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:
   LAW OFFICES OF ___________________

   By: ____________________________________
   _________________, Esq.
8. Susan A. Lauren February 13, 2019 at 7:40 pm

   January 2018 — spoken to the Medical Board of California

   Hello, my name is _____. I’ve been a licensed massage therapist for the last 19 years. I massage between 20-25 people on an average a week. I’ve been massaging Susan for a year now and her body does not feel like other bodies that I have worked on. I cannot find release points in her body the way I do on others. She is missing parts of her tissue throughout the body especially around her gluteus, hamstrings, IT bands, and trochanter, therefore showing deformities that are clearly due to this surgery. Her tissue has no elasticity and is overly sensitive. Susan is a smart, bright and talented woman who through conversations I know was accustomed to a very healthy and active lifestyle and I just cannot imagine that she would have ever possibly agreed to the kind of surgery this doctor performed on her.
9. Susan A. Lauren April 17, 2019 at 10:48 pm

   The failure of the Medical Board of California is a significant part of the problem that allows board certified plastic surgeons and other doctors in our state to have carte blanche. If the MBC doesn’t hold a dangerous doctor accountable, they can and often do go on to seriously harm other people.

   Mari Robinson, executive director of the Texas Medical Board, said, “State medical boards and the laws regulating the practice of medicine were “created 100 years ago when cosmetic procedures or surgeries weren’t anything that anyone had contemplated. It was about treating illness and disease – not this idea of people pursuing medical procedures solely based on improving their appearance.”

   I would turn around Mari’s statement and say, “not this idea of DOCTORS *selling* dangerous medical procedures,, lying to people about the procedures and what they are going to do, and surgically battering healthy people with carte blanche. Also, in my case, the only reason I went to consult with a plastic surgeon was for medically indicated breast reduction; I had groves in my shoulders from bras, and pain in my pectorals.

   Lars Anning, M.D, a doctor who confessed to Marshall Allen of ProPublica that he lied to protect his colleague in a malpractice suit now works to expose the corruption in the medical field. Dr. Anning says, “In my opinion, state medical boards are simply the enforcers of, and disciplinary agents for, corporate health care and don’t give a damn about harmed patients. This sad situation is likely due to the incredible power of lawyers on the state medical boards (often linked to that state’s attorney general office) and their professional links to the lawyers of corporate healthcare.”

   Researchers from John Hopkins say, “Medical errors now third leading cause of death in United States.” Their research, however, under-estimates the health-crisis epidemic and the word “errors” is a minimization of the gross negligence, surgical battery, and criminal cover-ups that are common in the field. To my understanding, the John Hopkins research does not count harm done in ambulatory centers or the medical crimes that are covered-up. I know many people, (mostly women), in California, and all over the U.S. and the world, whose bodies, health, and lives have been destroyed by reconstructive surgeons.
10. Susan A. Lauren April 17, 2019 at 10:53 pm

    The case Susan A. Lauren vs. Saul Berger, M.D. illustrates the failure of the medical / legal system in California. Epidemic Preventable Iatrogenic Citizen-based Harm occurs widely and is covered up in California.

    EPIC HARM is caused by incorrect or incomplete knowledge; inadequate communication, faulty decision-making, and unethical practitioners who operate without consequence or remorse and misdiagnose, mistreat, and create fraudulent records. Without accurate data, (and with the cover-ups such as in this case), the causes of death and injuries cannot be identified; this prevents the healthy evolution of practitioners who can learn from mistakes; innately bad procedures; and other doctor’s negligence.

    As if ending quality of life, ruining one’s health, killing a loved one, leaving one destitute and at risk for homelessness isn’t bad enough, the cover-ups by the medical / legal system continually re-victimizes victims and their families and prevents “root cause analysis” needed to change the system to make errors and gross negligence less likely, like they do in aviation.

    The solutions for this EPIC HARM scourge in our society are:

    1) Acknowledgement
    2) Action
    3) Accountability

    ACKNOWLEDGING the depth and breadth of the problem and putting the greater good above one’s financial and political interests is the only way to lessen this preventable iatrogenic harm. This will take legislators, lawyers, and laypeople with guts and conscience.

    ACTION is needed to educate and change laws. This has to be done away from the medical institutions and doctors who create the harm in the first place and lie for each other as the “reality show personality” plastic surgeon did in my case.

    ACCOUNTABILITY is imperative in order to protect California citizens. Doctors who do innately bad procedures, harm healthy people for profit, and operate against need, consent, or rationale ought to be defrocked. When the medical boards don’t carry out their statutory required mission to protect the public, it is state-sanctioned medical harm. If a surgeon grievously assaults someone, they ought not be practicing.

    According to the Wikipedia definition, a cover-up, (such as the one in my case), is an attempt, whether successful or not, to conceal evidence of wrongdoing, error, incompetence or other embarrassing information. In an active cover-up, deception is used. The expression is usually applied to people in positions of authority who abuse power of to avoid or silence criticism or deflect guilt of wrongdoing. Perpetrators of a cover-up (initiators or their allies) may be responsible for a misdeed, a breach of trust or duty, or a crime.

    I posted this comment earlier, but I don’t see it, so I am posting it again.
11. Susan A. Lauren May 11, 2019 at 3:41 pm

    PLAINTIFF LAWYERS – 1

    Lawyers I contacted when I was looking for representation for this surgical battery case acknowledged the egregious harm that was done to me. Several of them said they had “seen everything before,” but they audibly gasped when they saw the videos of what this surgeon did to me. They then said this was “the worst thing they had ever seen.”

    One lawyer in Orange Country examined my body with a female assistant in the room and said, “It’s much worse in person than the video; he got you all the way down to the bones!” I said, “Yes, he did. I was as fit, muscular, and healthy as could be and he took a power-assisted liposuction tool to muscular and bony areas of my body for no reason and sucked me dry.” The lawyer interviewed my friend and myself for quite a while and wanted to take my case, all he had to do was run it by a plastic surgeon he used as a consultant. His consultant told him not to take the case —- the doctors cover up for each other.

    Most of the lawyers I contacted said a plastic surgery malpractice case wasn’t worth it to them given MICRA, (a really outdated tort reform in California), even though I made good money also and had lost my lifelong income and the physical damages were so severe. Their view is that plastic surgery cases, (or “these cases” as they call them without differentiating that each case is unique), are an uphill battle with victims being wrongly blamed, gas lit, and slandered.

    Several lawyers wanted to sign on and have me pay costs upfront, but I had been disabled by the assault and didn’t have money coming in for these costs.

    One lawyer said she’d take the case if I took opioids, which I refused to do.

    Another lawyer – a nice man who wanted to find a lawyer to partner up with in the case – took me to a plastic surgeon to examine me. That plastic surgeon, (who has a display case in his office with his hands bronzed in it exclaiming that he has hands that “complete God’s creation”), made up things about me and my life without asking or listening. He just made up his own story. He took the lawyer in the other room, away from me, as though I were a child rather than an adult that had been medically harmed and deserved to be talked to directly and treated with respect. I walked into the hallway to listen. The one-way conversation went like this:

    SURGEON:
    “Was this lady VIO-lated? ABSOLUTELY! Would I rip this guy apart in court? YOU BET! But it’s not worth it to you, (the lawyer), to have me take pictures of her. Why? Because she’s not a twenty-year old model, and no one is going to care.”

    That is an example of the agism and sexism that goes into the cover-ups in the field of plastic surgery. I was an attractive woman. I looked decades younger than my age, felt amazing, had a fantastic and interesting life, and expected the surgeon my primary doctor highly and exclusively recommended would do the conservative breast reduction that was discussed, would be responsible and professional, but when instead, he ripped into my body with a power-assisted liposuction tool with a three-pronged Mercedes head when I was unconscious under anesthesia and left me a writhing, bloody mess, in intractable pain forever, this hands-of-god lawyer turned me away because I didn’t fit his twenty-year old model criteria.

    Here’s what most of the lawyers said:

    • Liposuction and plastic surgery cases are botched all of the time
    • Plastic surgeons are the lowest rung of doctors
    • Patients can’t get at the truth because the surgeons hide their bad reviews
    • Plastic surgeons cover for each other
    • The perception of the jury is that it was elective surgery
    • The cases aren’t financially worth it to them
12. Susan A. Lauren September 28, 2019 at 7:47 pm

    Money and corruption, not culpability, shaped the unjust outcome of the Susan A. Lauren vs. Saul R. Berger, M.D. trial.
13. Susan A. Lauren October 3, 2019 at 12:06 am

    Surgical assault is a violation where you are are put to sleep and wake up with body parts missing without need or consent. Saul Berger committed this offense against me.
14. Susan A. Lauren November 27, 2019 at 3:50 pm

    WHY DID I GO TO A BOARD CERTIFIED PLASTIC SURGEON?

    For one reason only —- for decades, doctors had recommended breast reduction to me for medical reasons. The large size of my breasts on my petite body caused some pain in my neck, shoulders, back, and pectorals, I had grooves in my shoulders from bra straps, and some translucent skin tags under the breast fold.

    The friction of my sports bras on the inframammary fold under the breasts caused the skin tags. Clothing got stuck on the tags. In order to remove keratomas, the dermatologist burned them off, which is an uncomfortable, painful procedure. I did not want to have to keep getting skin tags burned off my body.

    My lifestyle included working out very day for ninety minutes to several hours: I hiked, ran, ran up and down stairs, did P90X, weightlifting, Pilates, yoga, bike riding, gymnastics, used a trampoline, did squats, lunges, sit-ups, push-ups and more. I loved working out; it was my passion.

    My long-term diet was plant based and as healthy as could be: no sugar, gluten, caffeine, preservatives, white starch, or meat.

    So why did Saul Berger do ANY liposuction on me? Liposuction, by the way, was contra-indicated for me. I’ll write how that in another comment. For now, here’s the letter recommending breast reduction from the dermatologist:

    May 19, 2009

    To Whom It May Concern,

    Susan Lauren has been followed in my office since May of 2009 for extensive skin lesions. The growth of these lesions is influenced by the moisture and friction which results from the size and weight of her breasts. She has multiple seborrheic keratosis, angiomas and acrochordons all of which frequently undergo irritation and inflammation. Ms. Lauren’s lesions have been treated with extensive growth removal sessions. Any treatment which would assist in the reduction and repositioning of her breast tissue would minimize the steady growth and new development of these lesions. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.

    Sincerely,

    _____________ MD
15. Susan A. Lauren January 7, 2020 at 11:22 pm

    WHY LIPOSUCTION?

    I went for a conservative medically recommended breast reduction. That is the only reason I went to a plastic surgeon. Saul Berger, highly referred by my then physician, said he had to do a touch of liposuction on my upper lateral hip to balance me from the breast reduction or I would “look really weird, hate my body, and end up right back on the operating table.” I was attractive, youthful, and healthy, and I didn’t want to look really weird and hate my body because of a needed breast reduction. I questioned him for over three months and four appointments about the safety of the procedures. I told Berger I was as fit and healthy as could be – muscular, a runner, hiker, weight lifter, yoga practitioner, health food person, and had some loose skin.

    I made clear that I did not want any scar tissue that was not medically necessary, I liked the hourglass shape of my body. I was concerned that if fat cells were removed from the breasts it would change the estrogen – hormonal balance, (it does and it did), and that if you take fat cells from anywhere on the body then the remaining cells get larger, (they do, they did, and continue to), but Berger misled me and lied to me.

    I was adamantly against pain or a hard recovery, or added risk. Berger told me that lipo was “no big deal,” there would be no scar tissue, just a tiny pinpoint, I wouldn’t even see anything, he said lipo was not for weight loss but a slight contour for a diet and exercise resistant deposit of fat. He said he was the experienced surgical expert and one needed a board certified plastic surgeon, not a dermatologist, for liposuction.

    I did not need any weight loss, but Saul Berger egregiously took over six pounds of needed tissue from my breasts to my shins. He said, “After surgery you’ll laugh and see that all your concerns were totally overblown.” Then, while I was unconscious, he stabbed me a multitude of times into muscular and bony areas with a power tool (power assisted liposuction). I had never heard of power assisted liposuction, did not consent to it, didn’t consent to what Berger did, or to consent to having liters of healthy tissue removed from my fit body. I did not understand what liposuction was because I was so misled. I had not seen a video of liposuction, and when I punched in questions about breast reduction and lipo on the internet, I was led to a misleading website.

    I had questions about Saul Berger and what he wanted to do, so I shared my concerns with the primary care physician who referred him to me. I told her that I didn’t like Berger, and I questioned what he was suggesting to do. The referring PCP told me, “You don’t have to like him, you don’t have to go out to lunch with him, you just need the best surgeon, and he is the best surgeon. You and I will take care of your health.” But she didn’t take care of my health, she colluded with Berger in the cover up and caused me continued medical harm.
16. Susan A. Lauren March 7, 2020 at 4:22 pm

    THE JUDGE EXHIBITED BIAS AND PARTIALITY

    Saul Berger surgically assaulted me; his violating acts were contra-indicated and not anatomically suitable. I did not ask for or need to be stabbed into and mutilated on over 60% of my body. The outcome disfigured and disabled me and left me in excruciating pain and ill health. I was healthy and happy before the surgical battery.

    1) Judicial Bias
    On Pg. 78 of the trial transcript the judge addressed my lawyer; he said, “The court wants to clarify, when you say concerned, is that concern because of some pain to that portion of the body or because of a mental reaction, or what?”

    The judge had no reason to mislead and bias the jury by planting a defamatory seed about me having a supposed mental reaction; the fact is, Saul Berger’s surgical battery is the direct result of severe bodily harm, which is my cause of concern.

    Saul Berger and his defense team slanderously try to portray me as a person with “factitious disorder,” who “asked for” these egregious and harmful acts. Blame-shame-gaslight-and-discredit-the-victim tactics are common in medical malpractice cover-ups; this moral turpitude causes additional harm to malpractice victims.

    • According to the Basic Evidence Rules and Objections, in California, “A question may not assume as true, any fact not yet introduced into evidence.”

    2) Judicial Impropriety

    My lawyers openly displayed bellicose, inappropriate behavior toward each other and me in full view of the jury. Twice, my lawyer threw my notebook into a bag, crossed his arms, and turned his back on me for no valid reason. The jury, spectators, and judge had a clear view of this unprofessional conduct, yet the judge allowed it, which seemed to bias the jury against me. One spectator wrote a signed letter stating what he witnessed

    • “A judge shall at all times act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.” ~ Rule 1.2, American Bar Association Model Code of Judicial Conduct.

    Also, the judge allowed Saul Berger’s defense attorney to veer from the discussion of surgical assault to such non-relevant topics as acidophilus that have no relevance to the egregious surgical assault and tragic outcome. Additionally, on pg. 403 the judge interrupted the vital and relevant discussion of the cannula direction and never returned there.

    • Evidence must be logically relevant to be admissible. Evidence is logically relevant when it tends to prove or disprove a material fact of the case. (Evid. Code, §§ 210, 350, and 351.)

    • Evidence is prejudicial if it may bias the jury, confuse the jury, waste time, or unduly delay the proceeding. (Evid. Code, § 352.)

    It is clear to others and me that the judge in Lauren v. Berger lacked impartiality; it is my opinion his repeated bias and partiality was a factor that affected the unjust trial outcome.
17. Susan A. Lauren June 6, 2020 at 6:51 pm

    I was a healthy, athletic person when I went to Saul Berger to consult with him about a conservative medically recommended breast reduction to remedy pain and keratomas.

    Dr. Berger misled me and then surgically assaulted me; he stabbed me with an 11 blade into my kneecaps, IT bands, upper and lower hamstrings, buttocks, sciatic notch, infragluteal crease, and hipbones. He destroyed my breasts. He removed needed, wanted portions of my body while I was unconscious under anesthesia.

    Saul Berger left me to bleed out of dozens of un-sutured wounds where he stabbed me in muscular and bony areas. He left me in agonizing pain that feels to be tearing, ripping, and burning. By looking at the atrocities Berger caused for me, it’s clear to see why. I told him about the complications and violations; he gas lit me. He wrote “No Complications” on the Operative Report, which is a fabrication, and as are most of his notes.

    I did not consent to liposuction on my posterior lower leg over my muscular hamstrings.
    I did not consent to liposuction on the infragluteal crease (crease below the buttocks).
    I did not consent to liposuction in multiple incisions all over my buttocks.
    I did not consent to liposuction on my distal kneecap below my patella.
    I did not consent to liposuction on my lateral legs on top of my strong muscles.

    None of this makes any sense for a petite, athletic person with strong muscles and some loose skin who is a holistic person careful of their health – or for anyone. Berger’s violating sculpting episode negatively affects my ability to walk, sit, lie down, and more. I have fallen multiple times since and because of the assault, and never once before.

    Summary of the Procedures

    1) Was the procedure medically justified in the circumstances? No.
    3) Performed under condition meeting standard criteria? No.
    4) Were there obvious factors showing gross negligence? Yes.
18. Susan A. Lauren July 13, 2020 at 3:44 pm

    The Los Angeles coroner’s list of “deaths due to liposuction from 1999 – early 2019” shows mortality to be on the increase. Morbidity, (which is a lead barometer of harm caused by adipose removal), is even more pervasive. 100% of victims on the coroner’s list are female, 0% are male. The average age is less than 48 years old. 37% Caucasian, 30% black, 26% Hispanic/Latin, 4% Asian. This is medical violence against women – often young, healthy women.

    Causes of death were listed as: fat in the bloodstream entering the lungs, blood clots in the lungs, heart attacks, bleeding to death, infections, and anesthesia complications. I support Truth in Advertising re: liposuction, criminal prosecution for surgeons who assault people, legislation to stop this medical scam, transparency, patient-approved records, changes to Lipo Code 1356.6 and other Lipo codes, and strict accountability. Assault and fraud are crimes.
19. Susan A. Lauren July 30, 2020 at 3:38 pm

    Healthy people who go in for a medical need, cosmetic concern, or both may be sold or upsold on liposuction; California passed liposuction legislation based on a guideline, but there’s no data behind it. No science. Lipo is linked to life-shortening diseases such as diabetes, stroke, and heart attack, as well as disfigurement, disability, and death.

    As I wrote above, the Los Angeles coroner’s list of liposuction related deaths for 1999-2019 shows that 100% of those listed are female; their average age is < 48 years old. 37% are Caucasian, 30% black, 26% Hispanic, and 4% Asian. Causes of death are: fat in the bloodstream entering the lungs, blood clots in the lungs, heart attacks, bleeding to death, infections, and anesthesia complications. Morbidity and mortality is on the increase.

    In 2011 Dr. Saul Berger surgically assaulted me when I went for medically recommended insurance-covered breast reduction. He charged me over $5,000 in out-of-pocket costs for what he claimed was a safe, spot specific contour to balance me from breast reduction. I was petite, athletic, and at my perfect muscular weight and fitness.

    Against my consent or rationale, Berger stabbed me into my hamstrings, illiotibial bands, buttocks, hipbones, knee joints, sciatic notch, and infragluteal crease. He removed and destroyed myofasical and other tissues. Doctors demonstrated and testified Berger’s acts were not medically justified under any circumstances. The battery crippled me; SSI put me on permanent disability due to the physical damage Berger caused me.

    Informed consent begins with consideration of the tort of battery, one of the oldest forms of legally disfavored conduct. It consists of unpermitted, unprivileged, intentional contact with another’s person. After assaulting me, Saul Berger portrayed me as having “factitious disorder.” This slander is how perpetrators commonly discredit their victims.

    The medical board denied my valid complaint against Saul Berger. For more on the Medical Board of California, you can look up their reviews on Yelp.

    I’ve met hundreds of women who have also been harmed by board certified plastic surgeons – many of them in California. Thousands of desperate reviews, (mostly by women), detail a spectrum of harm caused by adipose removal. People describe being gas lit by the offending doctors who trot out the patient-blame smears, fabrications, threats, gags, online reputation management, etc. Some victims complain of assault. Many of these women don’t file complaints with the medical board because the board protects dangerous doctors. Others, like me, have filed complaints, but met with the same corruption.

    In May 2019 plastic surgeon Kenneth Hughes came before the Medical Board of California for two counts of wrongful death; the Hughes case was dismissed after attorneys from both sides said the plastic surgery expert for the MBC was “corrupt and lied profusely.”

    Lawyers told me plastic surgeries are commonly substandard and plastic surgeons cover for each other. They say people can’t get at the truth because surgeons hide bad reviews, and cases aren’t financially worth it to lawyers due to the antiquated MICRA tort reform that was initiated by Governor Brown in 1975 and has not been adjusted for inflation since. Additionally, patients are afraid, in too much pain, or otherwise reluctant to come forward. Some of the iatrogenically injured women say their doctors have threatened to sue them.

    I didn’t receive a fair trial: evidence was barred; records and photos are false and misleading. My first lawyer dropped me when I refused to sign a $29,999.99 under limits cover-up settlement with a gag clause. My second lawyer was also unprofessional. I witnessed firsthand the complete sham of the U.S. legal system.

    The defense hired Dr. Terry Dubrow as the Independent Medical Expert (IME). There is nothing Independent about being hired and paid for by the defense to hit their talking points. Terry Dubrow also works as an expert for the MBC; he charged $3000 an hour for the deposition, and used his position as a reviewer for the Medical Board of California to sway my jury with lies. By participating in this fraud and slander, Terry Dubrow hijacked my right to restitution and justice, leaving the dangerous Saul Berger in practice.

    During the deposition about my surgical mutilation, Dubrow joked about how much money he makes being an expert witness in the case. "Why do you think they call it PLASTIC surgery?" he quipped, referring to the use of credit card to pay for his costs.
20. Susan A. Lauren August 19, 2020 at 12:30 am

    I just saw an accurate description of patient shaming posted by someone who was medically harmed. Her description describes what Dr. Saul R. Berger and his cohorts did to me.

    “Patient shaming: A tactic used by the medical community to downplay a patient’s illness and medical experience. It serves to discredit the patient and put them in a subordinate position. Many of the patients who experience this type of shaming are contending with life-threatening and life-altering medical issues and/or surgeries and treatments. As a result of their illness and medical treatment, they may be disfigured, disabled, unemployed, in chronic pain, tethered to toxic medications, or financially devastated but they are supposed to, “Just get over it” and, “Move on with their lives” according to their doctors. Patient shaming invalidates one’s experience and is a form of gas-lighting and emotional abuse.”

    Matthew H. H. Young, a physician and attorney trained at Harvard who lost his own father to medical malpractice in 2009 wrote an article entitled, “The Silent Pandemic: Medical Errors Will Kill Far More Americans Than COVID-19.” Here is a bit from the article:

    “According to ProPublica, more than 1 million patients are harmed each year by the US healthcare system. Estimates put forth by highly esteemed medical institutions and medical experts range from 100,000 to more than 400,000 deaths a year as a result of preventable medical harm.

    The most recent estimate put the number around 250,000 — however, that number included only in-patient hospital deaths. It excluded the billions of out-patient and other healthcare visits and interactions taking place annually that result in negligence and death. It also doesn’t take into consideration the fact that there are fates worse than death. Medical malpractice often causes horrific injuries, traumas, and life-long disabilities that do not result in death.”

    Dr. Saul Berger committed such a heinous surgical assault on me I am in the category of a fate worse than death. He structurally gutted me leaving me in unrelenting, agonizing pain. Dr. Saul Berger, Dr. Terry Dubrow, attorney Tom McAndrews and his colleague Tina Lee, and others patient shamed and gas lit me in relation to this case of surgical battery. The plaintiff attorneys did not honestly or adequately represent me.

    I’ve met some wonderful and supportive doctors, medical researchers, harmed patients, and people whose loved ones were killed by medical negligence. Decent people are outraged by the harm Berger et al. did to me.

    One may think, “Medical malpractice would not happen to me.” Think again. Medical harm is epidemic.

    The loss of my lawsuit was a loss for patient safety. Any individual, insurance company, or institution like the corrupt Medical Board of California that allows this medical harm to go unchecked is responsible for giving doctors a “License to Kill.”
21. Susan A. Lauren August 29, 2020 at 3:02 pm

    “Why did you go to Dr. Berger?”
    Recall, I went to consult about a possible breast reduction for structural reasons.

    “Why?”
    Doctors recommended breast reduction to me for years. I was petite and athletic with large breasts that caused some physical problems including indents in my shoulders from bra straps, pain in the pectorals, and keratomas under the bra line from my athletic bras; these keratomas had to be burned off.

    “Who recommended you to Dr. Berger?”
    My physician at the time highly recommended him as a “reconstructive expert.”

    “Did you want surgery?”
    No, I was cautious. I said no to it for years. I liked having large breasts and a small waist, but I wanted to stay athletic for my whole life and the dermatologist, Dr. G, told me to get breast reduction for structural help while I was still young and healthy.

    “Besides a conservative breast reduction, what else did Dr. Berger suggest?”
    In the same surgery as breast reduction, Saul Berger recommended circumspect liposuction for what he called a localized diet-and-exercise resistant fatty deposit on my upper lateral thigh. Without this common, minor, safe add-on, he said I would be imbalanced, look very weird, and be very unhappy with my body.

    “How did that go over with you?”
    I had many valid questions and concerns. I spoke to Dr. Berger, his nurse, and other staff members I was in contact with in his office about my reluctance for any surgery. I did not want to risk my health or be in pain. I didn’t agree to any scar tissue that wasn’t medically indicated. I explained clearly about my healthy, holistic lifestyle, high level of fitness, and skepticism for liposuction and breast reduction.

    “What were your concerns about breast reduction?”
    I was concerned that removing even a little adipose tissue from my breasts would change my hormonal levels since fat in the breasts stores estrogen. I was concerned that if a doctor removes fat cells from one place on the body, the others will get larger.

    I also, had concerns about pain, anesthesia, scar tissue, recovery, and more.

    “How did Dr. Berger respond to your valid concerns?
    He lied. He denied the physiological realities. He sold and upsold me, convinced me he was the surgical expert who knew what he had to do, and it would be no big deal.

    “Did you ask Dr. Berger – or anyone ever – for liposuction of your flanks?”
    No.

    “A piece of paper called Surgical Planner from October 2011 lists liposuction to be done as: Lateral thighs and flanks, plus medial thighs.”
    Yes, it does. I adamantly refused to sign consent for surgery when I saw flanks listed. I told Marianne Klaas I didn’t need, want, ask for, or agree to liposuction on my flanks.

    “Who is Marianne Klaas?”
    She said she was Dr. Berger’s financial manager. She’s listed on corporationwiki as Office Manager for Saul R. Berger, M.D., Inc. I found out at the Susan A. Lauren VS. Saul Berger, M.D. trial in July 2016 that Marianne Klaas is Dr. Saul R. Berger’s wife.

    “How did Marianne Klaas respond when you objected and refused to agree to sign?”
    She told me “lateral thighs and flanks,” were listed together without a comma in between like “beans and rice” for billing purposes; someone might only want beans or rice – this was just a price point, she said. She said Dr. Berger would only do what was needed and agreed to.

    “Did her response convince you?”
    No.

    “What did you do then?
    “I insisted on speaking with Dr. Berger. I was not okay with flanks being listed.

    “Did you talk to Dr. Berger that day in October 2011?”
    Yes, in between his appointments.

    “How did the conversation with Dr. Berger go?”
    I reiterated I was there for medically indicated breast reduction. My waist was lean. Any tissue that could be pinched was skin. I was a workout buff with a healthy diet. He agreed. I told him I only would agree to what he described as a minor site-specific contour – NOT for weight loss. He said the purpose was to smooth the silhouette and balance my body from breast reduction. I told him NO flanks, be prudent, do the least.

    “What did he say?”
    He assured me he would do what I wanted and be prudent, he knew I was muscular with some skin ptosis. He called me a ‘holistic type.” He said the procedure was not for weight loss and would be conservative, no scars or downtime. He said I’d laugh after surgery and see that all of my concerns were TOTALLY overblown.

    Dr. Berger misled me with propaganda and lies about what liposuction is and about what he would do to me. He sold me a dangerous, harmful medical scam against my well-stated conscientious objections.

    “Did you ask Dr. Berger – or anyone ever – for liposuction of your knees?”
    No.

    “Why is liposuction of the knees listed?”
    On the Surgical Planner sheet, medical thighs are listed; Dr. Berger told me he had to do a tiny spot there to ‘balance me.’ I was shocked. I refused and said, “No.” I asked, “What exactly are you going to do to me? I’m a hiker and runner; my legs have strong, developed muscles, I work out for hours a day, this is just a little skin, look,” – I lifted the skin up on my leg to show my muscles.

    Dr. Berger told me he was an artist and knew what he had to do.

    “What did you say to that?”
    I said, “AN ARTIST?! Don’t I need a surgeon?” Berger seemed to me to be put off by this and replied he was an expert surgeon AND an artist. I complained to my referring physician about this and other concerns re: Saul Berger; she sent me right back to him; she said he was THE surgical expert, THE surgeon I needed to go to.

    Clearly Saul Berger is not a good artist or a competent, ethical surgeon.

    “Did you try to cancel the surgery?”
    Yes. I tried to cancel the day before. My ride said she was unable to make it. I spoke with Marianne Klaas (Berger). I offered to pay part and asked if their office would be able to schedule some people who were waiting to get in for smaller procedures.

    “How did Marianne respond?”
    She came across as cold and uncaring to me on the phone. She said I could not cancel. She said if I choose to not show up I’d lose everything: the $5,150 cash they already had from me plus I’d be charged for the medically covered breast reduction and Health Net would never approve me for reduction again.

    I insisted she ask Dr. Berger directly. Marianne came back to the phone and said NO. I was unaware at that time she was his wife. If I had known, I would not have moved forward with this surgery for any reason.

    When I arrived the next morning for surgery, Dr. Berger seemed to me to be in a strange mood. My instincts told me to run away. I’m someone who listens to my instincts, but in this case, I felt roped in. Marianne Klaas had told me I’d lose everything. Dr. C and Dr. Berger had convinced me Saul Berger was the surgical expert I needed to go to for the breast reduction, which I believed was necessary.

    As soon as I got there, Berger put an I.V. in my arm. My instinct told me to remove it and leave. I told myself I was just nervous because it was surgery and I’d be okay.

    I asked Berger if it would be okay. He said yes. I reminded him of how fit I was and to do the least he could. What Berger did to me is unthinkable. He stabbed me up a multitude of times into my kneecaps, illiotibial bands, hamstrings, buttock, and hipbones and removed an estimated six pounds from my 5’2” muscular body.

    Saul Berger brutally surgically assaulted me. He disabled me. He covered up his gross negligence with fraud and slander. The case is Res Ipsa Loquitur. Dr. Terry Dubrow and others participated in the cover-up.

    “Do you have any final thoughts today?”

    The people that blame surgical assault victims are the same people that blame rape victims. Those so-called professionals that cover up for surgeons like Saul R. Berger who commit surgical atrocities, fraud, scam, and slander are morally bankrupt.

    Sadly, the U.S. court system and medical boards do not protect the public or bring justice. Because of the unscrupulous folks I mentioned, including Tom McAndrews, the judge, unprofessional plaintiff lawyers, unresponsive California legislators, and corrupt medical boards, women the world over will continue to be harmed by board certified plastic surgeons. I’ll continue to educate about the medical scams, greed, and rigged systems that protects the offenders.
22. Susan A. Lauren October 18, 2020 at 6:00 pm

    Dr. Saul R. Berger surgically assaulted and disabled me on November 8, 2011; he covered it up and slandered me. Dr. Terry Dubrow lied in his deposition and my trial against Saul Berger in 2016. Plastic surgeons in America give each other “The License to Kill” and maim, without consequence. The disinformation surgeons and their boards put out on TV and the Internet mislead people, (mostly women), to go to dangerous doctors who commit medical scams and assault. The plastic surgeons have created a genocide for healthy women.
23. Ying Xu December 17, 2020 at 1:53 pm

    Dear Susan,

    I am so sorry to hear about your experience. You’re a real life example of how MICRA fundamentally changed the way how doctors practice medicine: they no longer care about patients, they know their reckless actions will have no real consequences because the law is on their side.

    Please keep spreading the truth on the Internet. God bless
24. Susan A. Lauren December 27, 2020 at 11:55 pm

    In Saul Berger’s deposition he said he inserted cannulas into my buttock.

    Doctors and experts demonstrated and testified that simple examination reveal at least eight surgical incision scars on the buttock’. Saul Berger scarred, disfigured, and disabled me permanently as a direct result of the overly aggressive and unconsented surgery he performed on me on November 8, 2011. This constitutes surgical battery, they say.

    In Berger’s deposition, he was asked if he had any reason to question whether I was an appropriate candidate for surgery from the standpoint of my mental status. After trying to dance around this and lying, the answer was “no.” There was no reason to question my mental status, of course not, yet rape, assault, and medical malpractice victims face character assassination and slander from perpetrators on a regular basis.

    After he mutilated me, Berger told other doctors I healed perfectly and had “factitious disorder”; his dishonest defense was to try to turn mutilation into a mental problem.

    In his deposition Saul Berger denied that I complained, but in fact, I voiced clear concerns from the moment I came to convulsing and in agony from his assault. On Dec. 9, 2011, I showed him parts of my body that he damaged. He ran his fingers quickly on the deformity he created where my gluteus used to be and said, “It can months to heal; we don’t know the outcome yet.” I said, “Are you telling me my butt is going to grow back?”

    It sunk in I had lost my good life by trusting Dr. Saul Berger based in large part on the strong referral given by an Osteopath and another plastic surgeon’s office. I refused to step foot in Saul Berger’s office after Dec. 9, 2011. In the trial, Tom McAndrews, Berger’s lawyer, tried to paint me as being “non-compliant” because I didn’t go back to see my perpetrator. By that point, all the stitches were removed from my breasts, and it was clear that Berger violated me, harmed me permanently and severely, and was covering up and denying what he did. It was not in my best interest to see the surgeon who assaulted and maimed me with a power tool against need, consent, or rationale.

    I called Berger’s office many times up to that point. I wrote a desperate Contact Us form to his website. Berger called me from an unlisted number and denied, minimized, and gas lit me. I was distraught, “Oh my god, what did you do to me? You said this was a tiny contour, no scar tissue, no pain, not for weight loss. I was fit, muscular, worked out daily, and my diet was healthy. I told you that anything you could pinch was skin. Why did you stab me all over? I nearly bled to death. I’m in so much pain, I can’t sit, and I don’t have padding left on my hips to lie down normally, so I can’t sleep.”

    On the phone Berger said I could walk, so I was fine. I texted him, “I’m the walking wounded.” Tom McAndrews, Berger’s lawyer, tried to manufacture a sleep and other made up problems to try to blame me for the atrocities Berger caused and minimize any possible restitution. They don’t care about my life, justice or protecting future patients.

    Berger told me I could “use that powerful mind of mine” to fix it and I should just go out to lunch with a friend. He said another patient of his couldn’t leave the house after surgery with him and then she went out to lunch and was fine.

    *****
    Dr. Brain Brantner, (a heavyset man who was hard of hearing), was the plaintiff expert. During his deposition he asked for a question to be restarted. Tom McAndrews, Berger’s lawyer said, “Really? You’re a big boy.” It was vital to my case that Brantner focus on his testimony rather than being body and age shamed. Tom also body shamed me in trial.

    Tom McAndrews staged a dishonest, slanderous defense. He talked about tragic outcomes of Berger’s disabling, disfiguring surgical assault as though it is just a little cosmetic imperfection that I have the gall to complain about.

    He kept referring to “the surgery” as though I had gone in for liposuction. He insisted that I was “very motivated” for this, always trying to blame me. Saul Berger added on a slight lipo contour to the medically indicated breast reduction — he did not add on breast reduction to liposuction. The only reason I went to a surgeon was for breast reduction that doctors told me to get. Berger convinced me that without a supposedly safe, slight contour, I would look weird and imbalanced and end right back on the operating table.

    McAndrews questioned me about a Chinese herb I took briefly eight months before Berger’s assault. An herbal supplement did not stab and mutilate me over 60 percent of my healthy body, Saul Berger did.

    McAndrews said I didn’t have any pain because no doctor was there to testify to that. My lawyers explained his goal was to minimize financial damages and exculpate Berger.

    Firstly, I don’t need anyone to tell me if I’m in physical agony; I am, that is clear, and the direct cause is Berger’s surgical assault.

    Secondly, Multiple doctors and health care workers acknowledge that Saul Berger’s assault caused me physical pain that is without remedy. It’s obvious.

    Here is some relevant information:

    • The Osteopath who highly referred me to Berger in 2011 refused to put me in a gown and physically examine me after the assault. Her repeated negligence, (which is a whole book on it’s own), caused me additional medical harm. Yet, in 2012, she finally wrote to SSI stating, “A year later is still unable to work due to her daily discomfort and pain.” When I confronted this Osteopath about Berger’s assault, I said, “I hope you’re not still referring him,” to which she screamed in response, “It’s none of your G-D-Fing Business WHAT I do.”

    I couldn’t even get in my car to drive to get help because Berger disabled me. My car was towed away six months later. I no longer even have a driver’s license.

    • A Neurologist in 2013 offered to write me a prescription for opioids. I refused because narcotics would cause additional problems for me without remediating the structural and functional damage Berger caused. That neurologist recommended me to a medical malpractice lawyer.

    • A Social Worker wrote to SSI in 2013, “It was very evident that was in severe physical pain and emotional distress given the circumstances of her surgical procedures conducted on November 8, 2011… Ms. Lauren’s condition cannot be remediated with medications.

    • A Physical Therapist at USC, May 2013, cited structural and functional damage and pain caused by what Berger did. He declared me physically disabled from it.

    • My first primary Care Physician after the assault wrote in 2013, “Surgery has irreversibly destroyed much of the patient’s subcutaneous myofasical and other tissues. has been experiencing an extreme chronic pain syndrome as a direct result of the surgery. In 2016 he wrote, “This is CLEAR-CUT BUTCHERY. HORRIBLE. Unfortunately, he went to the Olympics in Rio on a holiday with his family instead of testifying in my case of surgical assault. He and my second lawyer were arguing with each other at that time, to my detriment.

    This PCP wrote to my second lawyer, “If Games are Cancelled because of Zika. We will not come home. Since This our family vacation time. Will go elsewhere. Am upset that all this is happening at wrong time for the best of and my family as well.”

    The lawyer wrote back to the PCP – “As I explained to you before. Your unavailability will cost on this case. I have explained to you that the judge will not grant any further continuances on this matter. So… maybe you reschedule your trip… So maybe you leave the issue alone as there is nothing we can do.”

    They could have videotaped his testimony, but they didn’t. They were contentious and argued about how much it would cost to get his testimony. Since Berger disabled me, I lost my successful, beloved businesses and could not foot the bill. My savings were quickly depleted by cost of living and medical expense. My case is emblematic of the unjust hurdles medical malpractice victims face.

    • In 2014, dermatologist J.K. referenced “complex regional pain syndrome, neuropathic pain, post operative neuropathic,” in my case. His name came up in my deposition and my lawyer objected saying that this doctor breeched my privacy by talking to Saul Berger’s defense about my visit to his office.

    • An LMT wrote in 2018: “I’ve been a Licensed Massage Therapist for 15 years. I met Susan Lauren in April 2012, 6 months after her breast reduction and liposuction surgery. She was in shock and such significant physical pain from muscle damage and distortion, I could barely touch her. Portions of her lower body are missing, affecting her whole structure.”

    This excellent body worker goes on to detail exactly how my body has compensated for the absent tissues in the hamstring and gluteal areas, etc. affecting my overall spinal health and inhibiting nearly all normal activities, such as walking, sitting, and lying down. She details skin adherence to muscle on my illiotibial band, gluteus Maximus, and more.

    She ends with this, “ though in disabling pain, is rational, kind, and bright. She’s more organized and highly functioning than many people I know without disability: I can only image how high functioning she must have been before she was so injured. I don’t know what the standards in the field of plastic surgery are, but it’s hard to image that full disability, disfiguration, trauma, and pain were the intended outcomes from surgery.”

    Contrast this truthful information with Terry Dubrow’s role in this surgical assault cover-up. In his so-called exam of me, he poked at my body. He pulled on skin that is adhered to my bones. This hurt me. I communicated clearly and directly with Dr. Dubrow that what he was doing hurt me. He used this as excuse to abort the exam early.

    Dubrow falsely claimed that there is no basis for my physiologic complaints of pain or inability to function normally. My PC said, “The pain has caused almost total disability. Social Security agrees I was permanently physically disabled as a direct result of the severe bodily damage Berger did. It’s obvious.

    As my PCP documented: “It appears that the lipo has irreversibly destroyed much of the patient’s subcutaneous myofasical and other tissues.”

    In court, Dubrow said, “I think it’s appropriate. I don’t think it’s aggressive. I just think it’s an acceptable amount of liposuction.”

    In court, Dr. Terry Dubrow said that spider bites (shown in a picture) were liposuction incisions. Dubrow recommended a surgery that would harm me and would not fix the permanent structural and functional damage Berger inflicted upon me. My lawyers made clear that Dubrow’s role was to put a dollar amount on a supposed “fix” to cap any restitution.

    *****

    A long-term friend and colleague of mine, Ann, wrote an amazing letter about the events.

    and I became friends as well as colleagues, and I have known her to be a smart, positive, upbeat person always willing to help others. She is (was, before surgery) a vibrant, health-conscious, athletic person, who found ways to work around the intense periods during our training so that she was able to continue eating properly and working out as a natural part of her personal fitness program. Cheerful and friendly, she has a healthy lifestyle, and it showed in her physical, mental, and emotional presentation to the world. She was attractive, charming, and had what would be called an hourglass figure. At no time did I ever hear her complain about being “fat” or wish she could lose weight or state the desire for a “total make-over”. She never showed any 
interest in being a candidate for liposuction. I never saw any signs of anxiety or depression. Rather, she seemed to have a comfortable positive self-esteem.

    and I stayed in touch after the end of the ADL project.” She writes, “We got together socially from time to time up until November 2011, when she visited us just prior to her breast reduction surgery, which she had elected to do to relieve back pain.

    All that ended in early November 2011, when she initiated breast reduction surgery with Dr. Saul Berger, who it turned out had more expansive expectations for He removed flesh she didn’t have to spare, cut through deep structures, and left her disabled, disfigured, in extreme pain, and no longer able to work, her lifetime potential cut short. “I thought my next 50 years would be great,” she muses, “productive, full of travel to new places. I planned to work with kids, to share my skills with them for a more productive life.” But none of that was to be.

    Once recovered from the surgery sufficiently to grasp the extent of her mutilation, she faced a band of brothers – people who shared responsibility in some way for the cavalier treatment that had led to her pain, disability, and disfigurement. She sued the doctor, unsuccessfully. She took her case to the Medical Board of California. Unsuccessfully. She contacted her state legislators. Unsuccessfully.

    They were unmoved by the damage done – or unable to take on the system. Some even disparaged her intent saying she must have “asked for it,” or “been fat and lazy.” Some even implied her body wasn’t that of a 20 year-old model and therefore no one would care. Let me assure you, did NOT ask for it, nor was she fat or lazy. She was a levelheaded person seeking to resolve a medical problem. Now, she has been disabled and rendered housebound.”

    She ends with this, “Do not belittle . Do not disparage her efforts. Her campaign is serious. She’s seeking help from federal, state, and local regulators to protect unsuspecting patients from the dangers of liposuction. Will you help, or stay silent?”

    Of course, everyone stays silent, withholding justice, giving these surgeons carte blanche, and leaving the next crop of people – mostly women – at risk.

    *****
    In an op-ed in The Huffington Post is July 2016, actress Jennifer Aniston responded to criticism of a photo of herself in a bathing suit that appeared in the tabloids. She said, “I have grown tried of being part of this narrative… I resent being made to feel ‘less than’ because my body is changing and/or I had a burger for lunch and was photographer from a weird angle and therefore deemed one of two things: ‘pregnant’ or ‘fat.’

    Touché, Jennifer. Saul Berger had me stick out my stomach, knock my knees together, otherwise contort myself, and he took photos in a dark room with a headlight on his forehead. He presented manipulated photos and false records, assassinating my good character in a high paid cover-up. In court I barely recognized a photo of myself he took.

    *****
    In 2011, Maria Shortall, a 38-year-old healthy woman, died from approximately 22 liposuction incisions, which her family lawyer said is “a significant amount in terms of a minor procedure.” Why are these surgeons allowed to stab up healthy women?

    Saul Berger made a “multitude” of incisions from my waist to my shins in addition to an aggressive breast reduction. I had no idea he would do what he did and I made absolutely clear I would only agree to the most prudent procedure possible. He didn’t even try to hide these stab wounds, which gouged and litter my body. He removed needed, wanted parts of my totally fit, petite, muscular body.

    Saul Berger’s records are full of lies and omissions. He doesn’t have a photo of where he drew on me before surgery, he did not draw on me where he operated, and he put an IV needle in my arm before he drew on me.

    I’ve been connecting with other women harmed by board certified plastic surgeons since 2012. The harm caused by these surgeons is epidemic. I’ve written on this legal blog and elsewhere in an attempt to educate about the preventable devastation these surgeons cause for people – mostly women – also affecting their loved ones and communities.
25. Susan A. Lauren February 4, 2021 at 11:31 pm

    Thank you, Ying Xu.
26. Susan A. Lauren June 3, 2021 at 1:59 pm

    Here are some suggestions I submitted to the California Senate in May 2021 based on the actions of Saul Berger, the doctor that highly referred him and then refused to appropriately examine me afterwards, et al.:

    1. Medical Records should be co-authored by doctor and patient or not used as evidence. Looking to a doctor’s records is a futile way to determine guilt. For legal purpose, if it’s not in the medical record, it “never happened.” This is a legal veil to protect doctors. In cases of medical abuse, notes may be wrong to begin with; it is the fall back position to alter records and photos to create whatever story perpetrators wish to convey. Omissions are common. Statements from victims ought to be on an even footing with doctor’s, otherwise this dangerous authoritarian system will continue unimpeded.

    2. Zero tolerance for cover-ups. If a fellow doctor participates in the cover-up of a negligent peer, the colluding doctor should receive the same treatment as the offender.

    3. Reporting for medical harm ought to be mandatory by any medical professional. Currently, instead of reporting medical harm, many doctors misdiagnose mentally healthy people with mental disorders when in fact they are physically injured by medical harm. These unskilled, unethical doctors then layer on inappropriate medications that cause new problems the patient didn’t have; their function is impaired, and the healthy but injured person is diagnosed with problems the medications caused.

    4. Doctors that misdiagnose people who were highly functional before medical harm with ‘anxiety or mental problems’ instead of reporting the medical harm ought to lose their licenses. It is not hard to look, listen, report, and do no harm, but many doctors refuse to do so. “Mental disorders become the default position to deal with medical uncertainty,” said Dr. Allen Frances, former chair of psychiatry at the Duke University School of Medicine. “It’s widespread, and it’s dangerous.”

    This post-medical harm misdiagnosing follows along the lines of the Rosenhan experiment where mentally healthy people were committed to mental hospitals, falsely diagnosed, and mistreated no matter how ‘normal’ and well functioning they were under the circumstances. (See Rosenhan Experiment on Wiki for a summary)

    Victims of medical harm may be in intractable pain that isn’t remediated by medication; disabled with newly limited function; mourning their life and health or the life of a loved one; their valid complaints are denied, defended, they’re gaslit, shamed, blamed. They need intelligent, ethical doctors to listen, record the real harm, do no more harm, and help them maneuver catastrophic loss and violation with dignity and credibility in tact.

    Saul Berger surgically assaulted and physically disabled me, took away my independence and ability to even drive to get help. It took me eleven months after the assault to get to a skilled, ethical doctor who finally did an appropriate physical exam. I’ll write more about that later.

    In the interim, I was severely harmed by dangerous doctors who layered me on medications that had no bearing on my problem, which is the mutilating assault. They caused tachycardia, anaphylaxis, bizarre feelings, extreme vomiting, gripping stomachaches, headaches, and inability to function, severe drop in blood pressure, trauma, and more. When I finally got off these meds I got ‘myself’ back. I climb the wall of the slander, character defamation, false diagnosis, and false records they perpetrated. Many medical harm survivors are mistreated like this. This is the fallback way doctors cover their crimes of humanity.
27. Susan A. Lauren June 16, 2021 at 5:46 pm

    DR. D.C., THE PHYSICIAN WHO REFERRED ME TO DR. SAUL R. BERGER

    Dr. C, an osteopath, referred me to Dr. Saul Berger for a medically indicated breast reduction. I had large breasts on a small frame, which caused pain. I expressed concern to both Drs. that adipose removal would change my estrogen levels. I was fit, and liked my breast size; I wanted the least change possible. I requested verbally and in writing that Berger be conservative and safe.

    Dr. Berger said he had to do a small add on to the breast reduction “for balance,” however, he operated aggressively on my breasts and body against all my wishes. He stabbed me a multitude of times, waist to shins, into bony, muscular areas against consent, need, or rationale. He caused muscle distortion, systemic problems, disability, and disfigurement.

    Dr. C. refused to physically examine me to evaluate the damage Dr. Berger caused. Instead, without an appropriate exam, she prescribed inappropriate medications that created serious problems in addition to the catastrophic outcomes from the assault.

    The pre-op request from Berger to Dr. C. lists only breast reduction, not liposuction. From Dr. C’s notes: “LOCUM HERE!!!!!!!!! It seems she is trying to blame her locum for something. I had several discussions with Dr. C. about Dr. Berger before this and she told me he was THEE surgeon I needed to go to, the best, he would listen to me, and she and I would take care of my health.

    I came to convulsing, with numb lips, and a metallic taste for at least a week – lidocaine toxicity. I had (and still have) trouble breathing and was covered in severe petechial rash for months – fat embolus syndrome. Studies conclude FES occurs after liposuction.

    At home, a friend and my family found me a bloody mess, sliced and cut up on over 60% of my healthy, muscular body, jammed into an industrial garment Berger’s team pulled me in that I could not breathe in. After maiming me, Dr. Berger wrote, “Contour correction was achieved.”

    Ten doctors, including four board certified plastic surgeons, said what Berger did was surgical battery and caused permanent, progressive damage. A neurologist and surgeon referred me to medical malpractice lawyers. Lawyers said it looks like a Dr. Mengele job.

    Dr. U. states, “Surgery has irreversibly destroyed much of the patient’s subcutaneous myofasical and other tissues.” He says the tissues are over-stretched, leading to pockets of painful adhesions that pull tightly upon movement. These procedures caused many other systems to be affected: muscular, lymphatic, circulatory, mobility, and others.

    I described and showed the global devastation to Drs. Berger and C., but it was clear to me they did not want to acknowledge it; their records, full of lies and omissions, do not reflect the truth whatsoever. In C’s notes, incidents and conversations have been altered or not recorded. She never mentions severe bodily harm or extreme pain; she repeatedly refused to do an appropriate exam. No MRIs were done. For legal purpose, if it is not in the medical record, it never happened. This is a legal veil to protect doctors.

    Nowhere in her notes did Dr. C. record the mutilation, disability, surgically induced menopause, lidocaine poisoning, (symptoms: convulsing and putrid metallic taste in my mouth, etc.), Fat Embolis Syndrome, (symptoms: respiratory distress, neurological features, and skin petechiae). She mentioned a rash and wrote it might be an allergic reaction, but allergic rashes generally don’t last months: FES caused by lipo does.

    Instead, Dr. C. mistreated the tragic outcomes of the mutilation (and harm by inappropriate prescriptions) as “anxiety.” She says I “asked for it” and in her opinion, these life-destroying problems are my fault, “a culmination of life’s traumas.”

    During the months I was heavily drugged from sixteen inappropriate medications inept doctors, (including Dr. C.), put me on, Dr. C. told me to write emails to her; I could barely sit, type, or think due to being injured, in pain, and overly-wrongly medicated. In the emails I asked Dr. C. to do a real exam, be ethical, acknowledge the harm, and think outside of the box. I told her people believe her lies because they believe doctors.

    Dr. C. turned her deceptive notes and personal emails over to Berger’s civil defense. In trial, Berger’s lawyer Tom McAndrews referred to Dr. C’s factious notes as fact. This misinformation helped the dishonest and slanderous defense strategy succeed, which left me in poverty, and at risk for homelessness.

    Three weeks post surgical assault, Dr. C. told me by phone that spasming body, difficulty concentrating and breathing are from the anesthesia. I also had FES; surgically induced menopause; and a multitude of other iatrogenically caused harm, including mutilation.

    Five weeks post, breathing problems, pain, severe petechial rash, etc. continued. Dr. C said, “Surgeons don’t tell patients surgery is trauma; they don’t tell women their hormones will be messed up.” I asked, “Why didn’t you tell me when I expressed concerns?” I said, “You don’t still refer Berger, do you?” Dr. C said, “It’s none of your damn business what I do.” She documented this as, “Pt asked lots of questions.”

    She wrote, “rash looks like allergy,” but failed to diagnose or even consider FES; she told me to take Prednisone, a med I’d told her prior I did not tolerate.

    Since the surgical harm, I need a sleep medication. One works for me, but Dr. C. insisted (against my wishes) on trying multiple meds for sleep, which caused problems including: tachycardia, allergic reaction, bizarre feelings, tremors, akathisia, (an urge to move beyond one’s control), and more; these are common detrimental effects of these drugs. When I reported intolerable, dangerous drug effects, Dr. C. told me to take more.

    Dr. U. would later document, “The surgery irreversibly destroyed much of the patient’s subcutaneous myofasical and other tissues… Performing surgery without proper informed consent falls below the standard of care and is evidence of clear negligence… was excessive and contra-indicated. Before surgery the patient was a highly functional, physically active, and employed person. Now she’s totally and permanently disabled…”

    On April 1, 2012 and before, several people asked Dr. C to do a real exam of me. My decision to have surgery, which was not entered into easily,”resulted in crisis, they said. I’d described significant impairment to muscles, and neuromuscular damage with Dr. C at length.

    On April 2, 2012, Dr. C. insisted on doing osteopathy, which was against my wishes, as osteopathy is not indicated for mutilation. She put her fingers on my neck and said, “Your whole body is torqued!” I said, “Yes, from the assault, as I’ve been telling you all this time.”

    In an article about medical misdiagnosis, Diana Cejas, pediatric neurologist said, “Sometimes a patient’s complaints seem outlandish and their symptoms impossible. But sometimes they’re right. Sometimes just listening to a patient can save their life.”

    Bias, close-mindedness, or maliciousness lead to poor patient outcomes; physicians often assume superiority and dismiss complaints, labeling a physically injured patient as whiny, unhappy about an outcome, noncompliant, or mentally ill. They may be protecting themselves and fellow doctors.

    In Spring 2012, Dr. C., who refused to treat me honestly, respectfully, or with dignity, emailed me, “…there is no way to quantify your tissue issues for anyone to understand.”

    In October 2012, Dr. U. broke the cycle of medical abuse: he did physical evaluations of me that involved muscular and systemic function, read the medical records, charted the scars and bodily damage, had me fill out a detailed pain-disability questionnaire, ordered an MRI, and wrote reports about the unconsented removal of needed myofasical structures, et al.

    Drs. R. and U. agree the MRI shows damage directly due to the assault. The absent tissue inhibits normal activities. Dr. U. got me away from doctors who mis-prescribed meds. Once off the unneeded SSRI et al., the disturbing and dangerous drug effects ended. Years later, I’m on one med — the one I need for sleep. No medication remediates the assault.

    Dr. C.’s actions and notes were wrong before the surgeon too. Once she put me on Macrobid, a strong antibacterial for cystitis, which I didn’t have. I got terrible effects from Macrobid. Drinking water before bed caused the problem. I stopped doing that, and was fine. Her notes contain other misleading or wrong items.
28. Susan A. Lauren August 29, 2021 at 3:56 pm

    THERE WAS NO INFORMED CONSENT, NO MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES, NOTHING REASONABLE ABOUT IT –– WHAT SAUL BERGER DID TO ME WAS SURGICAL BATTERY

    As a reasonable person, I would not have undergone surgery with Dr. Saul Berger had I known he would go against all my needs and wishes, assault and destroy my body, and then stage a cover-up. There is no recognized form of treatment that involves stabbing a healthy athletic woman four times into her illiotibial bands and a multitude of places into muscular bony areas that will severely and permanently maim her. What Berger did does not have anything to do with a conservative breast reduction to solve a structural problem, or a wee bit of smoothing to a “diet and exercise resistant” localized spot on the upper side of my hip to “balance me” from the medically recommended breast procedure.

    Saul Berger’s actions were and are so contrary to a doctor’s fundamental obligations that there is a public interest in criminalizing them. He committed a public wrong because his behavior threatens trust in the medical profession and brings the profession into disrepute. He operated for greed, not need; what he (and his colluders), did had zero to do with helping me and everything to do with destroying me on every level.

    “The medical profession developed in a way that was particularly harmful to women. It usurped their traditional function of the care of the sick. It changed this function to suit itself, with far-reaching consequences, both for better and for worse. It used this unique position much less to improve the health of women than to enhance its own power. It used, and often grabbed at, women as patients in order to consolidate and support itself. Further, some doctors perverted scientific knowledge to their own ends and added the weight of their ‘expertise’ to the perversions of others.” ~ Women Under the Knife: A History of Surgery by Ann Dally

    Dr. Berger, who boosts about how he became a doctor at 22, violated my body after he put me unconscious, then he hired an unscrupulous lawyer, Tom McAndrews, who had no conscience to stop him from making money off of my suffering and help Berger with the cover-up he started immediately after he harmed me.

    Instead of a medical board in California I propose a patient safety board. It is necessary for patient safety to have an agency that will honor the valid complaints of victim of medical harm in order to stop innately bad procedures, hold offenders accountable, and help society take care of surgical assault survivors. I know firsthand the Medical Board of California is not honest, equitable, or patient focused.

    In the August 19, 2021 public quarterly meeting of the Medical Board of California, a doctor board member suggested that others on the board speak in private to a critically thinking public member in order to “bring him around to their way of thinking.” This pressure on members to loyally support past decisions and unquestionably support the group’s arguments is subversive; the authority risks become tyrannical.

    In a cohesive group such as the Medical Board of California, as soon as any member expresses his doubts, he discovers he is in the presence of powerful group pressures to stay in step and be a booster, not a detractor. Self appointed mind guards emerge to protect the group from adverse information that will prevent them from continuing their shared sense of complacency about the effectiveness and morality of past decisions.

    Given this shared commitment, the group marches to the same old drumbeat and insists everyone stay in step with it. Members face group pressure to conform socially, which may override critical thinking about doubts regarding the lack of success and morality of their policies.

    The members of the MBC are guilty for failing to prosecute violations or to look proactively at prevention of scam procedures; policies of such a privileged group legitimize indiscriminate harm. For a start, it may be too unbelievable to think doctors would so horrifically – sometimes intentionally – harm others, so they act like mal events never happened, straight out deny the facts, and remain emotionally detached, using a cover of professionalism to explain their coldness. They refuse to condemn any doctor to an inferior stature (unless they are faced with a string of totally ruined lives whose destructive legacy they cannot escape from) and instead hide falsely behind credentials and schooling as if they are the ultimate purveyor of morals and intelligence.
29. Susan A. Lauren September 13, 2021 at 10:52 pm

    DR. DONNA CASHDAN’S UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR IS CENTRAL IN THE COVER-UP IN THE CASE OF SUSAN A. LAUREN VS. SAUL R. BERGER. If I’d had a skilled doctor with ethics, this case would have had a different outcome. Even though I will repeat some of what I’ve written above, I share my review of Donna Cashdan below.
30. Susan A. Lauren September 13, 2021 at 11:27 pm

    REVIEW OF DR. DONNA CASHDAN, DO — SHERMAN OAKS FAMILY MEDICINE, INC.

    Dr. Donna Cashdan referred me to Dr. Saul Berger who operated against need, consent, or rationale and disabled me. After this severe, obvious, and disabling bodily harm, Dr. Cashdan dismissed my complaints and refused to physically examine me appropriately to evaluate the damage.

    Instead, she prescribed inappropriate medications that caused tachycardia, allergic reaction, bizarre feelings, akathisia, (an urge to move beyond one’s control), and many other common detrimental effects of these drugs. When I reported intolerable and dangerous effects of these drugs that weren’t appropriate for me, Dr. Cashdan told me to take more. She was a dismissive, disrespectful, and dangerous doctor to me in my time of need.

    Ten doctors, including four surgeons, (who examined me in the correct ways Dr. Cashdan did not), demonstrated and testified the surgery was overly aggressive, contra-indicated, and against consent; this constitutes surgical battery they said. “The surgery irreversibly destroyed much of the patient’s subcutaneous myofasical and other tissues. Portions of her body are missing, affecting her whole structure. This is CLEAR-CUT BUTCHERY. HORRIBLE.”

    The physical therapist from USC requested full physical disability status for me. Another physical therapist wrote, “Though in disabling pain, she is rational, kind, and bright. She’s more highly organized and functioning than many people I know without disability; I can only imagine how high functioning she must have been before she was so injured.”

    11 months after the violations by Dr. Berger, (who Dr. Cashdan referred me to), Dr. U. finally broke the cycle of medical abuse: he did evaluations for muscular and systemic function, studied the case, charted surgical scars and bodily damage, had me fill out a detailed pain-disability questionnaire, ordered an MRI, and wrote reports about the unconsented removal of needed myofasical structures and the life-altering outcomes. He was professional, and respected me and treated me well — totally unlike Donna Cashdan did.

    “The tissues are over-stretched, leading to pockets of painful adhesions that pull tightly upon movement. These procedures caused many other systems to be affected: muscular, lymphatic, circulatory, mobility, and others,” Dr. U wrote in a report.

    It seems clear to me Dr. Cashdan did not want to acknowledge the damage the surgeon she referred me to caused; I found her records to be full of lies and omissions. She did not document severe bodily harm, extreme pain and other problems caused by the surgeon. I learned that for legal purpose, if it is not in the medical record, it “never happened,” This is said to be a legal veil to protect doctors. The defense used Dr. Cashdan’s lies against me. When fellow doctors fail in upholding the Hippocratic oath, medical harm continues.

    In what I find to be classic victim blaming, (DARVO – Deny and Reverse Victim and Offender), Dr. Cashdan said I “asked for it” and any problems are my fault. I’ve met others who have serious complaints from Dr. Berger since then. The ethical doctors I’ve met since are outraged by Dr. Cashdan’s mistreatment of me.

    Five months after the surgical harm, Dr. Cashdan repeatedly insisted on doing osteopathy, which was against my wishes, as osteopathy is not indicated for mutilation. She put her fingers on my neck and said, “Your whole body is torqued!” I said, “Yes, from the assault, as I’ve told you.” When I continued to ask for the appropriate help I needed, (including but not limited to an MRI, which another doctor finally referred me to – the MRI shows damaged structures), Dr. Cashdan wrote in her notes I was “teary,” and “whiny, as usual.”

    In an article about medical misdiagnosis, Dr. Diana Cejas, pediatric neurologist, said, “Sometimes a patient’s complaints seem outlandish and their symptoms impossible. But sometimes they’re right. Sometimes just listening to a patient can save their life.”

    Before Donna Cashdan’s referral to Dr. Berger, I ran successful businesses I loved, was accepted to graduate school, planned to become a homeowner, and had an active, social, athletic life; after, I’m physically disabled, in extreme pain, survive on a tiny disability stipend, and now have valid concern about homelessness.

    I asked Dr. Cashdan to do the right thing, but she was noncompliant. It’s vital to have a skilled physician who has your best interests at heart and charts the truth.

    Donna Cashdan caused me continued and egregious medical, emotional, and financial harm by her medical mistreatment, fraudulent records, and slander of me after the assault Dr. Saul Berger who I went to because of her referral. She lied to other doctors and persons about me and refused to be honest and ethical with me. She failed in her duty to me as her patient and a human being.
31. Susan A. Lauren September 14, 2021 at 12:12 am

    ANY REASONS WHY DR. CASHDAN WOULD NOT ACCURATELY CONVEY THE TRUTH? WHY YES TOM.

    In the trial transcript on page 333, line 25, Tom McAndrews, Berger’s lawyer, asks me, Q. “Any reasons why Dr. Cashdan, you can think of, would not accurately convey what had gone on between the two of you up to that point in time.” On line 28 I answer, “Yes.”

    Tom McAndrews, of course, railroaded over my honest response. He wasn’t looking for real answers. He pushed past with more lies, accusations, red herrings, and slander. As a victim when you bring a case to trial against a doctor, you have to know that you’re going to be attacked and lied about. It’s a sadistic system run by people who don’t care about their fellow human beings.

    I live a life of integrity. I care about and have always taken care of people, but these doctors, lawyers, and judges are without morals or conscience. They don’t care about me or other victims. They make money on our suffering. Their behavior is far beyond what I (or anyone I know with a backbone and character) can fathom.

    In a recent Medical Board of California meeting, one of the doctor board members made reference to the fact that doctors, “lawyer up,” in civil cases and complaints before the board. Victims are unable to do the same. The medical / legal process is based on wealth and privilege not prevention or justice.

    No one is doing anything to remedy this though.

    Californians are faced with an antiquated tort law: the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA), which caps the financial compensation a victim of medical harm can receive. This limit for pain and suffering has not been updated since 1975. Due to this outdated cap, lawyers who take on cases of medical harm, which are costly, end up gambling with their own money in a legal environment set up to protect doctors.

    My case was financially unlimited (beyond MICRA) because not only did Dr. Berger cause me pain and suffering, but by disabling me, he took away my ability to make a living. My businesses continued to grow, I have a strong and vital work ethic, and had unbounded love for my professions and the people I helped. At the rate I was working, without updates for growth, I have lost well over half a million dollars in net income thus far.

    If I’d had a skilled, caring, and moral lawyer, this case would have been won in my favor. When I was looking for a lawyer for appeal, (which was impossible to get because I didn’t have the money for it), several lawyers commented that if they had this case, it would have had a successful outcome for me. Appeals lawyers also said I had a case of legal malpractice and asked if my lawyers were on drugs or something.
32. Susan A. Lauren October 12, 2021 at 10:21 pm

    LEGAL MALPRACTICE
    Several appellate lawyers I contacted about an appeal in the Susan A. Lauren vs. Dr. Saul R. Berger case looked over the case and were shocked it wasn’t a successful verdict for me, the plaintiff, and by how the case was mishandled.

    An appellate lawyer I was in ongoing contact with strongly urged me to consult a legal malpractice attorney to bring legal malpractice action against all of my prior attorneys. He thought I should have a new trial.

    He wrote, “If you decide you want to go that route, you can give the information to your lawyer to evaluate. It’s from California Judges Benchbook, Civil Proceedings After Trial.

    A judge can grant relief from a judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) if the party’s attorney’s neglect was so extreme as to constitute positive misconduct, that in effect, ended the attorney-client relationship. Buckert v. Briggs (1971) 15 Cal.App.3d 296, 301-302; Vartamian v. Croll (1953) 117 Cal.App.2d 639, 646-47; Garcia v. Hejmadi (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 674, 683; Huens v. Tatum (1997) 52 Cal.4th 259, 265.

    A judge has inherent power to grant equitable relief on the theory of extrinsic mistake, such as a party’s reliance on an incapacitated attorney. Aldrich v. San Fernando Valley Lumber Co. (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 725, 738-740; Whittier Union High Sch. Dist. v. Superior Court (1997) 66 Cal.App.3d 504, 507.”

    I contacted multiple lawyers about legal malpractice. Each one found merit in my claim for legal malpractice and surgical assault however taking that road demanded financing I didn’t have and an uphill battle against an arduous and adversarial legal system.
33. Susan A. Lauren December 16, 2021 at 9:06 pm

    The IME, Dr. Terry Dubrow, lied in the case Susan A. Lauren vs. Saul R. Berger.

    My first lawyer told me I had to go to see Terry Dubrow because he was hired as a witness for Dr. Berger. I told my lawyer that multiple women I knew complained of harm done to them by Dubrow and it would be abusive to make me go see him. My lawyer said, “You’re not going to like any of these guys. If you want a trial, you have to go.” The lawyer said, “Dubrow won’t do a real exam. He’s hired to say what the defense wants him to say. He will recommend a surgery you don’t need to cap any possible restitution.”

    Sure enough, Dubrow didn’t do a real exam and suggested surgery that has nothing to do with the assault Saul Berger committed. Dubrow’s dishonest suggestion is impossible anyway because Berger caused parts of my body to adhere to the underlying tissue.

    Dubrow, who profits financially by witnessing in civil cases, was asked in the deposition for my case: “How should I pay you?” The defense lawyer said, “Cash, credit, it’s all good.” Dubrow responded, “Why do you think they call it plastic surgery?”

    Tom McAndrews, Berger’s lawyer sold Dubrow to my jury using Dubrow’s status as a Medical Board of California expert as reason to believe him.

    Dubrow lied and said there is no lasting damage, however, ten other doctors, including four plastic surgeons, physical therapists, and California state disability disagree.

    Dubrow denied I’m in pain. He misidentified spider bites as surgery incisions. He acted like mutilation is normal. He described Dr. Berger’s records as perfect, when they are wrong from the first sentence in which he lied about my pre-assault breast size and weight. Berger’s records read like fiction. There are even other women’s medical records mixed in with mine. No one said a word about those.

    Dr. Dubrow aborted his exam early with me. My doctors throughout the years who aren’t defending my assaulter have been able to examine me without a problem; they see what Berger did was a horrific surgical assault and there is a cover-up. In the Hagen-law blog it says:

    “While there are many, many good doctors in the world who genuinely care about their patients, there are some who have walked away from their oath to objectively care for patients. These doctors have begun to care a great deal more for financial gain than patient advocacy. Insurance companies and these corrupt doctors work hand-in-hand, and it’s to the detriment of the patients. You.

    The insurance company sends a patient to see one of their independent medical consultants to determine the extent of his injuries. While the conscientious doctor would spend time looking over the patient to determine his overall condition, the “independent” consultants that the insurance companies prefer to give the patient a cursory glance and write their reports. The reports are returned to the insurance company and then used in discussions, or even in court, to determine the benefits to be paid to the patient.”

    California plastic surgeons have harmed and killed healthy consumers for decades. They do scams, assaults, experiments, pile on procedures, have students and techs operate, forge records; slander and sue victims, and cover for each other. I’ve asked for consumer protections against plastic and cosmetic surgeons since 2011.
34. Susan A. Lauren December 16, 2021 at 9:08 pm

    The Military Health Agency Excluded Dr. Terry Dubrow From Tricare For Ten Years ~

    On page 7 of the Annual Fraud and Abuse Report of the Military Health Agency it states, “Dr. Terry J. Dubrow and Rox Surgery Center, California – 10 Year Exclusion.

    On 5 October 2018, Dr. Terry J. Dubrow was excluded as a TRICARE Authorized Provider for a period of 10 years. The exclusion is based on Dr. Dubrow retained the beneficiary’s advance payment, despite being made aware on multiple occasions that his actions were contrary to Federal regulations put in place for our military members who have sacrificed so much for their country. This administrative action was invoked under 32 CFR 199.9(f)(l)(v), which is in the best interest of TRICARE and its beneficiaries.”
35. Susan A. Lauren June 22, 2022 at 7:35 pm

    REVIEWS OF THE PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS IN MY CASE, (BY THEIR OTHER CLIENTS)

    Some medical malpractice plaintiff lawyers are abusive and negligent. They increase problems for consumers who are already in dire straights, physically injured, traumatized, and financially challenged as a result of medical harm, A plastic surgeon I contacted recently has gotten acquainted with my case of surgical assault. This surgeon said my case of surgical battery should have been a win for me, (obviously). And he said the damage is irreparable, (obviously). He supposed there was legal malpractice in my case, (besides just the corruption on the defense side). Yes, (obviously), as I wrote about above.

    Today I looked up reviews for my plaintiff lawyers in the Lauren vs. Berger case. The reviews were all left after my trial. I never stood a chance without decent representation.

    LAWYER X REVIEWS
    1. Terrible. Lawyer X took my case, did NOTHING for a year, wrote a letter without cc me. Then decided to drop the case. Lawyer X is not worth working with.

    2. Scary, just scary. Months after a meeting where he said I didn’t have a case but he wanted to see my medical records, I learned that he had filed a lawsuit in my name. He sent me acknowledgement forms and his office said not to date them or write anything else on them they would fill that out. After the fact, I am realizing I have no idea what he did with them. He filed my lawsuit and I never even signed papers agreeing to work with him. Now my case is destroyed. What do I do? First, I suffer at the hands of a California doctor, then a California attorney destroys my medical malpractice case. What the heck is going on?

    3. There is a hearing on my case in two days which has been rescheduled several times over many months. I have been asking him for more than 6 months what is the content of the motion he filed for that hearing and he has never told me. Additionally, he got angry at me for asking this, and has ordered me not to try to talk to him on the phone, and only in writing. He has failed to respond to my written requests for status in almost a year.

    4. Lawyer X was a terrible lawyer for me; he did not seem to have my best interest at heart. He asked me not to communicate with him directly and was uncaring. He has a temper, didn’t treat me with respect, refused to listen to what I know about my own body and life, fully work up the case, or keep me updated on my own case. Lawyer X dropped my serious meritorious case a few months before trial after trying to pressure me to sign a paltry $29,999.99 settlement agreement, (a penny under the $30,000 reporting limit), with a gag clause that his assistant called “a bribe.” A couple of other lawyers who looked at the case since said they are shocked at how poorly Lawyer X handled the case and said if they had been at the helm, it would have succeeded; I am disabled me and at risk for homelessness due to failures I was told by attorneys could have been well handled by a skilled and compassionate legal professional. Unfortunately, in California, it’s difficult for a plaintiff to get a solid medical malpractice lawyer, and so dangerous doctors continue to practice and harm other innocents, and survivors of medical harm continue to suffer unimaginable fallout from the medical harm. (my review)

    5. I hired him years ago for a sexual exploitation case. He filed my Complaint without letting me review it. I couldn’t believe it! There were a lot of mistakes in it, including a very important date that was crucial to my case. During my deposition, he actually put his grubby hand on my leg above the knee! I asked for a break and took him out of the room to tell him not to do that again! He did it again! It was sickening to me. I wanted to go to Trial, but he became angry with me. He was quite a bully to me throughout the entire process. At one point in the Mediation, he actually told me to “stop being greedy!” At that point, I started to believe he was actually scheming with the opposing side. I did not feel safe at all throughout the process with him and definitely would Never hire him again, nor recommend him to anyone. He’s so obviously, and often cruelly out for himself. It took me years to gather the guts to write this.

    6. Known by other attorneys for his pattern of failing to respond to motions which he acknowledges by begging the court for leniency, blaming “his other cases”. This means that: he takes cases that he knows he does not possess the personal competence and/or resources to litigate. So, then he simply lets his cases “die on the vine”. To his clients, and I was one, he is violently abusive. If you are still considering hiring this guy, at least look at the variety of cases filed against him in LA superior court, one of which was for physical assault, demonstrating his inability to control his violent temper. And several legal malpractice cases.

    LAWYER XX REVIEWS

    1. Lawyer XX attorney at law has a known drug and alcohol history, is emotionally abusive, has poor impulse control such that he screams loudly at his client often using profanity at times, misses key deadlines causing multiple defaults on the court docket, provokes meritless lawsuits against his own client & then fails to defend his client, is utterly incompetent, never won a single motion yet claims he wins all of his other cases, is grossly unprofessional in every way, and should be avoided at all costs.

    2. Lawyer XX was my lawyer for almost 2 ½ years. He took my personal injury case on consignment, and failed to do due diligence in the discovery process. He didn’t fulfill our contract, did not hire a medical professional or complete depositions of people essential to my case. He lied to me. His behavior was unprofessional, unethical, deceptive, incompetent, and disorganized. He pushed out my trial date twice. Then, he bought an expensive house and 3 weeks later sent me an email saying he had to withdraw from my case because he didn’t have the money to pay the costs. Keep looking! You can easily find a much more competent attorney.

    3. Rude, dishonest, and unprofessional. Never hire this guy or Lawyer XX’s law firm. First, he barely responds even you try to reach him several times. Second, he had settlement with third party without even informing us. When I asked him why did he failed to communicate with us? He did not have answers but instead he yelled he is doing us a big favor.

    4. Incompetent. I had a case of a traffic ticket for which I hired Lawyer XX on the recommendation of a friend. He charges me over the phone, never gave me his office location. He contacted me so many times at the beginning just to get the money from the ones I paid him. I only heard from him once, and then received the letter from the court that I lost the case. Later on, I found out from the court secretary he never showed up to Court, he just proceeded no contest.

    5. Lawyer XX, dishonest and unprofessional. I hired Lawyer XX for a case of red-light citation with camera. it was an easy case with no identifiable person driving the car. he promised to easily dismiss the case but then he dragged it for one year and then send me a plea of no contest and lost the case. then I went to court myself and dismissed the case. I was told that he did not fight the case but only pleaded no contest. he wanted to go to trial apparently to charge for more money.
36. Susan A. Lauren December 26, 2022 at 1:40 pm

    Liposuction is scientifically proven to cause long-term health and contour problems.

    There is no legitimate standard of care for liposuction, an invalid medical treatment. In Opinion 8.20, the AMA states that 1) treatments which have no medical indication and offer no possible benefit to the patient should not be used (Opinion 2.035, “Futile Care.)”
37. Susan A. Lauren August 7, 2023 at 7:23 pm

    YELP REVIEW FOR MALCOLM LESAVOY POSTED 4/13/2022 (saw Lesavoy in early 2013)

    A plaintiff attorney referred me to Dr. Malcolm Lesavoy re: a medical malpractice case. Dr. Lesavoy wrote in his notes that I came prepared with facts and spoke with intelligence. He acknowledged pain and deformities in his report, however there are also multiple mistakes in his report, and his actions do not reflect a wise or prudent practitioner.

    Here’s what an honest doctor wrote: “SL, my patient, medically needed a breast reduction. The surgeon (Dr. Berger.), however, did more extensive procedures than necessary or agreed upon. The surgery irreversibly destroyed much of the patient’s subcutaneous myofasical and other tissues. Performing surgery without proper informed consent falls below the standard of care, is evidence of clear negligence, and has caused irreparable harm to Ms. L’s life. Before surgery the patient was a highly functional, physically active, and employed person. Now Ms. L is totally and permanently disabled, and her health continues to decline.”

    He also said, “This is CLEAR-CUT BUTCHERY. HORRIBLE.”

    During what was to be conservative breast reduction with slight spot specific lipo contour, Dr. Berger stabbed me dozens of times into my buttock, illiotibial bands, hamstrings, kneecaps, and hipbones. He left me bloody, un-sutured, and convulsing in pain. He took over six pounds from me after telling me there’d be no weight loss. I was 5’2″, fit, and at my perfect muscular weight.

    Another doctor wrote: “Simple examination of Ms. L’s buttocks reveals at least eight surgical incision scars on the buttock. She is in constant pain and her life has been irreversibly changed for the worse. This is all the direct result of the overly aggressive and unconsented surgical procedures that Dr. Berger. performed on Ms. L.” — I didn’t consent for Saul Richard Berger to touch my butt and indeed it is not listed on any of the paperwork, but the dude removed it.

    What Dr. Berger did was antithetical to what was discussed; he did this to me unconsented after he put me unconscious in his private center.

    Fat is an endocrine organ. Hormones are released from adipose tissue and these are responsible for different functions within the body. Estrogen is synthesized through fat cells. If you take cells away estrogen-dominant fat areas, such as breasts, thighs, and hips, you take away your bank of extra estrogen storage needed for healthy, normal function.

    Before I went for breast reduction, my menses occurred every twenty-eight days. I’d gone through puberty late, as per my family pattern. We have longevity in my family, look young, and have a strong constitution. We go through menopause late. I expected ten more years of menses, however Saul Berger removed so much of my healthy, needed fat and estrogen, he forced menopause upon me, as is often done with hysterectomy. My menses abruptly ended.

    I showed Dr. Lesavoy the structural harm and told him of the systemic problems Dr. Berger caused. When I told him about the forced menopause, Lesavoy got angry. He dismissed what I said as if I don’t know my body or understand physiology. Dr. Lesavoy does not understand biology and / or wanted to protect Dr. Berger. Lesavoy ended up on Dr. Berger’s defense list. One of Lesavoy’s former students, Terry Dubrow, lied in my case. This left me without needed restitution.

    A friend of mine was present at Dr. Lesavoy’s. When we left the office, the first thing she said was how arrogant he is. We were stunned and sickened by his behavior. I later looked him up on the court site and was not surprised by the many lawsuits. I was in the health care field until Dr. Berger disabled. I can’t imagine treating anyone with the disrespect Dr. Lesavoy did to me.

    Two months after seeing Dr. Lesavoy, a physical therapist at USC did a thorough exam on me and cited structural and functional damage and pain caused by what Dr. Berger did. He cited the lack of fat tissue, especially in the left buttock’ that Dr. Berger removed against need, consent, or rational. The physical therapist declared me fully physically disabled from it.

    I looked up the 172 trainees and fellows on Malcolm Lesavoy’s CV. I found desperate reviews written by women for a high percentage on the list. What happened to first do no harm?
38. Susan A. Lauren August 30, 2023 at 11:44 pm

    August 30, 2023
    It’s astounding that Dr. Saul Berger and everyone who participated in the cover up of his egregious surgical battery of me are not in jail. My case shows what a greedy failure the medical / legal system is in the U.S.
39. Susan A. Lauren September 5, 2023 at 11:33 pm

    “A body of men, holding themselves accountable to nobody, ought not to be trusted by any body.” Thomas Paine, Part 1.3 Rights of Man.