Legal Standpoint

The opinion of most oral surgeons and dentists in the United States of America seems to be that removing wisdom teeth that are impacted, even if they are healthy and not causing problems, is best for America. In addition to disagreeing with this argument due to lack of scientific evidence, I also disagree with this argument from a legal standpoint.

After talking with lawyers and dentists about wisdom teeth removal, complications are bound to happen and oral surgeons are going to get sued. Did you know that most lawyers will jump on a wisdom teeth removal case that caused serious complications if the patient is older than 40?

This is because most oral surgeons and dentists recommend a conservative approach to patients who are over 40 years of age. This is because most of them feel that there is a much greater risk and chance of complications at this point. In fact, even Dr. Hall, a formerly active oral surgeon, admitted to say that he never even removed wisdom teeth from patients over 40. Give me a break Dr. Hall and similar minded oral surgeons, how are we supposed to believe that you actually care about patients and their health if you are so afraid to help people suffering because you do not want to get sued.

So lets say hypothetically that you were instructed by your dentist at the age of 19 to have your wisdom teeth removed because they were impacted. However, you are not willing to take on the risks of surgery and decide to have him/her keep an eye on them. At the age of 42, you start to have infection and a lot of pain on your lower wisdom teeth. Instead of trying to cure the infection and manage the pain, you see an oral surgeon who recommends the removal of the lower wisdom teeth. This ends up severing your trigeminal nerve and causing you extreme bouts of pain.

You decide to find a lawyer and of course one fills your case right away. You are offered a settlement for a large amount of money out of court and decide to take it. While you are left with constant pain and a decreased quality of life for the rest of your life, you also recieved compensation. If you would have had the same complication occur at the age of 19 you would have likely not recieved settlement or not as likely to have recieved the settlement. In addition, you would have had to deal with the life alterning complication for over 20 years more.

My own complication from getting my wisdom teeth out is not documented well in any literature. I had an expert review my case who was selected by a lawyer. The expert concluded that my case had no grounds for malpractice because my constant chronic headache could not be tied to my wisdom teeth removal. (which is a load of crap) Further, to complicate the matter, no medical doctor knows exactly what is wrong with me.

I feel that I should be compensated financially for my constant pain, suffering, and loss of earnings. Medically, there is no scientific evidence to support removing healthy impacted wisdom teeth. However, the current legal system in America rewards doctors for malpractice, in which decisions are generally based on norms of practice or local or regional standards of care, ignoring the scientific evidence. If the expert oral and maxillofacial surgeon says the surgery is necessary, then it is necessary.

Thus, the prevalent practice of healthy impacted wisdom teeth removal is the standard of care in America, even though that standard is based on an erroneous evaluation of all outcomes and costs.

In fact, California state law known as the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) states that $250,000 is the maximum amount allowed for pain and suffering caused by a doctor. This is a very small amount, and anyone conidering major surgery such as wisdom teeth removal should NOT have the surgery done in California.

Other states also have so called liability caps, so do your research on your state.

To complicate the matters even worse, each state in America has it's own amount of time before the suit has to be filled. If it is not filled in time it can never be.

Therefore, from a legal standpoint I see a benefit in "watchful monitoring" of healthy impacted wisdom teeth.

References
1. Friedman JW. The prophylactic extraction of third molars: a public health hazard. Am J. Public Health 2007;97:1554-1559. http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/1554