Photos of intimate parts at dermatologist

One of my friends had a mole shaved from his penis. The dermatologist apparently insisted to take before and after photos and said that they are required. The assistant took the pictures while the dermatologist held his penis.

Is this normal? Did any of you experience such situations, especially of intimate parts?

When dermatology had to shave a suspect mole off my breast they did take a before photo, but no after photo

When dermatology had to shave a suspect mole off my breast they did take a before photo, but no after photo

That's interesting. I guess they store them in your medical records, have you ever tried to download/print your records to look at those photos?

It's pretty normal, certainly not abnormal. They do it so they can compare it for changes the next time they check you. You have the right to refuse being photographed.

I had a skin tag on my scrotum which was getting irritated when cycling. My dermatologist suggested he remove it by excision, and it was photographed before hand by the female medical assistant. No after photo. Same scenario with a mole removed from my butt cheek. No big deal.

I had a mole on the back of my scrotum removed & they took before/after pics. Turned out to be pre-cancerous.

For every mole that I've had removed/ biopsied, they mark it with a pen during my full body skin exam, when it is discovered. The assistant then takes two pictures of it, one close up and another farther away containing a consistent part of my body so that they can verify the same exact mole when I return at the next appointment to have it removed. After it is removed, the assistant again takes a close up picture showing the shave or incision with stitches. All of these pictures were viewable by me on the patient portal. It's kind of cool.

Interpreting the term “required” can cause folks to mislead themselves. It is not required by law - it is required by their malpractice insurer to establish the “before” and “after,” as others have noted. In the hypothetical event that there is a lawsuit, the insurer requires that there be proof of what was there and what happened to it. Pathology reports are also required, by medical standards (of practice), as well as by the insurer.

Every time I’ve had something removed by the dermatologist they’ve taken pictures. It Is normal and it records where it was in case they want to examine that area again later

Interpreting the term “required” can cause folks to mislead themselves. It is not required by law - it is required by their malpractice insurer to establish the “before” and “after,” as others have noted. In the hypothetical event that there is a lawsuit, the insurer requires that there be proof of what was there and what happened to it. Pathology reports are also required, by medical standards (of practice), as well as by the insurer.

Insurance companies run everything these days.

Only if you want insurance

At my last colonoscopy (2 years ago), they documented the procedure with photographs, most of them through the colonoscope. They also photographed my anus, as there was a small scar left over from a previous procedure. They gave me copies of the photographs, and one of the nurses reviewed the images with me prior to discharge. I had never had that experience before, despite four previous colonoscopies.

Yes, this is normal. I get a full body scan at the dermatologist once a year and the nurse and Dr. use photos for documentation. I think it is better for reference and if the insurance has any questions they have the documentation to prove the removal or treatment.

They must even have spies here because I can't quote Pollux.

Most of the fun things we used to do with our railcars have been cancelled. We don't even dare give someone a ride now.

Yes, I’ve had this done. I figured it was incase they ever have to prove to the insurance company that they did indeed remove a mole/lesion.

Just made the news.

Cybercriminals may have stolen the sensitive photographs of as many as 2,760 patients

https://6abc.com/cybercriminals-stole-sensitive-photos-of-nearly-3k-lvhn-patients/13123400/

I must have been maybe 8yo in the 90's when my dad came home from a knee surgery. He got a VHS tape that we all watched together on our home TV. 1990's. We used to watch TV together back then. AFAIK, the video showed some flesh being cut away through an endoscope or something. So it wasn't really exciting for me or my mom, but my dad nearly blacked out from watching it, lol.

From our experience I think its pretty common in dermatology to use clinical photography in practice.

Whether it is to keep a record to compare changes at follow up visits, for case report, to review a more senior colleague who has sub speciality.

Our eldest has had many visits with dermatologist with particular sub speciality and has had many clinical photographs taken of more intimate areas as you say.

OMG never thought a doctor would take photos. I guess it makes sense in dermatology but I've never been to a dermatologist so I guess we'll see what happens.

I’ve only been to a dermatologist 4 times in my life. This year I asked if they could remove a lump that formed over time on the inside of my cheek. The NP had her assistant take a before removal and an after removal picture. But it was only of the inside of my mouth. Last year they froze things on my foot and on my nipples but they didn’t take any pictures. Nor did the dermatologist years ago take any the two times I saw him.

Photos of any body parts, including genitals etc, would only be taken if there's a clinical reason such as a lesion. Before and after photos would be vital to check removal of the margins and check for recurrence in the future.

I had a lesion remove from my pubic area right above my penis a few years ago. A small section of hair was shaved and when the picture was taken (before the lesion was scraped) my genitals were covered with a small drape so as to not be in the photograph