RIP

[E.J.]

Originally Posted by CigarNut

I have to disagree with you. If she should get cancer she would be a lot worse off -- possibly risking death. She decided it was not worth waiting to find out -- she would rather live with a lower cancer risk without breasts.

Maybe, you would decide differently, and that is your right.

The real question for me is did the surgery actually reduce her risk of cancer.

My wife has a family history of breast cancer and I can tell you these are very real, very important decisions.

As far as I know, she will not even have to live without breasts, just without her natural ones. They will do reconstruction.....

I also would vote for the precautionary strike(assuming I was in the situation with my wife and she gave me a vote). My friends wife just did double, when she one needed to do single(a little different, but same concept).

Long story short, better safe than sorry, especially with what they can do reconstruction wise today.

[Genetic Defect]

[CigarNut]

Originally Posted by E.J.

As far as I know, she will not even have to live without breasts, just without her natural ones. They will do reconstruction.....

I also would vote for the precautionary strike(assuming I was in the situation with my wife and she gave me a vote). My friends wife just did double, when she one needed to do single(a little different, but same concept).

Long story short, better safe than sorry, especially with what they can do reconstruction wise today.

Agreed!