Timothy J. Marten md - after his care the shape of my jaw is gone etc....

[Bobbit]

I believe he did similar procedure to me that they do in Korea. He sliced off my jawbone. Then he burred off my cheekbones and under eyes and eyebrow bone. He also burred my nose and forehead etc. I did not have any bones to burr, but still he found something to burr away. My face was very swollen for several weeks and months because of he violated my bones too.

Have you had an X-ray taken that shows that he removed a portion of your jawbone?   Cheekbones ?   Eyebrow bone ?

To the extent someone can see the limited "before" pictures,  they appear to show an already rather pronounced, pointed chin.  That does not look different in the "after" pictures.

[ditterbo]

OP if your so grossly botched as you claim to be from this surgery, get medical imaging done and find another doc to agree this was medical malpractice. Then you've got a leg to stand on in court for damages. Or you're not from the states, if I recall from a previous post... just saying anyways.

[girl]

just put the pics here or the link to the page. jesus do you understand English?

pics or it didn't happen.

plastic surgery is ALWAYS a gamble. Docs don't try to do a bad job but sometimes it just happens.

I've had the worst, s**ttest results from three of the most 'famous' surgeons out there. Surgery is not a 'gamble' - it is an art and a skill.

Anyway, just checked out the OP's pics on Yelp and can see what she's talking about in relation to her jaw and cheeks - they look messed up in comparison to her befores. I don't know if Marten shaved them - only an x-ray or CT could answer that - but he surely took out or repositioned her facial fat, redraped the skin in a clumsy way so as to create folds and sagging (which should not be present after one of his aggressive composite lifts) and generally made a mess of her face. So what if he's done 100s of beautiful face lifts - this lady has every right to be angry.

[girl]

OP if your so grossly botched as you claim to be from this surgery, get medical imaging done and find another doc to agree this was medical malpractice. Then you've got a leg to stand on in court for damages. Or you're not from the states, if I recall from a previous post... just saying anyways.

She has got pics - I can see what she's saying:
https://www.yelp.com/biz_photos/tim-marten-md-san-francisco?userid=BCrQ3Xls5XAI8R0vulyz0w

OP do you think that he cut out the fat and did redraped the skin incorrectly rather than shave the jaw?

[Lazlo]

HAHAHHAAHHAHAHHAH


Oh my god this thread is f**king comical. I take it back. Those pics are bulls**t.

And I can't even listen to this bulls**t about Marten burring bones. He doesn't even do that s**t
I doubt he even has a bone burring device. He burred your cheekbones??? WTF. Yeah right.

PROOF OR IT DIDN"T HAPPEN.

And you're a liar, you're not 40, you're in your 50s easy.

[girl]

HAHAHHAAHHAHAHHAH


Oh my god this thread is f**king comical. I take it back. Those pics are bulls**t.

And I can't even listen to this bulls**t about Marten burring bones. He doesn't even do that s**t
I doubt he even has a bone burring device. He burred your cheekbones??? WTF. Yeah right.

PROOF OR IT DIDN"T HAPPEN.

And you're a liar, you're not 40, you're in your 50s easy.

Why don't you ask for proof from all the people who've been "mutilated" by docs here then, rather than auto agreeing with them?

[Lazlo]

Why don't you ask for proof from all the people who've been "mutilated" by docs here then, rather than auto agreeing with them?

Well okay I don't know what I find fishy about this person but I feel like there's something very fishy going on here.

Like WHY would Marten burr her nose or cheekbones. Like that sounds completely ludicrous. I know a couple of marten patient one a 30 year old guy and another a 66 year old woman both who had incredible results with Marten.

Like it's possible this patient didn't quite get what she wanted and I'm willing to concede the results may not have been ideal. But that Marten mutilated her by burring off her brow bones and cheekbones and nose and jawline. Come on, give me a break.

If ANY of that is true. you have a homerun courtroom case in your hands. YOU WILL WIN BIG TIME. So go ahead and sue him and lets see what happens. You just need another doc to verify all the stuff you've said that your bones were burred etc. etc. etc. Oh and I'm assuming this is all written down in Marten's surgery notes which you legally have the right to get a copy of. And let's say he is lying in them. It would be easy to verify what you say by having an x-ray examined with a prior x-ray of you before surgery. I'm almost CERTAIN you have no evidence of your claims cause they sound too strange. But if you're telling the truth, well then you can sue him for a few million dollars and you'll win OP.

[girl]

I think it's fairly obvious that he didn't burr her jawline or cheekbones.

Of course, anything's possible, but I doubt it for the same reasons.

Two things: the OP is emotionally distraught and has legit bad results. Given the extent of the unexplained 'damage', she has speculated/concluded that the cause of these multiple problems relates, in part, to facial bone contouring surgery.

I guess if someone who's never had jaw surgery (or any kind of surgery) before gets a really bad outcome, then they might draw incorrect conclusions in an effort to understand why their face looks the way it does.

Most people don't realise that bad face lifts can distort the shape of the jawline (making it look pixie-ish).  Given that fat can be moved around in a face lift, this could have made it look as if she'd lost some of her 'cheekbones'.

Anyway, I think it'd be more productive to help her figure out what was actually done wrong in her surgery and point her in the right direction. What grates me is when I see a bunch of people who've never even had surgery with the doctor in question, plus one or two of the doctor's 'superfans', pour scorn on other people who are ultimately doing the rest of us a favour by warning us against bad/unstable doctors. This is why people ended up going to Mommaerts in droves - there used to be no criticism about him anywhere, only praise - and look what happened.

Well okay I don't know what I find fishy about this person but I feel like there's something very fishy going on here.

Like WHY would Marten burr her nose or cheekbones. Like that sounds completely ludicrous. I know a couple of marten patient one a 30 year old guy and another a 66 year old woman both who had incredible results with Marten.

Like it's possible this patient didn't quite get what she wanted and I'm willing to concede the results may not have been ideal. But that Marten mutilated her by burring off her brow bones and cheekbones and nose and jawline. Come on, give me a break.

If ANY of that is true. you have a homerun courtroom case in your hands. YOU WILL WIN BIG TIME. So go ahead and sue him and lets see what happens. You just need another doc to verify all the stuff you've said that your bones were burred etc. etc. etc. Oh and I'm assuming this is all written down in Marten's surgery notes which you legally have the right to get a copy of. And let's say he is lying in them. It would be easy to verify what you say by having an x-ray examined with a prior x-ray of you before surgery. I'm almost CERTAIN you have no evidence of your claims cause they sound too strange. But if you're telling the truth, well then you can sue him for a few million dollars and you'll win OP.

[girl]

I believe he did similar procedure to me that they do in Korea. He sliced off my jawbone. Then he burred off my cheekbones and under eyes and eyebrow bone. He also burred my nose and forehead etc. I did not have any bones to burr, but still he found something to burr away. My face was very swollen for several weeks and months because of he violated my bones too.

This is exactly my point.

The OP thinks that the reason for her thinned out jawline etc. is down to bone contouring surgery - she doesn't have any other point of reference or viable explanation as to how a face lift (soft tissue procedure) could create apparent changes in the contour of the face.

Marten's face lifts are aggressive and cause months of extreme swelling, the extent of which could be comparable to burring the bone. So that's likely fuelled her suspicions as well.

What probably happened was that he pulled too tight, got the vector wrong and/or removed too much skin, which could've altered the natural shape of her jawline substantially. If the swelling on the forehead was prolonged, then this could have stretched out the skin further, making it lax and wrinkly. Re. the cheekbones - well, whatever he did there involved messing with the fat in her face - obvious from the big ditches in her mid cheek. So he either took fat out or moved it to the wrong places.

Either way, he's made enough of a mess for me to not consider using him at any point in future.

[Lazlo]

Okay, well if she calms down and puts up some proper before and after pictures we can help her to figure out what's wrong.

In fact, I'm willing to lend my expertise to this situation and also suggest to her how she could fix the problem.

[UKMaxfac]

What are those pics? Bad quality, pulling contorted faces and expressions. Can't see any proper profile or 3/4 shots, nothing. Useless

[A-V-P]

I just did an on line search of the San Francisco County Court docket.   The last  time Dr. Timothy Marten was involved in a lawsuit was 1998,  eighteen years ago.  That was a dispute over a contract,  not a patient.

There are quite a many cases... Under those names are those cases...





[attachment deleted by admin]

[Bobbit]

There are quite a many cases... Under those names are those cases...

So to show how misleading your posting is,  you are suggesting or wanting the people on this forum to believe that those are all patients of Dr. Marten or his clinic that are suing him for malpractice in his plastic surgery clinic?   Right ?

So there are seven "entries".  But if you actually go the Court files here is what you find:

Not in sequence:

1) 1997 is a breach of contract case with an employee;
2) 2010 is a malpractice case that was dismissed by the court for lack of merit;
3) 2006 is a case by Marten against a sub contractor for release of a mechanics lean for carpet;
4) 1998 is a case of some description which was decided in Marten's favor.  May not be a malpractice case.  It was decided before trial because the person who brought the suit was unable to produce any evidence;
5) See 7, below;
6) See 7, below;
7)  2011 .    This the same case number as 5 & 6), above.  It is the same case in which the mysterious "Jane Doe" is  bringing a malpractice case against Dr. Marten and his clinic.  It is set for trial after more than 5 years in the court system.

In short - - of the seven entries on the Court's docket list, there are really on five different cases, and of those,  only two or maybe 3 are related to surgery in any way.  One is pending, and the other one or two were apparently dismissed by the Court before they ever went to trial.

There has never, so far, been a successful case against Dr. Marten related to surgery.

So you posted up a list of cases,  which were presumably intended for the people on this forum to believe represented seven different malpractice cases against Marten and his clinic.

Some people could easily construe that as an attempt to deceive people and deliberately damage a persons' professional reputation.

   

[girl]

Who cares whether the three malpractice cases against Marten were 'successful'?!

The fact is, Marten did something wrong, otherwise those patients wouldn't have even managed to find willing attorneys. The fact that the corrupt system in the US favours doctors means that they had no chance of winning; it doesn't mean that he did nothing 'wrong'.

Also, in the UK at least, doctors occasionally settle out of court before the case goes to trial, making it look like they have a 'clean record'.

Pointing out a doctor's previous lawsuits (which are publicly available online) isn't an attempt at 'deception'. It's pointing out a fact: there have been previous lawsuits against him. What's the issue?

[Bobbit]

Who cares whether the three malpractice cases against Marten were 'successful'?!

The fact is, Marten did something wrong, otherwise those patients wouldn't have even managed to find willing attorneys. The fact that the corrupt system in the US favours doctors means that they had no chance of winning; it doesn't mean that he did nothing 'wrong'.

Also, in the UK at least, doctors occasionally settle out of court before the case goes to trial, making it look like they have a 'clean record'.

Pointing out a doctor's previous lawsuits (which are publicly available online) isn't an attempt at 'deception'. It's pointing out a fact: there have been previous lawsuits against him. What's the issue?

Again... I think you are mis informed.

There may only be two cases,  not three.   And one of those two was dismissed - -  for lack of prosecution - - most likely because the patient could not find a lawyer that thought her case was good enough to be worth spending his time on.

Contingent fee legal work functions as a relatively effective system that tends to keep lawyers from filing cases that lack merit.   It does not always work well,  but in most cases it does. 

These are, at most  two cases,  neither of which has yet to be shown to have any merit.   They cover a period of 10 years.   For a surgeon that has operated on probably 1500 to 2000 patients in that ten years.