Tag: Boob Job

Don’t Call It a Boob Job…

I remember telling people that I had breast cancer. Most tried to be as supportive as they could, some weren’t quite sure what to say. But regardless of how they reacted, there was a general expectation that breast cancer surgery meant that I had lost both breasts to the disease.

A few people went as far as trying to get me to “look on the bright side” that I had gotten a “nice rack” out of the deal. For the record, I had opted for a lumpectomy, otherwise known as breast-conserving surgery, which removes only the tumor and some surrounding healthy tissue to ensure that the entire diseased part is removed. There was no “nice pair” to be had.

So maybe this is a good place to clarify a few things.

A mastectomy is performed to remove all breast tissue, usually (but not always) along with nipples, areolae and lymph nodes, of one or both breasts. It’s done to treat breast cancer or, in the case of prophylactic mastectomy, prevent development of cancer in the breasts.

There are alternatives to reconstructive surgery that may be very meaningful to the breast cancer survivor, including creating something beautiful out of what she might otherwise consider an ugly experience.

Whether or not a woman chooses to have a mastectomy vs. a lumpectomy is a very personal decision and based on a number of physiological and even emotional considerations. No one should ever be judged for their decision regarding this.

Similarly, well-intentioned folks should not assume that breast cancer means a bouncing new set of perky breasts. Not everyone who gets a mastectomy will opt for reconstructive surgery. In fact, there are tattoo artists who specialize in using mastectomy scars and the newly-flat chest as a canvas to create meaningful and beautiful artwork.

It’s also important to note, total removal of the breast does not come without its downsides. Surgical complications are more likely with mastectomies, and because so much breast tissue and skin is removed, there may be loss of sensation in the chest area that in some cases is permanent.

A newly published study in JAMA Surgery (Dominici et al., 2021; note, the free PMC version of this article does not appear until Sept 2022) with a reader-friendly version appearing in the NCI blog Cancer Currents) compares quality-of-life scores between a variety of breast cancer surgery types, including lumpectomy, unilateral mastectomy (one breast) or bilateral mastectomy (both breasts). All subjects were young (under age 40 at time of diagnosis) cancer patients with early stage breast cancer who gave scores to their perceptions of items such as breast statisfaction following surgery and both psychosocial and sexual well-being. Having a bilateral mastectomy with radiation treatments resulted in the poorest quality-of-life scores out of all surgery options.

Important: while the sample size of this study was ample, with 560 subjects filling out the questionnaire, the women were predominantly white, married and financially stable. A more diverse subject pool might affect the scores and the study must be replicated with inclusivity in mind in order to extrapolate the findings to the general female population. It should also be noted that no surgical groups’ quality-of-life scores were particularly stellar – such is the way with cancer surgery – but those of bilateral mastectomy patients were worse.

All women, regardless of age, have the right to have their questions answered before making a decision about breast cancer surgery.

Given the notable difference between these scores, and the fact that all the different surgical options were open to these young women due to their early-stage tumor status, it stands to reason that women should be informed by their oncologists and surgeons of the possible outcomes of their decisions and second opinions should be encouraged.

That doesn’t mean that a bilateral mastectomy isn’t the right choice for a younger woman with early-stage breast cancer, only that she should be aware of the possibilities of complications and persistent quality of life issues. She should not be pressured in either direction because there is a lot to consider and it’s not an easy choice, nor does it come at an easy time in her life.

So please, don’t call it a free boob job.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you are contemplating a prophylactic mastectomy in the absence of a genetic predisposition (BRCA+) and have early-stage breast cancer, please read this article from breastcancer.org and discuss your options with your medical team.

About That Boob Job…

Not gonna happen.

The funny thing about telling people that you have breast cancer: their eyes always seem to glance down at your chest, as if they’re thinking, “Wait, are those real?”

Our society puts a lot of value on breasts, way more than just as vehicles for nourishing our young. As a dedicated breastfeeder of two children, I was surprised by how many women admitted to me that they wouldn’t breastfeed because they didn’t want their breasts to sag.

There’s also this weird assumption that a woman will jump at the chance to “improve” her breasts; in the case of a breast cancer patient, hey, congratulations, you get “free” implants! YAY! After I related my diagnosis to a male friend, he noted that finally my husband would get the C-cups that he’s always dreamed of.

Stop. Go back and re-read that last sentence. It was my breast cancer, but my husband would “benefit” from it too. Yay.

“Bummer about your cancer diagnosis, but at least you’ll get a nice pair out of it.”

If you’ve read about my breast cancer experience, you’ll know that a mastectomy was unnecessary because my tumor was small enough to require only a lumpectomy. My recovery from surgery was short — I was back to work the following week.

However, my insurance would have covered removing far more breast along with reconstruction. None of this, as far as I’m concerned, would have been medically justifiable, but there was the expectation that breast cancer equals boob job, even when studies have shown that survival outcomes are not improved by complete removal of the breast when only a lumpectomy is indicated (for example, Fisher et al., 2002), and there are far more complications that can arise from the multiple surgeries necessary for reconstruction.

This, of course, was my personal preference. To be fair, I know a number of breast cancer survivors who had no other option than a radical mastectomy. That in itself is traumatic, so it’s perfectly understandable why they would want reconstruction in an effort to regain whatever normality they could. As I wrote in Body Image, Part 1, like it or not, breasts do define us as women. You can argue whether or not that sets women’s rights back (“I am not my breasts”) but I feel that when it comes to cancer, all bets are off. Breast cancer survivors deserve a lot of leeway in making decisions about whether or not to reconstruct.

Those who do choose reconstruction may still have a host of other issues that they have to contend with (see the Healthline article: “No One Talks About the Emotional Side of Breast Reconstruction”). So it’s not all wine and roses and Double-Ds.

I didn’t need a complete mastectomy and thereby did not augment my tiny breasts even though I could have. For me, this was not a matter of “looking better” or “taking advantage” of the situation the way others suggested I should. It was about maintaining the greatest degree of normality, getting though the experience and trying to get on with life.