Social media influencer Danielle Mansutti claims her breast augmentation procedure has led to permanent deformities and significant financial loss amid ongoing legal proceedings against Dr Domenico Mileto.
A significant legal case is unfolding involving social media influencer Danielle Mansutti, who has filed a lawsuit against Harley Street plastic surgeon Dr Domenico Mileto, claiming his surgical decisions have cost her both physically and financially. The influencer, who is 30 years old, alleges that her breast augmentation procedure, which involved three operations between December 2020 and May 2021, has resulted in permanent physical deformities and has severely disrupted her career.
Mansutti, who garnered a following of 1.6 million subscribers on YouTube through her makeup tutorials and lifestyle videos, claims that her breast implants were excessively large for her frame. According to court documents, she underwent her first surgery in December 2020 but quickly encountered complications. Following the initial procedure, she experienced issues, particularly with her left breast, which began to droop, leading to a series of corrective surgeries.
During these interventions, it was communicated by a different surgeon that the implants, selected by Dr Mileto, had indeed been too large for her size eight frame, causing significant damage to her chest muscles. Mansutti claims this left her in considerable pain and resulted in asymmetrical breasts, which she describes as having a “disfigured” appearance.
In her legal filings, Mansutti asserts that her experience has had detrimental effects on both her mental and physical well-being, ultimately forcing her to leave the UK and halt her work as an influencer. She is seeking £1.7 million in damages, citing potential lost earnings of approximately £1.4 million as a result of her inability to continue her thriving social media career.
Mansutti’s barrister, Caroline Hallissey, has detailed that the influencer had expressed a desire for a natural breast appearance during her initial consultation in November 2020 and was seeking to upgrade from a 34B to a C/D cup size. The case highlights that Mansutti was presented with various implant sizes, but Dr Mileto allegedly advised her to proceed with the larger 400cc implants, despite her hesitation for such a size.
Dr Mileto’s defence, represented by Matthew Barnes, counters these claims, asserting that the implants used were as requested by Mansutti and consistent with her wishes, as she had provided photographs of her desired appearance. While he did not keep a record of the photographs, he maintains that he offered her an opportunity to try on different implant sizes and even suggested a follow-up consultation if she had any doubts.
The legal proceedings revealed that Mansutti’s dissatisfaction with the results was noted shortly after the surgeries, leading her to seek further medical assistance. A third surgeon eventually removed the implants in May 2021, reportedly confirming that the pectoral muscle on the left side had pulled away from the bone, resulting in ongoing pain and physical repercussions.
As the case progresses, it is noted that liability remains a contentious issue, involving arguments regarding informed consent and the surgical options presented to Mansutti. The court hearings referenced involve plans to call upon various experts, including professionals in employment and breast surgery, to construct a fuller picture of the impact of the surgeries on Mansutti’s career and health.
The case is scheduled for a five-day trial, where these details will be fully examined, giving both parties the opportunity to present their arguments regarding the outcomes of Mansutti’s surgeries and the implications they have had on her life.
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/youtube-influencer-sues-harley-street-plastic-surgeon-breast-implants-b1220244.html – This article confirms the lawsuit filed by a YouTube influencer against a Harley Street plastic surgeon over breast implant complications. It highlights the influencer’s claims about the implants being too large, resulting in physical and career damages.
- https://www.michigan.gov/documents/Courts/Michigan_Civil_Evidence_Rules_415067_7.pdf – Although this document is not directly linked, similar resources on legal procedures and evidence handling are relevant to understanding how legal cases involving medical negligence are managed, including aspects of informed consent.
- https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m2408 – This link is not relevant to the specific case but discussing informed consent and medical negligence in general could provide insights into similar legal disputes.
- https://www.lawcasesummaries.com/medical-malpractice/negligence-standard-of-care/ – This resource explains the concept of negligence in medical malpractice cases, which includes failing to obtain proper informed consent, relevant to Mansutti’s claims.
- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60651776 – While not directly related, discussing breast augmentation complications and patient experiences can provide context to Mansutti’s situation.
- https://www.medicalmalpracticelaw.com/types-of-medical-malpractice/failed-breast-augmentation-surgery – This link details the potential complications and legal considerations surrounding failed breast augmentation surgeries, similar to those experienced by Mansutti.
- https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14562497/influencer-sue-plastic-surgeon-large-breast-implants.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490 – Please view link – unable to able to access data
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
7
Notes:
The narrative appears recent, referencing events and a lawsuit that seem to be ongoing or of recent origin. However, specific dates from the case, such as surgeries between December 2020 and May 2021, could indicate the core events are not extremely current.
Quotes check
Score:
0
Notes:
There are no direct quotes provided in the narrative to verify.
Source reliability
Score:
6
Notes:
The Daily Mail is a well-known publication, but its reliability can vary depending on the topic and specific reporting. It is not typically considered among the most authoritative sources for legal or medical matters.
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims of medical malpractice and subsequent legal action seem plausible given the context of similar past cases. However, the specifics of the case, such as the extent of physical deformity and career disruption, cannot be fully verified without additional evidence.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
The narrative is plausible and appears recent, but its reliability is somewhat diminished by the source’s variable reputation and the lack of direct quotes. The case details are mostly unverifiable without further evidence.