Do most small animal vets want to be heroic/excess care question

[Ottakee]

This morning a friend called for me to go with her to take her dog to the vet as he had some facial swelling and ear infection.

 

We get there and the vet was very worried that he had been given 1 Tylenol (500mg) the evening before.  She said that was toxic and wanted to put him in doggie ICU with IV fluids, blood tests to check kidney and liver function, culture of the ears to determine course of treatment and on and on.......to the tune of over $500.  Vet said if there was kidney/liver damage it would be irreversible.  Said dog is a Huskey/Lab mix, 90 pounds and 5 years old.  Dog did have ear pain and face was a bit swollen but dog was eating and drinking and normally active.

 

My friend called her husband and they decided to take their chances with the dog and just treat the ear infection and get some extra fluids and a injection of Benadryl and take the dog home...........saving over $300.

 

When I got home I looked up Tylenol toxicity in dogs and it says that to see symptoms they need 100mg per kg but this dog only had 12 mg/kg in a single dose.  They gave the Benadryl injection and then said that it was the same as 3 Benadryl people pills (which would have saved $22.50).

 

Is this really common with small animal vets to go seemingly overboard on care, tests, etc?  My friend is NOT a dog person at all which is why I came along to handle him.  Her dh does love the dog but honestly is realistic that there are just times when putting them down is the best financial decision.  Neither of them could see spending $500+ on  a dog for ICU care-----esp. if the damage (if there really was any) was irreversible anyway.

 

Then again, I might have a sore spot with this as we took a dog to this same clinic years ago (different vet though) who made me feel horrible for not getting $3000 eye surgery done on a dog we had gotten at a garage sale for free a few days before.  Dog was older and had cataracts in the other eye so would have been mostly/totally blind even with the surgery.  We opted to put the dog down.

 

[Kebo]

It varies a LOT. This was overboard, for sure. But each clinic can have a different culture (of how aggressive to be, etc.), as well as each individual. Look for one that suits your style. Believe me, clients come in all different flavors, too!

[kewb]

Sounds a bit unethical to me.

[hornblower]

Well, I'm of two minds on this.
 

Are there some vets who charge unreasonable prices & are too quick to recommend expensive treatments? YUP.

Are there an awful lot of people who acquire pets with no thought to the costs involved for their care? ABSOLUTELY.

A $500 vet bill doesn't seen unreasonable to me but given the description, I'm not sure it was warranted.

Pets are expensive. Period.

Get insurance, or have an empty credit card, or put money aside monthly & keep it avail for vet care.

I love my vets, I use a whole bunch of different vets for my animals & for the rescue critters that I help out & I have friends who are vets so I've talked to vets a lot.
I think there's a reason that so many vets are at huge risk of suicide - the endless stream of people walking in their doors just asking them to kill Fluffy because it's just a dog/cat/bunny/rat & they won't run tests/give medicines/treat treatable conditions. You go into the field because you love animals, & you spend your day killing them.
 

 

eta - this is another reason why it's important to have a good, regular vet, whose judgement you trust, & with whom you've established a rapport.

[Ottakee]

A $500 vet bill doesn't seen unreasonable to me but given the description, I'm not sure it was warranted.

 

 

 

That is mostly my point I guess.  Vet was all concerned about Tylenol toxicity but from my reading dog would have needed 8 times as much to have symptoms caused by that.  The ICU, fluids, etc. was precautionary............but yet she said if the damage was done it was irreversible so to me putting a dog that is eating, drinking, and active as normal into ICU overnight for a possible liver/kidney issue that was irreversible (meaning treatment wouldn't matter anyway) was a bit over the top.

 

Maybe we see this differently as we are hobby farm people.  We care for and about our pets but remember they are just pets, not people and there is a time and a place to say that x care is above what we can afford.

 

I now use a vet that is large and small animal.  It is a bit farther away but I think they understand maybe a bit better that there is often a financial aspect to this as well and that not everyone who loves a pet has $500 for vet care that may or may not help in the long run.

[elegantlion]

It varies a LOT. This was overboard, for sure. But each clinic can have a different culture (of how aggressive to be, etc.), as well as each individual. Look for one that suits your style. Believe me, clients come in all different flavors, too!

 

Yes, it's important to have a vet matches your style. 

 

$500 does not seem excessive for a vet bill, however the recommendations based upon how the dog was presented does seem excessive. However, huskies are also known for liver failure. 

 

The vet I worked for probably would have given an allergy shot and perhaps admitted the dog to be monitored as a caution. But he was also very reasonable about extra care (this was also years ago). 

 

Cataracts while not fun is something many pets safely live with. There is a balance of care and realizing the pet only has so many years. I would not put down a dog that was not in pain for simply aging, and I would not put cataract surgery high on the priority list either. 

 

Quality of life is a huge discussion between owners and the vet I worked for. The only time I really saw him get enraged at a client was when an owner wanted her cat put down because her back claws were putting holes in their new leather sofa. 

[Ottakee]

 

 

Cataracts while not fun is something many pets safely live with. There is a balance of care and realizing the pet only has so many years. I would not put down a dog that was not in pain for simply aging, and I would not put cataract surgery high on the priority list either. 

 

 

 

I wasn't clear.  It was a $3000 surgery on the OTHER eye (injured eyeball) that most likely would not ever have sight.  The other eye had the cataract and the dog was elderly already.  I would not have worried about the dog if it was just a cataract but we didn't have the $3000 for the eye surgery and the dog was in pain from that injury.

 

[elegantlion]

I wasn't clear.  It was a $3000 surgery on the OTHER eye (injured eyeball) that most likely would not ever have sight.  The other eye had the cataract and the dog was elderly already.  I would not have worried about the dog if it was just a cataract but we didn't have the $3000 for the eye surgery and the dog was in pain from that injury.

 

 

Yeah, the pain level does make a huge difference.  :grouphug:

 

I found one vet in our previous area that was light years apart in understanding from another vet in the area. Not only were his prices more reasonable, he actually listened to his clients, reminded me of a old-fashioned country doctor. 

[AimeeM]

NO. Not all small animal vets are that way.

Our vet recommended AGAINST exploratory surgery for our Luke (GSD, almost 4 when he passed) because she said that he was so far gone already, that anything she found she likely couldn't successfully treat, and that it may be considered simply unkind to prolong things more for him. She said she would do it if we wanted it, but she in no way, shape, or form pushed it.

Before that conversation, she tried the most conservative treatment she could - a course of antibiotics and steroids (and pain medication) to treat him. When that didn't work, we asked her what the most aggressive treatment she could do would be. She first advised us that it was very pricey, and that she would COMPLETELY understand if we didn't want to/couldn't do it. We opted TO do it, understanding the cost, but wanting to try everything reasonable to save our beloved, young pup. 

 

[Audrey]

I think it depends entirely on the vet.  I just had an experience that was very much the opposite where a vet was talking about amputating a kitten's leg because of a break, then set the leg in a cast which caused a horrific pressure sore, then talked more about amputating the leg she'd now screwed up even more.  Long story short -- that vet won't touch another animal of ours ever and we're dressing the wound ourselves and that leg seems to be healing the break just being gauze wrapped because that kitten is walking on it and even running up and down stairs on it.  So :tongue_smilie: you stinkin' vet. :sneaky2:

[MiMi 4under3]

Our Min Pin had trouble moving her back legs a few years ago. We were told by the surgeon at an Emergency Vet Clinic that she needed spine surgery to fix a disc in her neck for $6,000+.

 

We decided to put her on steroids (per DH's orders) and to crate her to prevent movement. She was "cured" in 2-3 weeks, and it hasn't happened again in 6 years.

 

---

 

At our regular vet office, there's one who will run every test and prescribe anything you are willing to use. Ask me how I know. The rest are more conservative. There is also one who is very hands-off, you almost have to demand a prescription or test.

 

So, it varies.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Well, I'm of two minds on this.

 

Are there some vets who charge unreasonable prices & are too quick to recommend expensive treatments? YUP.

 

Are there an awful lot of people who acquire pets with no thought to the costs involved for their care? ABSOLUTELY.

 

 

Yep.  Not much different than other service providers. 

 

I finally found a dentist who doesn't seem to be a gold digger, but anytime he finds a problem I think, "Hm...he must have some upcoming expense."  LOL

[Ottakee]

Good news is the dog seems just fine today.

 

[StephanieZ]

Vets vary greatly. 

 

A great come back a vet recently offered for responding to client queries about unnecessary tests/care was, "Tell me which test is unnecessary and we'll skip that one."

 

Valid reasons for pushing perceived "excess" care include:

 

1) Covering the bases. Medicine is a science and an art. Diagnosis and even treatment often involve many steps and tests and phases of treatment to get to the right diagnosis and the right treatment. If there is a 50% chance that the pet will suffer or die if you don't do X, do you want to do it if X costs $5? What about if the risk/chance is 5%, but X still costs $5? What if X costs $50? Or $500? What if the test is fast and painless? What if the test requires three client/pet visits to the hospital? What if it is painful? Owners/clients vary HUGELY on their cutoffs on each of these parameters. It is NOT directly related to income/assets/etc and cannot be easily predicted. Clients surprise vets all their time with either their willingness to spend or their unwillingness. It is generally understood that it is NOT right for the vet to make assumptions on client desire/willingness to spend based on their impressions of the client's income, appearance, etc. So, the vet should offer the best option to the owner . . .

 

The best vets are able to demonstrate compassion and respect for monetary limitations, but it is really essential that the owner/client bring up their limitations, as vets can not and should not try to read your mind. It is offensive and hurtful to owners when a vet seems to suggest reduced care or even euthanasia when the owner wants to try harder, just as it can be offensive and hurtful to owners when a vet suggests additional care when an owner is ready to call it quits. 

 

Some vets are better than others at this "dance" and the range of vets is going to meet various owners' needs better than others. So, find one that you communicate well with and that meets *your* needs. This is one of the many reasons why having a long term relationship with a vet is in everyone's best interest. When you have been working with a vet for years or decades on an annual basis, it makes making the hard decisions much easier.

 

2) Of course there are occasional bad apple vets. I think the actual bad apple vets are pretty far and few between, but I have certainly seem some evidence that they do exist as they do in any profession. They might be inexperienced in diagnostics or in client relations. They might be money hungry, callous, or stupid, or maybe just under the pressure of a corporate drive to produce revenues. Personally, I think this is one of the great strengths of small independently owned practices, as when you are dealing with an owner-vet with 100% control and no one looking over their records for "missed billing opportunities", the vet has more latitude to do whatever he would do for his own pet or for a family member . . . instead of worrying about his "bottom line" being reviewed by corporate number crunchers who do not have any real experience in the compassionate relationship that evolves between a vet and his/her clients and patients. The growth of Banfield, VCA, and other corporate-owned practices is a bad thing in my personal opinion as it is removing the control from the vets themselves. Again, a long term relationship with an individual vet (or small practice) is another assurance against getting in a bad situation when you are desperate for help and in need of sincere guidance.

 

[JaneEyre]

Well I took my cat in for a $17 shot the other day and they thought there might be something wrong and kept her overnight. She ended up being fine, but it was closer to $200 when I took her home the next day.

[Mommyof4ks]

Small animal vets in area are the same way. In their defense people are treating dog like children now days, so they can get people to pay an office visit, a checkup fee, 4 times the price of shots you can get at the feed store and do yourself (except rabies which vets must give), and on and on. We take our animals to a farm vet who also works with small animals. He is a realist, and he told us when our doggy had liver cancer, which he found with a simple X-ray, that we could do more tests and try chemo, but ultimately if it were his dog he would do the humane thing and put her down. We chose to do that. I love our vet, and being able to trust your vet is very important. With our new animals we know that if he says such and such can save their lives, then he really thinks they will be fine and that whatever he is suggesting is necessary. Honestly, I would find another vet. She may just be covering her rear, but then she may just want money.

[Farrar]

Well, I certainly think the culture has shifted. Shouldn't it be a balance? Like, okay, if someone has that money and can spend it, great. But if that's the threshold of pet ownership these days, how many people are we driving away from pet ownership who could otherwise be good, loving pet owners? And how many unwanted animals will go without homes as a result? Are we creating an environment where only a few people can have pets that are crazy well cared for and many others have to be put down because people can't care for them? And, even worse, how many people will have pets but just skip the vet check up even though they need to go for shots because every time they go, the vet wants to do something really expensive?

[hornblower]

Well, the culture is shifting.
& certainly culture has shifted about lots of things.

For ex. in Anne of Green Gables - how were orphans treated?  What was the value of a child?
I'm sure someone then was saying "WHAT? I'm expected to provide this adopted child with medical care? Be glad they have a home. There are lots of others to replace this one if she dies..."

 

It is tough though. I do feel the joy of pet ownership is something so important that I worry that we're pricing people out.
We have a local foundation here that organizes regular day long free vet clinics for homeless & extremely poor downtown residents. The food banks also collect pet food to distribute. It's a hard balance to strike for sure....  And there are lots of people who will scrimp and save & sell off furniture etc to pay for vet bills. While there are others who drive up in an expensive vehicle, talk about their trip to Vegas but won't pay for tests or medicines for their pet :(

As for the unwanted animals issue: the key to breaking the chain of unwanted animals is responsible pet ownership -  which includes spay & neuter & providing medical care & not taking on pets you can't afford.