Didn't get that feeling when you said this:
This is so funny because that was not what I was talking about, I was referring to ALL clinics not having every piece of equiptment in there clinic and how thats not necessary. Not only would you not use the equiptment as much because not all clients want to pay for it but its just unreasonable. Having 100,000s of dollars of extra equipment in a human doctor office might be needed because it will be used a lot. But for vet med its probably more reasonable to refer. Lets look at the NEXT statement in that SAME POST. Wow, talking about taking something out of context
"I have never stepped foot inside of a small animal vet clinic that had these things that was not a secondary or tertiary clinic. Why would you need to buy all these expensive things if you can just refer? Keep your prices lower for the general care and if they want more they can easily have it. If I don't believe that I could care for an animal safely is when I would talk to the owner about other clinics. Every vet has a limit to what there clinic can do.
Just an example: I did have to put one of my dogs to sleep recently. The vet I take her too never once offered euthanasia as an option. He offered all the options which were all referrals and the only place that could could take her to fix her problem was the vet school. I simply cannot afford the treatments at the vet school so I told him I would like her euthanize instead. He is a very reasonable priced vet AND he is a good vet. He even refunded all of the charges for the medicine I bought the previous day even though I chopped all the pills up in half and he waved the PE fee. I did not ask him to do this he just did. We don't talk about how much money I have
he just puts all the options on the table and lets me pick the one that is suitable for my budget. Do you not think this is a reasonable thing to do? He was offering me the best of the best but I just didn't take it. "
Thats two different things out of context. When I said don't judge how much people may or may not spend on a pet, I meant in the consult room. No matter how poor they look, how uncaring they look, how much they seem like they'll take the cheap/easy option, offer the gold standard first anyway. Lots of vets judge clients in the consult room and tailor their initial treatment plan off how the clients seem instead of just offering the best option to everyone. Which obviously shouldn't be happening.
I don't think really really poor people should be owning pets.
Ok so basically your are saying don't judge someone by the way they look. But you can judge the really really poor people.... how can you judge someone at all based on this?
Maybe they used to have jobs and they lost there jobs and they are attached to there beloved pet? Maybe they are just going through a rough patch in there lives and they are trying to get back on there feet. I know a girl who was homeless for a time and she lived in her car with her cat.... now she is doing great and can afford everything the cat needs. She says that she would have given up if it was not for that single cat. The cat kept her sane through her ordeal and she got through it. But according to your standards that cat should have been euthanized.
How would you know how much money a person makes or how they live there lives with out judging them? Unless you have a copy of there life story + there finances I don't think you should be the one telling them they can't have there pet. Just like you said, you would be surprised how much someone is willing to spend on an animal.
If a person literally had NO money and they went to a shelter to adopt a pet they would not be able to pay the adoption fee, which is often a few hundred dollars. And if they have no money and they find a dog or cat on the street or something, the animal would probably be better off hanging around someone who has no money vs. no one.
That is just my opinion though. You can choose who you judge as much as you like.
) are two different things.
........
