Yesterday I saw a 10 year old assisting in surgery

[DVMDream]

Well, this is certainly...a first. I think I'll have a chat with the vet/owner of the clinic. I'm curious to know his opinion on this...

I'm quite shocked that a veterinary teaching hospital allowed kids to scrub in for major operations. What if one of the animals died?

I tried watching Series 1 on Youtube, but for some reason isn't available in my country. Was one of the kids asked to do the drilling during a neurosurgery? If not I wouldn't be surprised if it happened in a later season, lmao.

What if the animals died when it was a 4th year student doing their first abdominal explore? What if it died during a routine spay that a third year student was doing? Animals die during surgery. You could be 20 years out into practice as a vet and have something go wrong and an animal die. You could be a 4th year and have an animal die. Also, if the animal did die, it wasn't anything the kids were doing in the show, as they were never left unsupervised or allowed to do anything really dangerous. There were vets, nurses and staff around at all times helping them and watching them.

It isn't like the kids were doing the surgery. Nor were they unsupervised. I would argue that a teaching hospital has much more staff and resources to watch a kid "assisting" in surgery than your average private practice does. They were constantly watched and someone was right next to them the entire time. Not only that, it isn't like they were cutting organs out of a patient, they were doing things like "hold this instrument", "hand me this" and occasionally at the end of surgery they were allowed to help suture the skin, showing them how to do so and guiding them through it the entire time. Not only that, but as part of the show the kids were given labs just like the vet students were. They were shown how to suture, gown, glove, scrub, etc.

And why would you think they would be allowed to do drilling during neurosurgery? First of all, those surgeries rarely, if ever, happen and if they are happening, there is no way even a 4th year vet student is getting close enough to be allowed to drill. The interns and residents will be the ones doing the surgery and the students will be lucky if they can even see.

To add to this, the kids were presented in front of the owners of the pets. The kids spoke with the owners, helped with the exams, the diagnostics, etc, etc. The owners were well aware of what was going on and I am sure gave some form of consent to allow the kids as part of the show to assist the vets with their pet.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Minnerbelle]

Just something to think about, but for those of you not too keen on having owners observe you, or having to supervise young people in surgery, perhaps you could try to imagine yourself in the same surgery after 15-20 years.

I don't think young vets should have ANY distractions, but once you know your way around a scapel, your ability to handle increasing distractions will improve. So watching that young'un who is scrubbed in becomes easier, and ignoring the worried stares of an owner becomes easier.

Pretty sure my boss who's been in practice for many many years would still feel uncomfortable with owners watching an explore... I kind of doubt our surgeon would even be okay with it. Like I said, spays/neuters whatever, I don't really care. If I'm doing a shelter animal spay, i honestly don't care who's watching. But explores are so emotionally charged with the owners in the first place even without them thinking about watching, that I just don't think it's a good idea. I just don't like the idea of owners watching their own animal's surgeries. But that's just me. If it don't bother you, and then that's perfectly fine I guess.

Even with a spay though, do i want any random lay person scrubbed in? no. Sorry if that's curmudgeony of me, but i dont see why anyone should be entitled to in the first place. They are 100% welcome to go elsewhere that will allow them to scrub in. Pretty sure all the doctors in my practice would back me up on that one. The only reason anyone would really benefit from actually scrubbing in is if they are training to become vets and maybe techs, and they can so do that once they're in vet school, IMO. I got plenty of vet experiences before vet school without scrubbing into surgery, and i dont feel disadvantages at all... I don't mind shadowers/volunteers, and we accommodate a number of them even on overnight shifts. They are free to observe whatever's going on in the ER or OR. Ask whatever questions they want, and I'll answer them given that ****'s not hitting the fan at the moment. When little vet wannabe kiddos come in with their pets, I walk them through my exams and let them listen with my stethoscope and such. I mean is it so horrible to stop there and draw the line? Or should owners be allowed to experience EVERYTHING?

Usually the owners who insist that they be present for x,y,z are pain in the ass clients I don't want much to do with anyway... So there's that too.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

I think it's easy to think that way when you're mostly in the mindset of admissions and needing to get experience and stuff. But that gets less and less relevant as you care more and more about patient care. If something's benign, I will absolutely accommodate a prevet or a young aspiring vet, but it's another thing altogether when it interferes with my ability to provide good outcome for the patient. Taking a dog to an explore is pretty nerve wracking to begin with, esp when it's starting to look like a negative explore. It would be extremely distracting to have the owner in the room. The last thing I need to worry about is maintaining good bedside manner in a stressful surgery.

That makes sense. Also, taking into account the size of the surgery room would be an issue. I've seen larger and then very cramped rooms.

 

[bunnity]

Pretty sure my boss who's been in practice for many many years would still feel uncomfortable with owners watching an explore... I kind of doubt our surgeon would even be okay with it. Like I said, spays/neuters whatever, I don't really care. If I'm doing a shelter animal spay, i honestly don't care who's watching. But explores are so emotionally charged with the owners in the first place even without them thinking about watching, that I just don't think it's a good idea. I just don't like the idea of owners watching their own animal's surgeries. But that's just me. If it don't bother you, and then that's perfectly fine I guess.

Even with a spay though, do i want any random lay person scrubbed in? no. Sorry if that's curmudgeony of me, but i dont see why anyone should be entitled to in the first place. They are 100% welcome to go elsewhere that will allow them to scrub in. Pretty sure all the doctors in my practice would back me up on that one. The only reason anyone would really benefit from actually scrubbing in is if they are training to become vets and maybe techs, and they can so do that once they're in vet school, IMO. I got plenty of vet experiences before vet school without scrubbing into surgery, and i dont feel disadvantages at all... I don't mind shadowers/volunteers, and we accommodate a number of them even on overnight shifts. They are free to observe whatever's going on in the ER or OR. Ask whatever questions they want, and I'll answer them given that ****'s not hitting the fan at the moment. When little vet wannabe kiddos come in with their pets, I walk them through my exams and let them listen with my stethoscope and such. I mean is it so horrible to stop there and draw the line? Or should owners be allowed to experience EVERYTHING?

Usually the owners who insist that they be present for x,y,z are pain in the ass clients I don't want much to do with anyway... So there's that too.

Agree with everything.
I made enough mistakes (in lab) when learning to gown/glove/drape that I really don't think it's as simple as people are making it out to be. It's a frame of mind where you're constantly aware of everything you touch and it takes a while to get used to that. I doubt most vets have time to teach kids proper sterile technique to the extent that would make me comfortable having that kid in my sterile field. The pressure of an animal's life and the responsibility to their owner is kind of crushing when you first get out of school and maybe that gets better but the reality is that you have a life on the line and sorry, I don't want even the smartest, bestest, whateverest 10 year old with their paws in my patient's abdominal cavity.
And yeah, I'd really rather not have a child or an owner breathing down my neck as I curse (at myself) my way through the surgery.

 

[dyachei]

Agree with everything.
I made enough mistakes (in lab) when learning to gown/glove/drape that I really don't think it's as simple as people are making it out to be. It's a frame of mind where you're constantly aware of everything you touch and it takes a while to get used to that. I doubt most vets have time to teach kids proper sterile technique to the extent that would make me comfortable having that kid in my sterile field. The pressure of an animal's life and the responsibility to their owner is kind of crushing when you first get out of school and maybe that gets better but the reality is that you have a life on the line and sorry, I don't want even the smartest, bestest, whateverest 10 year old with their paws in my patient's abdominal cavity.
And yeah, I'd really rather not have a child or an owner breathing down my neck as I curse (at myself) my way through the surgery.

I think we are making assumptions as to what counts as assisting. Assisting can mean sterile instrument handling to give things to the vet, sterile irrigation, etc. It doesn't necessary mean the child has their hands in an abdominal cavity

 

[LyraGardenia]

This made me feel inadequate, lol. Great experience for her though.

Not to backtrack the thread, but same here! I've wanted to be a vet since elementary/middle school (I can't remember exactly), but I never would have thought to ask to observe/help with anything in the back of a vet clinic at that age, even on my own pet. I was honored the first time a vet let me shadow him when I was 17! It sounds from the OP like this was the vet's idea, though, so I don't know that it means this girl is more dedicated or smarter or whatever than the average kid who wants to become a vet. If a vet had asked me at age 10 if I wanted to watch/help with a surgery, I'm sure I would have said yes, although I don't know how well I would have handled it. Also, I don't think most 10-year-old's would get much out of watching a surgery than just "that was so cool!!!" Sure, the vet could take the time to explain what he's doing, but a lot of it is going to go over a child's head. It's nice that this vet wants to inspire his young clients who want to be vets and give them that kind of opportunity, but I think 10 is a bit young for them to truly appreciate the science behind surgery, and what a privilege it is to get to watch it, let alone assist.

On another note, I noticed from the "similar threads" that a similar case to this came up in a thread from 2008: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/10-year-old-vet-assistant.491963/

 

[LetItSnow]

Next horse owners are much less OMG fluffy and more reasonable.

Uh. "Horse owners" and "reasonable" don't belong in the same paragraph, much less sentence. I mean, no offense, but everyone knows horse owners are crazy. Even horse owners admit it. They're basically the crazy cat ladies of the large-animal world.

 

[bunnity]

I think we are making assumptions as to what counts as assisting. Assisting can mean sterile instrument handling to give things to the vet, sterile irrigation, etc. It doesn't necessary mean the child has their hands in an abdominal cavity

The original example was someone scrubbing in. I think opening a pack of suture to hand to a sterile person, for example, is pretty easy to teach but if someone is scrubbed in and touching things, whatever they touch is going to touch the surgery site... I don't know, not something I'd be comfortable with.

 

[Minnerbelle]

Uh. "Horse owners" and "reasonable" don't belong in the same paragraph, much less sentence. I mean, no offense, but everyone knows horse owners are crazy. Even horse owners admit it. They're basically the crazy cat ladies of the large-animal world.

I'm glad someone caught that too. My eyes rolled to the end of the galaxy and back when I read it.

 

[dyachei]

The original example was someone scrubbing in. I think opening a pack of suture to hand to a sterile person, for example, is pretty easy to teach but if someone is scrubbed in and touching things, whatever they touch is going to touch the surgery site... I don't know, not something I'd be comfortable with.

I really think that depends on the kid and how involved you let them be. I mean, it could have been scrubbing to hand over instruments. Or pick up a sterile syringe to irrigate. I'd be ok with that under direct supervision and training

 

[Cracker.Jack.]

Uh. "Horse owners" and "reasonable" don't belong in the same paragraph, much less sentence. I mean, no offense, but everyone knows horse owners are crazy. Even horse owners admit it. They're basically the crazy cat ladies of the large-animal world.

I wish I could 'like' this more than once

 

[LetItSnow]

I mean is it so horrible to stop there and draw the line? Or should owners be allowed to experience EVERYTHING?

I dunno. You're clearly compelled by the potential for distraction and your perception that having an untrained person in the operatory increases risk to the animal. That's cool, I understand that. Personally, I don't find either of those compelling because if I felt comfortable with the person and procedure ... I'd have ruled out distraction already. And I just plain don't buy that it really adds risk to the animal. Not criticizing you for feeling that it might - I just don't agree. *shrug*

So for me it's more like "ehhhhh... why not?" And while people have supplied reasons that are compelling to THEM (and that's perfectly cool), they haven't really provided any that compel me.

It's not horrible for you to stop <wherever> you want and draw the line, because you can't let a optional/elective owner request interfere with your ability to do good medicine. You're paid (or will be paid, for the rest of us) to use your best judgment, and that's what you'd be doing. That seems obvious to all of us, I'm sure. But I don't think you should expect your line to be the same as my line.

Since we moved from talking about kids to owners ... there is a practice in our area that has a 100% open 'door' policy for owners. If an owner wants to watch a procedure - surgical, dental, blood draw in a treatment room, whatever - they can watch it. The practice has an exam-room-sized room set aside as a kind of 'green room' for owners to go back to if they decide they want to quit watching.

I was pretty amazed by that policy and asked if it had ever caused them trouble. They said not one single time. The owner even described a pretty unfortunate event where an animal died under anesthesia with the owner present. She said that while it was obviously pretty stressful ... at the end of the day, the owner *VALUED* being present because she could see the efforts the staff went through to manage the problem (albeit unsuccessfully). So in the end, it resulted in a *POSITIVE* interaction with the owner that might otherwise have been very, very negative.

(I think an emergency clinic would not be a good choice for a policy like that. I hope that goes without saying.)

 

[Minnerbelle]

Well yeah, like I said, I don't care if anyone else feels comfortable with it. Never said I had issues with it being done, I just want nothing to do with random person being scrubbed in. Not a part of my job, and not a part of my perceived obligation to society (like i said, i accommodate shadowers/tech interns/volunteers all the time). If you are okay with the risks of being liable for negligence (both to child/owner involved and the animal), that is your prerogative. Obviously like with anything else, whether or not you get sued over negligence (or perceived negligence) tends to depend on the client and your relationship rather than what actually happened. But I personally don't want to risk getting in trouble for something that is totally unnecessary. If you don't care, kudos to you. I just didnt understand why people were making it sound like it SHOULD be allowed. I don't agree with that.

And yes, 90% of the explores we do are on emergency basis and owners freakout sometimes when just explained that it is an EXPLORE and that we might not find anything. I would absolutely not be comfortable with them being anywhere close to the OR even in earshot when that goes down. Currently, a majority of my surgeries are ER surgeries and not routine elective procedures, so that may color my world a little differently. I can't even tell owners what time we'll even get to surgery, I can't imagine coordinating things with them. Once the pet is admitted, things get done when they can get done so long as the wait is not harming the patient (e.g. Even a possible obstruction needs to be fluid resuscitation first and there is wiggle room so long as patient is stable and the diagnostics aren't super scary). The owner doesn't need to know that their pet is sitting around and on hold with the OR ready for their pet, because a dyspneic cat came in. I don't need an O breathing down my neck. The key to ER work is to make it appear as if I am concentrated 100% on each owner's pet, when in reality I'm keeping tabs on everyone but priorities are made on what gets done in which order based on which patients are most critical. Owners of hospitalized patients are antsy enough, I can't imagine having them watch everything once their pet is admitted. They just need to go home and take a chill pill until we have some diagnostics/procedures done that we can update them with.

 

[MyMia]

What if the animals died when it was a 4th year student doing their first abdominal explore? What if it died during a routine spay that a third year student was doing? Animals die during surgery. You could be 20 years out into practice as a vet and have something go wrong and an animal die. You could be a 4th year and have an animal die. Also, if the animal did die, it wasn't anything the kids were doing in the show, as they were never left unsupervised or allowed to do anything really dangerous. There were vets, nurses and staff around at all times helping them and watching them.

It isn't like the kids were doing the surgery. Nor were they unsupervised. I would argue that a teaching hospital has much more staff and resources to watch a kid "assisting" in surgery than your average private practice does. They were constantly watched and someone was right next to them the entire time. Not only that, it isn't like they were cutting organs out of a patient, they were doing things like "hold this instrument", "hand me this" and occasionally at the end of surgery they were allowed to help suture the skin, showing them how to do so and guiding them through it the entire time. Not only that, but as part of the show the kids were given labs just like the vet students were. They were shown how to suture, gown, glove, scrub, etc.

And why would you think they would be allowed to do drilling during neurosurgery? First of all, those surgeries rarely, if ever, happen and if they are happening, there is no way even a 4th year vet student is getting close enough to be allowed to drill. The interns and residents will be the ones doing the surgery and the students will be lucky if they can even see.

To add to this, the kids were presented in front of the owners of the pets. The kids spoke with the owners, helped with the exams, the diagnostics, etc, etc. The owners were well aware of what was going on and I am sure gave some form of consent to allow the kids as part of the show to assist the vets with their pet.

Definitely a good point, though I can't help but wonder how the people watching the show would have reacted had one of the animals.

The NS comment was a sarcasm btw.

 

[dogluver1994]

Just thought I'd chime in. My sister came to shadow me at work one day when she was 9 or 10. She got to see a lot of procedures and a dog spay. My boss let her scrub in for the surgery and she wore a gown, mask, etc. But she never actually assisted with the spay in any way. The experience was amazing for her and she still talks about it. She was really mature for her age, listened to instructions really well, and asked good questions. I wouldn't be surprised if she ends up being a vet or a tech someday.

 

[lailanni]

I wonder how this question would go over in human medicine? Do family members get to watch surgeries? What if it's just a "routine" surgery?

If, say, I want to get my tubes tied (human version of a spay) can my spouse watch? Or can my kid watch? Maybe my kid can help, they're pretty smart for a 10 year old and they want to be a doctor when they grow up. It wouldn't be a big deal because it's my kid working on me, no problem. (No, I don't have a kid, but I just want to put that sentiment out there for discussion).

If someone from human medicine wants to chime in I'd love to hear. Would family members or kids be allowed in the OR or a viewing gallery? How about letting them lend a hand?

I have no idea, but I'm going to guess no. Probably for liability and interference with regular staff procedure, which is why I personally wouldn't do it either for veterinary work. I do think it's up to each individual doctor's comfort level and subject to individual clinic policy though. So whatever floats your boat or finds your lost remote.

I know a boarded radiologist who will let owners watch an ultrasound - for a fee. I asked about that once. She said it takes so much longer to answer their questions and it can just get annoying. So it's compensation for the reduction in efficiency.

 

[WelshCob]

Uh. "Horse owners" and "reasonable" don't belong in the same paragraph, much less sentence. I mean, no offense, but everyone knows horse owners are crazy. Even horse owners admit it. They're basically the crazy cat ladies of the large-animal world.

What no?! I'm 100% a perfectly reasonable person. I also own three cats.

 

[LetItSnow]

Someone remind me again why the liability is different with one age observer than it is with, say, a college-aged pre-vet looking to shadow? Some posters seem to be very ok with the latter, but are using 'liability' as a reason to preclude the former.

I don't really care who anyone does or doesn't let into their OR, because I firmly believe it's up to them to evaluate whether it's reasonable. I'm just curious about why they perceive liability to be an issue with one age but not another. In either case it's an untrained person with no business reason to be there. Seems to me people who are letting liability dictate their opinion should be more consistent and say "nobody in my operatory other than trained staff." You're just as liable if a 20-year-old pukes into your spay as a 10-year-old ripping off his gloves to go abdomen diving for guts.

Not really sure I understand the point of the human med vs vet med comparison, Lailanni. In human medicine, the stakes are much higher. It's silly to suggest otherwise, right? I mean, we do standing surgery in cows in the middle of a feces-filled, dust-laden, bug-packed barn ... are you going to ask why we don't do human surgery on a bale of hay in the same circumstances? Or are you going to suggest that we should be doing every LDA in a floor-to-ceiling double-scrubbed positive-pressure operatory?

(I have no idea what the rules are in the human world. Interesting question. Maybe. Given the knee-jerk "zero risk acceptance regardless of whether something is really a risk" trend, though, I suspect the answer is obvious.)

 

[lailanni]

Not really sure I understand the point of the human med vs vet med comparison, Lailanni. In human medicine, the stakes are much higher. It's silly to suggest otherwise, right? I mean, we do standing surgery in cows in the middle of a feces-filled, dust-laden, bug-packed barn ... are you going to ask why we don't do human surgery on a bale of hay in the same circumstances? Or are you going to suggest that we should be doing every LDA in a floor-to-ceiling double-scrubbed positive-pressure operatory?

Yes, more value is placed on a human life, so the stakes are higher that way. But I don't see how the stakes are higher in a technical sense. Mammal on an operating table = mammal on an operating table. Still need sterility, still using similar tools and techniques. Yet it can be kosher for a kid to help in vet med when I doubt it'd be an option in human med. Where do we draw the line and why? (Not trying to argue, I just think it's an interesting discussion)

(Wasn't thinking LA but more SA)

 

[Minnerbelle]

My distinction with liability has nothing to do with who is in the OR, but who is scrubbed in and touching the sterile field. No one but trained staff is allowed to do that regardless of age or relationship to patient with my rules.

I don't like family in the OR watching because it is annoying. 2 separate issues. Not for liability reasons. Though actually, I get enough pain in the ass clients who prob would insist on watching so that they could "supervise the surgeon" during surgery so that they could come up with every reason to sue or not pay if things didnt work out well for their pet (or i wouldnt put it past some people to do that even if it went well). You know... the people who won't spend the money for surgery unless you can guarantee a good outcome, which obviously we can't. E.g. "I asked that doctor about the color of the liver because it looked wrong to me, but she just brushed aside my concerns. It was definitely not normal. that must be why my baby died" when the answer is "no effing crazy b**** your dog died of septic peritonitis because you waited 3 days to go to surgery on an obstructed dog." Those clients are few and far in between, but those would be the ones who would want to watch. Most reasonable clients wouldn't want to even if given the chance. I think I'm still scarred by a recent PITA client who I really wished never set foot in the clinic.

Even for routine surgery days, those days are so busy, I really don't have the time to babysit owners. With shadowers and volunteers, they just follow along and watch whatever is going on. I can leave and work on paperwork and call owners and stuff in between things. When we move from one animal to the next, they're not concerned about "their baby" that we just left in the cage for the treatment tech to monitor. We already get enough calls from antsy owners who keep calling to ask if their pet is done yet starting 10am... even when we tell them that their pet is #4 on the list today so it will be a while. And they just don't get it. So I would hate to have them breathing down my neck in person. For routine spays/neuters it's not even really the actual surgery that worries me with the owners watching. I've done 80+ at this point and haven't had any complications so that might make me overconfident. I'd hate to have my first dropped pedicle be with the owner watching, now that I think about it. Not because I couldn't handle it. for a shadower that might just be exciting to watch, but it would be horrifying to the owner, and I don't want to be dealing with them as I'm extending my incision and working on finding the dropped pedicle.

 

[LetItSnow]

Yes, more value is placed on a human life, so the stakes are higher that way. But I don't see how the stakes are higher in a technical sense. Mammal on an operating table = mammal on an operating table. Still need sterility, still using similar tools and techniques. Yet it can be kosher for a kid to help in vet med when I doubt it'd be an option in human med. Where do we draw the line and why? (Not trying to argue, I just think it's an interesting discussion)

(Wasn't thinking LA but more SA)

Nope, I'm not arguing with you either - I was really just trying to understand the point.

I think my response would probably be that rather than saying "maybe vet med should draw the line more stringently like <I presume> they do in human med" ... the better stance might be to say "maybe human med should lighten up". It'll never happen, of course, but the consistent emphasis on using every possible available diagnostic modality, therapeutic modality, whatever ... and the total focus on 'liability' ... hasn't exactly helped human medicine much. It's just made it stupendously expensive. I guess I'm not sure I see human medicine as something to aspire to, in a lot of ways. And that's not a shot at doctors - it's a shot at the system they are forced to work within.

I wouldn't be here if some vet hadn't said "sure, come on into my OR." So at the end of the day, I know that allowing that to happen made a difference in MY life. I'd hate to utterly remove that chance for someone else down the line.

 

[exoticsmed]

My mom is an RVT and some of my earliest memories are going in to the clinic where she worked to clean kennels and do treatments when I was like 8 or 9 in the winter when no one else could make it in because of snow. The vet always let me watch and help in surgeries. I wasn't actually doing surgery but I would scrub in and he would explain to me what was going on. I saw everything from a cat having its eye removed to a dog with a ham bone being removed from its stomach to actually helping revive dane pups after a c-section. It was a normal part of my childhood. I never had a problem with it and I value those memories to this day. It's just what my childhood was. I learned to give sub-q fluids and draw blood before I could drive. I think it definitely helped me become more mature at an early age. No one there ever spoke down to me and if I didn't understand something the vet was always super awesome about explaining things until I understood them. I think he's part of the reason I teach the way I do today. So kudos to the vet for letting this girl explore her passions.

I honestly think if more people saw what their pets go through in surgery and treatment they would be a little more careful with them. Maybe watch the lab puppy with the socks a little more closely so it doesn't have to have foreign body surgery. Just my opinion but I think it's pretty cool.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

I wonder how this question would go over in human medicine? Do family members get to watch surgeries? What if it's just a "routine" surgery?

Don't even get me started. My dad has had so many cool (well...not for him) surgeries that I've wanted to watch! I do think seeing my dad opened up on the table might be a bit nerve-wracking, and I would draw the line for myself there. My dog, I could handle with a bit of breath-holding here and there. My family, not so much.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

I think legal matters draw the line for human medicine, as opposed to the doctors themselves. You don't see HIPAA laws in vet med, and THANK the heavens for that otherwise we'd all be screwed.

 

[DVMDream]

I think legal matters draw the line for human medicine, as opposed to the doctors themselves. You don't see HIPAA laws in vet med, and THANK the heavens for that otherwise we'd all be screwed.

There are still confidentiality laws in vet med. As a vet, you can't go off rambling about a case you just saw or giving information away on a client. This is important at all times, but becomes especially important if you are dealing with say.... champion show dogs, expensive racehorses, dressage horses, etc.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

There are still confidentiality laws in vet med. As a vet, you can't go off rambling about a case you just saw or giving information away on a client. This is important at all times, but becomes especially important if you are dealing with say.... champion show dogs, expensive racehorses, dressage horses, etc.

Right, but those laws don't prevent us from shadowing vets. You don't need to have the low-down on a client to watch their dog being examined. HIPAA laws prevent you from following a human doctor into a room with a patient.

 

[that redhead]

Someone remind me again why the liability is different with one age observer than it is with, say, a college-aged pre-vet looking to shadow? Some posters seem to be very ok with the latter, but are using 'liability' as a reason to preclude the former.

My impression is that, for better or worse, society perceives that ten year olds are not ready to handle complex topics like maintaining a sterile field. And maybe their mother thought their assisting would be great for young Johnny who wants to become a vet, but maybe the family turns on you when something - anything, even aside from your child's participation- goes wrong either during or after surgery. I think it would look a lot worse to tell a judge and jury that you let a ten year old in on surgery versus a college age or older aspiring pre vet who may have previous experience.

Is that right? I dunno.

 

[LetItSnow]

My impression is that, for better or worse, society perceives that ten year olds are not ready to handle complex topics like maintaining a sterile field. And maybe their mother thought their assisting would be great for young Johnny who wants to become a vet, but maybe the family turns on you when something - anything, even aside from your child's participation- goes wrong either during or after surgery. I think it would look a lot worse to tell a judge and jury that you let a ten year old in on surgery versus a college age or older aspiring pre vet who may have previous experience.

Is that right? I dunno.

If it's truly liability that you're worried about, I don't think you're a lot better off with the older person. Any lawyer worth their salt could rip you apart stem to stern and make you sound like the most incompetent, crazy, dim-witted, idiot in the world for letting anyone without specialized medical training into your operatory. At least, that's my guess.

 

[Citan]

My mom is an RVT and some of my earliest memories are going in to the clinic where she worked to clean kennels and do treatments when I was like 8 or 9 in the winter when no one else could make it in because of snow. The vet always let me watch and help in surgeries. I wasn't actually doing surgery but I would scrub in and he would explain to me what was going on. I saw everything from a cat having its eye removed to a dog with a ham bone being removed from its stomach to actually helping revive dane pups after a c-section. It was a normal part of my childhood. I never had a problem with it and I value those memories to this day. It's just what my childhood was. I learned to give sub-q fluids and draw blood before I could drive. I think it definitely helped me become more mature at an early age. No one there ever spoke down to me and if I didn't understand something the vet was always super awesome about explaining things until I understood them. I think he's part of the reason I teach the way I do today. So kudos to the vet for letting this girl explore her passions.

I honestly think if more people saw what their pets go through in surgery and treatment they would be a little more careful with them. Maybe watch the lab puppy with the socks a little more closely so it doesn't have to have foreign body surgery. Just my opinion but I think it's pretty cool.

Sounds like an amazing childhood for any aspiring vet.

 

[that redhead]

If it's truly liability that you're worried about, I don't think you're a lot better off with the older person. Any lawyer worth their salt could rip you apart stem to stern and make you sound like the most incompetent, crazy, dim-witted, idiot in the world for letting anyone without specialized medical training into your operatory. At least, that's my guess.

Oh I agree entirely. I just think that, while being ripped apart by a lawyer, they'd have far more of a field day if it were a ten year old versus a college educated pre-vet who might have already scrubbed into a surgery, maybe done a few as a part of one those international programs, etc.