Illegal to draw blood

Started by rachroo
Veterinary Science Graduate Programs from U. of I.
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
rachroo

rachroo

OSU CVM c/o 2013
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Hello everyone! I have a concern that I'm hoping to get some advice on...

I have worked at a small animal practice for almost 6 years. I was originally hired to work in the kennel for boarding animals but I also help out in the hospital, and am in charge of the weekend schedule. I was also elected to be the "head" kennel person if you will...if any Dr. or tech have any problems with someone/something they come to me and I have to deal with it/solve/fix it.

In Ohio, it is illegal for anyone who is not a DVM or tech to draw blood (and many of the other clinical skills that DVM's and tech's perform), therefore my "veterinary experience" will not contain these things. Besides my kennel duties, I do help out in the hospital. I help restrain during appointments/x-rays/etc, sometimes go into the exam rooms if we're short on techs to talk to the clients, feed/help give meds to sick, count pills, help prep/observe with surgery, help the DVM's/techs if they need anything wether it's a towel an e-collar, an extra set of hands, etc....and in return they teach me a lot!!

While in South Africa last summer, I volunteered with an organization that takes in baboons. 😀 When several of the baboons became sick 2 of the pre-vet volunteers from the States attempted to draw blood on the baboons and told me that the states that they lived in they were able to be techs without having gone to a tech program or taking a licensing test.

I know that when I apply to my IS school, they obviously will be understanding, since it is illegal for anyone in Ohio to act as a tech without a license. But how am I supposed to compete with all of these "techs" from different states who have more vet "experience" and have been a tech when I apply to OOS schools? How do I explain this "problem" in my VCMAS...would it go in the explaination part?
 
I don't think it would be a problem and I wouldn't mention it...just describe your duties and state that you are the kennel head--that sounds good.

Many people apply to vet school from Ohio, and I would say that most people applying are not certified techs. I had no clinical experience except for four months working part time as a tech assistant, and I definitely didn't draw any blood, and I still had a very sucessful application cycle.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Yeah - I am from NY where there is the same restrictions (they actually just placed a note on a bulletin board reminding the doctors that non-techs are not allowed to perform certain duties). I never even thought twice about it while applying. I just highlighted the duties i was entitled to perform (running lytes, pcvs, etc, giving fluid boluses etc) and it seemed to work for me!
 
Is there an exclusion for vet students in that law? Since students aren't technically doctors, nor are they techs...I'm sure there has to be. I'm from a state where you don't have to be certified to perform technician duties, so I'm not familiar with these types of laws.

Which states require licensing?
 
I've never drawn blood either (I live in Michigan - not sure if it's actually illegal for me to draw blood since I'm not a licensed tech). In my application, I just described my duties as a shadow/assistant. In my interview, they never mentioned anything about drawing blood - they asked me to talk about some of the duties I had described and what I had learned from them. 🙂
 
So they always say they can teach a monkey to do surgery ..... I bet they could teach one to draw blood too.

Okay, maybe not, but my point is more that drawing blood is CERTAINLY something we'll learn in vet school. The experience problem solving, being responsible for others, talking to clients, etc is something that you CANNOT teach -- and will be so much more useful as a vet! Play up these portions of your application, and nevermind that you've never drawn blood -- ITS NOT A "PROBLEM" -- if anything, you will be more desirable to an adcom because you learned those non-teachable lessons.

Relax -- being able to draw blood is NOT going to be the deciding factor in your application. Some vets I know still suck at it.
 
wi girl said:
Relax -- being able to draw blood is NOT going to be the deciding factor in your application. Some vets I know still suck at it.
Click to expand...

Haha so true! Thats what all those/you wonderful amazing techs are for and why we have to remember to be gracious and nice to them/you. :laugh: Ok done sucking up now!
 
clawsbeatskin said:
Is there an exclusion for vet students in that law? Since students aren't technically doctors, nor are they techs...I'm sure there has to be. I'm from a state where you don't have to be certified to perform technician duties, so I'm not familiar with these types of laws.

Which states require licensing?
Click to expand...

I am from Pennsylvania and we are required to hold a technician license in order to call your self a certified vet tech. A technician is a person has gone to a two year accredited program but never took the national exam (or failed). A veterinary assistant can be trained off the street with no schooling experience. Veterinary assistants can draw blood under direct supervision of the doctor....meaning the doctor has to be in the hospital at the time, where as a CVT can draw blood anytime the doctor has orders written for blood work. Assistants to my knowledge are still not allowed to perform dentals, but I believe they were trying to change this, due to the shortage of CVT and doctors not wanting to do them. Hope this gives you some insite on PA.
 
I love the jug!

Don't fret, they will teach you in vet school. I'll just be glad we don't have that law in my state or my clinic would go to hell. 7 techs, 2 certified, we all draw blood. Lots of times when there are no certified techs working.
 
The experience problem solving, being responsible for others, talking to clients, etc is something that you CANNOT teach -- and will be so much more useful as a vet! Play up these portions of your application, and nevermind that you've never drawn blood -- ITS NOT A "PROBLEM" -- if anything, you will be more desirable to an adcom because you learned those non-teachable lessons.
Click to expand...


Very true.:clap:

Thanks wi girl and everyone else!
 
clawsbeatskin said:
Is there an exclusion for vet students in that law? Since students aren't technically doctors, nor are they techs...I'm sure there has to be. I'm from a state where you don't have to be certified to perform technician duties, so I'm not familiar with these types of laws.

Which states require licensing?
Click to expand...

Yes there is. After your first year of vet school you are allowed to do pretty much anything under the direct supervision of a veterinarian. For example, this summer I am working at a veterinary clinic and the veterinarian can let me do spays/neuters if she so chooses. I live in Ohio if that helps at all.
 
off the subject, but was that the sanctuary in Phalaborwa? and on the subject, the three second year students I talked to at my interview hadn't drawn blood, etc. I think knowlege of the field is infinitely more important than specific skills in terms of tech work!!
 
off the subject, but was that the sanctuary in Phalaborwa?
Click to expand...

Yes, C.A.R.E. (the baboon sanctuary) is located on a wildlife reserve in Phalaborwa, South Africa.

I am guessing you have either seen it on Animal Planet's "Growing up Baboon" or or have been there yourself?!
 
I've been a certified/licensed vet tech for three years. I still got rejected from Cornell and didn't even get an interview at Penn. Probably why vet schools ask for animal experience, not tech experience 🙂

Another girl I applied with just worked kennel for a few months. She got into like seven schools. So I wouldn't worry. I would just look for a wide variety of animal experiences. You'd be surprised at how many cool things there are to see.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
When I read the explanation of your duties the thing that stuck out in my mind (and what will likely stick out to admissions folks) is that you had the title of 'head kennel attendant'...you have a leadership position and admissions people look for that. They don't care that you don't know how to draw blood especially if law prevents it...you will learn in vet school. People that know how to draw blood, take xrays, place catheters, etc. don't have much on you except that they will likely be useful tools in vet school when you all are learning how to do that stuff. Don't feel like you have to explain any lack of experience...that's why we're all going to school...to learn more.

I'm from Virginia and we have laws similar to the PA vet tech/assistant laws that someone already posted. The clinic where I work pretty much lets me do anything (with a few exceptions) as long as I am 'under the direct supervision of a doctor.'
 
I visited the sanctuary in 2004 when I was volunteering at Enkosini. My parents are going to Makalali for a month starting this friday- you must have had an awesome experience there! The adcoms looked on that experience favorably as I'm sure they will for you too!!
 
ri23 said:
Yes there is. After your first year of vet school you are allowed to do pretty much anything under the direct supervision of a veterinarian. For example, this summer I am working at a veterinary clinic and the veterinarian can let me do spays/neuters if she so chooses. I live in Ohio if that helps at all.
Click to expand...

This differs in each state. In CA, after 2 years you can consider yourself equal to an RVT. (this is only for outside of school work)

For school you can do pretty much anything under a vets supervision.
 
purplebunnie said:
I've been a certified/licensed vet tech for three years. I still got rejected from Cornell and didn't even get an interview at Penn. Probably why vet schools ask for animal experience, not tech experience 🙂

Another girl I applied with just worked kennel for a few months. She got into like seven schools. So I wouldn't worry. I would just look for a wide variety of animal experiences. You'd be surprised at how many cool things there are to see.
Click to expand...

Im with ya purplebunnie...but at least you got in. 14 years exp. and this was my 6th rejection cycle. Tech experience doesn't count for squat. The more I look at the stats (at least for my schools eligiblity) the priority lies in order of GRE, Grades, then experience. So glad Ive wasted all this time getting experience and taking classes when I should have just studied harder for the GRE.
 
LVT2DVM said:
Tech experience doesn't count for squat. The more I look at the stats (at least for my schools eligiblity) the priority lies in order of GRE, Grades, then experience. So glad Ive wasted all this time getting experience and taking classes when I should have just studied harder for the GRE.
Click to expand...

I would disagree with this to a point- and only to a point because I feel all schools are very different with what they are looking for. Even from class to class their priorities are different. If you review the successful apps thread, it's clear that some schools are looking for very specific qualifications. I know I was baffled when I got into schools that some other highly qualified applicants didn't. I had pretty low gpa stats and just average GRE's but lots of experience (albeit quite varied and not just tech work). I think a lot of it is matching your experience and goals with a school that is looking for someone like you!
 
clawsbeatskin said:
Is there an exclusion for vet students in that law? Since students aren't technically doctors, nor are they techs...I'm sure there has to be. I'm from a state where you don't have to be certified to perform technician duties, so I'm not familiar with these types of laws.

Which states require licensing?
Click to expand...

I know that in new york as a vet student you are allowed to work as a tech legally once you are in your second year of vet school.
 
Wow, I never realized so many states had such stupid Vet/Tech only laws. In California, I was originally hired as kennel help, but was drawing blood, etc. within 6 months. The only thing we (non-techs) can't do is administer conrolled drugs as of a few months ago due to a new friggen law *Sigh*
But I definately agree with everyone else, little skills like this are pretty unimportant in the overall application, and despite being able to do almost anything at my hospital, I am on only 3 alternate lists, no true acceptances (not even Davis my IS) Again, Sigh.🙁
 
Wolf Vet said:
Wow, I never realized so many states had such stupid Vet/Tech only laws.
Click to expand...

Whoa, I have a problem with this statement. Do you think that laws prevent your average Joe (i.e. those who have not had formal training) from drawing human blood are stupid? If not, then how can you justify having the opposite opinion when it comes to the veterinary profession without marginalizing the profession or the status of animals (i.e. the "they're only animals" spiel)?

I hate ranting, but sheesh, it pains me to see a pre-vet forum with such low opinions of techs. With such perceptions from our future veterinarians, I can hardly see how the veterinary tech profession can advance.

/rant
 
Primal, well said and kudos for saying it.

I think ALL states should adopt stricter vet tech laws, and I'm not just saying that because I'm licensed. I'm saying that because I'm tired of seeing animals die or get terrible patient care in the hands of severely inexperienced "techs". Would you want your sick animal getting treated by someone who blows three veins before they can successfully get a blood sample? Or doesn't know (or understand) which drugs are for what?
 
meadow36 said:
Primal, well said and kudos for saying it.

I think ALL states should adopt stricter vet tech laws, and I'm not just saying that because I'm licensed. I'm saying that because I'm tired of seeing animals die or get terrible patient care in the hands of severely inexperienced "techs". Would you want your sick animal getting treated by someone who blows three veins before they can successfully get a blood sample? Or doesn't know (or understand) which drugs are for what?
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree here. I'm from Texas, where no such laws exist. I've worked in several non-profit shelters and clinics serving low-income areas who just cannot afford the salary of a licensed technician. When I think about the literal masses of animals we've helped on a shoestring budget, I think the benefit far outweighs the cost of hiring non-licensed technicians or even letting (shock!) well-trained volunteers perform the same duties. I myself was a volunteer, and I know I blew far less veins than some of the licensed techs I've seen work, and unfortunately, even some vets.
 
fingercrossing said:
Does anyone know what the laws are regarding this in Virginia?
Click to expand...

Are you asking about allowable duties of unlicensed personnel? If so, then I think I can answer that. This information is all over the place on the BVM website so its difficult to put it all together.
VABVM refers to unlicensed veterinary personnel as assistants. You can not use the term technician unless you are licensed. Althought some clinics get around this issue by using the term veterinary nurse, which the BVM doesnt condone and board of nursing is actively looking to put a stop to.
Veterinarians can direct vet assistants to perform any duty they feel that person is adaquately trained to perform with the following exceptions.
IV cathetor placement
subgingival curatage (cleaning under the gumline)
handling (includes counting for RX) and administration of controlled substances
tooth extractions
skin suturing
equine teeth leveling (must have special equine dental technician status)
Legally those are the only differences in VA; I would say most vets dont allow they're assistants to induce anesthesia or intubate but there are some.
Hopefully, I havent left anything out, those are the last BVM updates that Im aware of; there might be some pending as things change with each newly elected board. These are regulations NOT laws so they are subject to intepretation by the current board...when the board changes sometimes things are re-interpreted and changed. Student techs and vet students have different regulations for them, I posted that on a thread yesterday on the veterinary forum if anyone wants to read it.
 
PrimalMU said:
Whoa, I have a problem with this statement. Do you think that laws prevent your average Joe (i.e. those who have not had formal training) from drawing human blood are stupid?
Click to expand...

Do you know how much formal training a person needs to actually start putting IV's into people and drawing blood? Human phlebotomy course is roughly 120 hours, which is fairly reasonable.... But, if you are an EMT-B and take an EMT I course its a total of 80 hours, and in that course you learn how to start IV's. In the latter case your are talking well under 10 hours dedicated to learning to start IV's before you can legally do it on your own.
 
I also remember something about vet assistants being unable to insert microchips but I couldnt find that one in writing so I didnt include it in the previous list. Maybe they havent updated the website yet or Im remembering wrong. I know it was brought to the boards attention, I just cannot find the ruling.
 
bunnygirl said:
I know that in new york as a vet student you are allowed to work as a tech legally once you are in your second year of vet school.
Click to expand...

Actually it's 2.5 years of vet school. I'm a second year vet student from upstate NY and I looked at the NY Veterinary Board's rules for students because the clinic I was going to work at this summer told me that what I could do would be limited because I'm not a tech and it didn't seem right to me. According to the website, "...students who have completed at least two and one-half years in an approved veterinary program and completed all core didactic training may assist in diagnosis, treatment and surgery...".

Two and a half years?! Really?! I know I'll get plenty of experience next year in school, but I thought I could get a jump start this summer. Oh, well.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
sms25 said:
Actually it's 2.5 years of vet school. I'm a second year vet student from upstate NY and I looked at the NY Veterinary Board's rules for students because the clinic I was going to work at this summer told me that what I could do would be limited because I'm not a tech and it didn't seem right to me. According to the website, "...students who have completed at least two and one-half years in an approved veterinary program and completed all core didactic training may assist in diagnosis, treatment and surgery...".

Two and a half years?! Really?! I know I'll get plenty of experience next year in school, but I thought I could get a jump start this summer. Oh, well.
Click to expand...

I don't mean to trivialize the training techs get, but - correct me if i'm wrong - most tech programs are two years, so it seems a little ridiculous that you would have to wait two and a half when you're going through a more rigorous program.
 
banditalfi said:
I don't mean to trivialize the training techs get, but - correct me if i'm wrong - most tech programs are two years, so it seems a little ridiculous that you would have to wait two and a half when you're going through a more rigorous program.
Click to expand...

More rigorous, perhaps, but certainly not the same. I can almost guarantee you that tech students get far more technical experience in those 2 years than vet students do. Not that it shouldn't be that way, of course, but its no secret that techs, like nurses in human medicine, are often more versed and more experienced in the technical aspects of veterinary medicine (restraining animals, prepping for surgery, and yes, in many cases, taking blood and setting IVCs) than the veterinarians are. This is especially true in practices that utilize licensed techs, I'm sure.

So, if you think about it, it makes sense. Most schools start clinicals the third year, which means they've had a semester of practical experience before they can work as techs. The first two years are more or less book learning, and most vet students probably aren't any better prepared to serve as techs after the first two years than they were going in to vet school.
 
PrimalMU said:
More rigorous, perhaps, but certainly not the same. I can almost guarantee you that tech students get far more technical experience in those 2 years than vet students do. Not that it shouldn't be that way, of course, but its no secret that techs, like nurses in human medicine, are often more versed and more experienced in the technical aspects of veterinary medicine (restraining animals, prepping for surgery, and yes, in many cases, taking blood and setting IVCs) than the veterinarians are. This is especially true in practices that utilize licensed techs, I'm sure.

So, if you think about it, it makes sense. Most schools start clinicals the third year, which means they've had a semester of practical experience before they can work as techs. The first two years are more or less book learning, and most vet students probably aren't any better prepared to serve as techs after the first two years than they were going in to vet school.
Click to expand...

Definitely see that side of things, too. I understand why vet schools (and med schools) do that, but I do think it is a weakness to the programs. The schools I looked at really stressed hands on experience early in the program - I know Cornell has some course that starts in the first semester which is essentially learning a lot of the technical hands on stuff.
 
PrimalMU said:
More rigorous, perhaps, but certainly not the same. I can almost guarantee you that tech students get far more technical experience in those 2 years than vet students do. Not that it shouldn't be that way, of course, but its no secret that techs, like nurses in human medicine, are often more versed and more experienced in the technical aspects of veterinary medicine (restraining animals, prepping for surgery, and yes, in many cases, taking blood and setting IVCs) than the veterinarians are. This is especially true in practices that utilize licensed techs, I'm sure.

So, if you think about it, it makes sense. Most schools start clinicals the third year, which means they've had a semester of practical experience before they can work as techs. The first two years are more or less book learning, and most vet students probably aren't any better prepared to serve as techs after the first two years than they were going in to vet school.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily true. We had a class first semester that dealt entirely with how to handle and treat animals as if we were the vets.

At UTK, we are allowed to do a lot in our first year. At the spay/neuter clinics, students came back telling us about how they learned to neuter cats, learned knots and sutures, etc. This could be because being certified/licensed isn't necessary in this state.
 
Well, I can only speak from what I've heard about the general vet school curriculum. I'm glad some schools do start practical stuff earlier, though.
 
First, let me apologize, PrimalMU for the way my comment came off. I deeply respect RVT's and CVT's, and am quite glad there are restrictions for many things. I am currently studying to take the CA test to become liscenced myself. However, that being said, there are numerous non-techs I would trust with my animals over many techs I know. In my opinion it absolutely comes down to the specific individual and thus I feel many non-techs are just as capable of doing these tasks, given the proper training of course.
 
Wolf Vet said:
First, let me apologize, PrimalMU for the way my comment came off. I deeply respect RVT's and CVT's, and am quite glad there are restrictions for many things. I am currently studying to take the CA test to become liscenced myself. However, that being said, there are numerous non-techs I would trust with my animals over many techs I know. In my opinion it absolutely comes down to the specific individual and thus I feel many non-techs are just as capable of doing these tasks, given the proper training of course.
Click to expand...

No doubt there are many non-licensed techs/assistants that are able to take blood. Honestly, from what I've experienced, its a lot easier to find a vein in a dog or cat than it is a human. Its just a slippery slope with things like this. On one hand, there are many non-licensed techs/assistants that can draw blood very well. On the other hand, when it comes to setting professional restrictions in the aim of advancing a profession, you must draw the line somewhere.
 
I know many non-licensed techs w/ excellent venipuncture skills. My earlier point is that that are a lot of very green unlicensed techs that are just set loose in the clinic to perform tasks they've had no formal training on. I see it everyday. I don't see why anyone would argue with requiring these people to have some formal training. A two year program hardly seems like a lot to ask when an animal's life is at stake.
 
meadow36 said:
I know many non-licensed techs w/ excellent venipuncture skills. My earlier point is that that are a lot of very green unlicensed techs that are just set loose in the clinic to perform tasks they've had no formal training on. I see it everyday. I don't see why anyone would argue with requiring these people to have some formal training. A two year program hardly seems like a lot to ask when an animal's life is at stake.
Click to expand...

If we are going to draw parallels to human medicine though, its only a 40 hour course for human phlebotomy. Less if you have experience.

Its great to say that everyone in a clinic should be license and have gone through a 2 year program, but that will simply up the cost of everything in the veterinary field. At some point there is a limit for how much owners are capable of affording for their pets.
 
Well, I get paid the same, maybe only slightly more, then my unlicensed coworkers, so I don't see what you mean by extra cost. Pay rate is determined by experience, not by license. Believe me - I wish it made a difference~!
 
meadow36 said:
Well, I get paid the same, maybe only slightly more, then my unlicensed coworkers, so I don't see what you mean by extra cost. Pay rate is determined by experience, not by license. Believe me - I wish it made a difference~!
Click to expand...

Ouch, that sucks. Here (Oregon) CVTS seem to have a starting hourly wage at least $2 higher than that of unlicensed assistants, in some cases quite a bit more ($4-$6 higher per hour). So there's a lot of incentive for techs to get licensed for the higher pay scale... but in small clinics you also see very few licensed people and mostly unlicensed assistants, because in Oregon legally we can do just about anything for a lower cost besides suturing, extractions, microchips, induction, and intubation... there may be a few more things I'm forgetting but here the restrictions for assistants are very few.
 
meadow36 said:
Well, I get paid the same, maybe only slightly more, then my unlicensed coworkers, so I don't see what you mean by extra cost. Pay rate is determined by experience, not by license. Believe me - I wish it made a difference~!
Click to expand...


Here it definitely makes a difference. Like athenaparthenos mentioned, at least $2-$4/hr. Maybe the fact that all technicians must be licensed in your area is the reason you don't see a pay raise. 😉 Having a license in your case doesn't necessarily set you apart from the rest of the crowd.

I still disagree that all states should require a two year licensing course for all technicians. I'm glad I live in a state that doesn't.

To add another dimension...the multiple times I have worked in the zoo industry, we have opted to hire unlicensed technicians with zoo experience over licensed technicians with no zoo experience.
 
Adding another kink in the conversation, Here (California), there are multiple ways to become a RVT (I think every other states calls it CVT though). The 2 year program is pretty standard, but not the only way. Me for example, I have a BS in Biology and my hospital has 'signed me off' that I have performed a long list of expected abilities an RVT should be able to do (of course things like prophys, intubating, etc. are only done under vet supervision) and X amount of hours in the field. Next, I pay the fees and can simply take the test, If I pass I get my liscence. I'm the first to admit this could be a very dangerous thing for a lot of people, but I too would appreciate a $2-3 raise so I'm going for it.
 
I'm just curious, have no idea what the answer is. I wonder if the states where there are more licensed techs vs. not have more restrictions regarding what unlicensed techs/assistants are allowed to do, and if the states where there are fewer licensed techs allow non-licensees to do more? I also wonder if the pay differences are greater in states where there are fewer licensed techs vs. non-licensees?
 
Wolf Vet said:
Adding another kink in the conversation, Here (California), there are multiple ways to become a RVT (I think every other states calls it CVT though). The 2 year program is pretty standard, but not the only way. Me for example, I have a BS in Biology and my hospital has 'signed me off' that I have performed a long list of expected abilities an RVT should be able to do (of course things like prophys, intubating, etc. are only done under vet supervision) and X amount of hours in the field. Next, I pay the fees and can simply take the test, If I pass I get my liscence. I'm the first to admit this could be a very dangerous thing for a lot of people, but I too would appreciate a $2-3 raise so I'm going for it.
Click to expand...

I've toyed around with the idea of doing this too since I didn't get into UCD this year (have the application all filled out and the papers signed off from the vet I worked for), but I don't think getting an RVT license and working in a clinic would help out my application too much since small animal experience was probably not one of my areas of weakness. I worked at a SA clinic in FL full time for one year and part time for two more years while I was in undergrad, and as I believe it was mentioned in FL unlicensed assistants are pretty much allowed to do anything that a licensed tech could do (no suturing/extractions, I think), so it was very extensive, in depth experience.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
nyanko said:
I've toyed around with the idea of doing this too since I didn't get into UCD this year (have the application all filled out and the papers signed off from the vet I worked for), but I don't think getting an RVT license and working in a clinic would help out my application too much since small animal experience was probably not one of my areas of weakness.
Click to expand...

Glad to know I'm not the only one 😀. But I don't think it could hurt, after all you are showing them next year the improvements you've made since your last application, and this would show you're still commited to the field and to furthering your education. Good luck whichever way you decide!:luck:
 
Wolf Vet said:
Glad to know I'm not the only one 😀. But I don't think it could hurt, after all you are showing them next year the improvements you've made since your last application, and this would show you're still commited to the field and to furthering your education. Good luck whichever way you decide!:luck:
Click to expand...

My future goals in vet med are in graduate academic education/research rather than clinical work, so more small animal experience isn't super relevant, that's my main sticking point. At my interview, they asked me a lot of questions about my clinical experience and may have gotten the wrong impression about my goals or felt that I was unsure or wavering about it, so that's why I think that for me doing research instead would be a better option. 😉

You're on a few OOS waitlists though, aren't you? You've probably got a good shot at getting into one of those schools, good luck! 🙂 I only applied to UCD this year, for personal reasons.
 
Actually in Florida it is not a requirement for techs to be licensed - which is why the pay rate is the same for licensed/unlicensed. Pay rate is determined by experience, not license. In NY I would have gotten paid more for my lic.

Either way, I like to see people get proper training BEFORE they are performing tech tasks. JMHO.

To answer Sheltergirl's question, in FL (unlicensed) unlicensed techs are doing everything from venipuncture to closing surgeries, which is why I'm so sensitive about this topic. I think it should be better regulated - I've seen too much crappy patient care.

Maybe a two step licensing procedure would work where level I can do less invasive stuff with minimal training (pull blood, etc) and level II reserved for people with proper training (suturing, placing jug caths/central lines, splinting, etc)?
 
meadow36 said:
To answer Sheltergirl's question, in FL (unlicensed) unlicensed techs are doing everything from venipuncture to closing surgeries, which is why I'm so sensitive about this topic. I think it should be better regulated - I've seen too much crappy patient care.
Click to expand...

Unlicensed vet techs can close up (suture) at the end of surgery?? I'll be honest, I didn't even know this was something licensed vet techs could do. That makes me somewhat uncomfortable. I think surgery (from start to finish) is something that should be the responsibility of veterinarians. I suppose I might feel less strongly about it for farm animals rather than people's pets, though. On a farm, practicality always seems to be the main guiding force.
 
VAgirl said:
Unlicensed vet techs can close up (suture) at the end of surgery?? I'll be honest, I didn't even know this was something licensed vet techs could do. That makes me somewhat uncomfortable. I think surgery (from start to finish) is something that should be the responsibility of veterinarians. I suppose I might feel less strongly about it for farm animals rather than people's pets, though. On a farm, practicality always seems to be the main guiding force.
Click to expand...

In canada is pretty common for techs to do cat neuters...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Is it inappropriate to ask to read successful applicant's personal statements?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Minnerbelle
Minnerbelle
U
Considering Kaplan pathways route to U. Liverpool and U. Bristol vet programs
Replies
10
Views
606
battie
battie
happyyellowturtle
How to go about finances - Loans vs Savings
Replies
10
Views
2K
FelineFine30
FelineFine30
keimeko
Transfer from Ohio to Colorado
Replies
6
Views
1K
megadorkie
megadorkie
I
Trying to transition into veterinary client service/reception work — looking for advice from veterinary professionals
Replies
3
Views
450
pp9
pp9