Terminal surgeries?

Veterinary School Application Advising Ad
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
E

equus2013

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
66
Reaction score
1
Points
4,551
  1. Pre-Veterinary
Members do not see this ad.
I am curious what schools still do terminal surgeries? I applied to missouri (and was summarily rejected😛) but one of their supplemental questions asked about your thoughts on terminal surgeries. i was shocked to find that missouri still does these, i know IL does not, but i was wondering what other schools do?

especially with this Ok State fiasco and Madeline Pickens thing going on.

*note I'm not asking if schools do live animal surgeries (i hope they all do!) but whether they do terminal surgeries

thanks!
 
I know Purdue and Iowa do terminal surgeries.
 
I am sorry if I offend anyone by saying this... But I would much rather practice actually getting to do a hands on surgery (even if it is terminal) then to have no experience what so ever. It is something that no one wants to do (terminal surgery) but sometimes its the best option.
 
"3dogsand2cats: ...It is something that no one wants to do (terminal surgery) but sometimes its the best option."

I agree. I found out from a doctor that I work for that she did them at WSU, and after hearing about it I agree that it's by no means a HAPPY scenario... but I can definitely see the benefits of it. I'd rather know that I'm learning to be a good surgeon without risking an animal who has a happy life ahead of it, but at the same time being careful with the "practice" animals that I have and still valuing them as living beings.
 
twinkletoegecko said:
I'd rather know that I'm learning to be a good surgeon without risking an animal who has a happy life ahead of it, but at the same time being careful with the "practice" animals that I have and still valuing them as living beings.
Click to expand...

Wow you stated my feelings exactly!🙂
 
I take it from the mention that you are already aware that OKSU does them. There is a recent thread (page 3 maybe?) about the Pickens thing in much detail. Included in that thread is a description of OKSU's course, I think.

Bah, here's a link if you need one! I had to go look and make sure. 🙂

So, if you want to know what a course like that would entail, read capella's post in the linked thread.
 
MSU (Michigan State) still does them.

No one here enjoys doing them, but they do make sure that all of the dogs are used to the utmost (researchers are called up ahead of time and told what will be available and is there anyone who needs samples ... so for example I was working in a dermatology lab and we took skin punches off of all the dogs ... others were around collecting bone pieces etc.). And they only terminal surgeries (actually I think only 1/year is terminal?) are ones where they think that the quality of life for the dog post-op would not be of sufficient quality after being "practiced" on.

They aren't fun ... but I'd rather have the hands on experience on a research dog then on someone's pet and skrew up. Just my opinion though.
 
The University of Tennessee only has electives that require them. So you can take classes that don't require them and will not have to do one in the 4 years here. The class that does require them is an advanced surgical techniques class, so they kind of need it.
 
No Imagination said:
Why were you shocked?
Click to expand...

I just can't fathom that with the thousands upon thousands of strays in the county that students studying veterinary medicine under the supervision of vets would operate on an animal with no intention of finishing the surgery. Yes, I absolutely agree that we must practice on animals, that is without doubt. I just don't understand why we can't do these surgeries on a shelter animal to make it more adoptable. If it doesn't survive, that is very unfortunate but at least not intentional.

I do not think terminal surgeries are justifiable and would refuse to do one if put in that situation.

thank you all for the responses!
 
Most schools have alternative options these days, so at least holding that opinion shouldn't limit you on where you can apply. Just be prepared to back up your opinion thoroughly! Those who support it should be able to back up their opinions as well. 🙂
 
i agree exactly. sadly, however many med schools also do terminal animal surgeries. many actually get their animals from 'dealers' which is even worse
 
JulieDogLove said:
If medical doctors can be surgeons and practice without learning by terminal surgeries why can't vets do the same? I don't understand why purpose bred dogs and terminal surgeries are necessary. This is something I feel very bad having to do in the next few years. I'm willing to do it to accomplish the goal but I whole heartedly feel it is a waste of life an is almost disrespectful. I wish I felt differently...
Click to expand...

Some med students have the option (or requirement) to perform terminal surgeries. They operate on pigs. I don't know if they use the same pigs over and over, but I doubt it.
 
equus2013 said:
I just can't fathom that with the thousands upon thousands of strays in the county that students studying veterinary medicine under the supervision of vets would operate on an animal with no intention of finishing the surgery. Yes, I absolutely agree that we must practice on animals, that is without doubt. I just don't understand why we can't do these surgeries on a shelter animal to make it more adoptable.
Click to expand...

I think that works well for Spays and Neuters, but what about other surgeries? I do not yet know what surgeries are taught in vet schools, but a lot of people would/could argue that it would be MORE inhumane to keep a stray animal alive after performing unneeded ACL surgeries, or any other's that don't increase their quality of life. I realize I've left myself open to attack here, but I can cover my ass on this one 🙂

JulieDogLove said:
If medical doctors can be surgeons and practice without learning by terminal surgeries why can't vets do the same? I don't understand why purpose bred dogs and terminal surgeries are necessary. ...
Click to expand...

Human medical doctors do not graduate with the ability to go out and perform these surgeries. They (MD's) are required to do 4-8 years residency/fellowships/internships before they can do these surgeries.

Vets however have to know how to do at least the basics of these surgeries. Sure, may of us will go onto do residencies, or work under a mentor, but for the ones that don't, the more we get out of our vet school, the better, IMO
 
No Imagination said:
Human medical doctors do not graduate with the ability to go out and perform these surgeries. They (MD's) are required to do 4-8 years residency/fellowships/internships before they can do these surgeries.

Vets however have to know how to do at least the basics of these surgeries. Sure, may of us will go onto do residencies, or work under a mentor, but for the ones that don't, the more we get out of our vet school, the better, IMO
Click to expand...

I have to admit I do take some issue with that. Is it fair to animals that we perform terminal surgeries so that we can practice sooner? Maybe we should do residencies so that these animals do not have to suffer? I can't justify terminal surgeries in the interest of time.

The surgeries we will be learning are pretty basic I think (spays, neuters, removal of small tumors, cherry eye surgeries etc.). More complicated surgeries would be preformed by specialists who do a residency anyway right??

Looking forward to your thoughts....
 
JulieDogLove said:
I have to admit I do take some issue with that. Is it fair to animals that we perform terminal surgeries so that we can practice sooner? Maybe we should do residencies so that these animals do not have to suffer? I can't justify terminal surgeries in the interest of time.

The surgeries we will be learning are pretty basic I think (spays, neuters, removal of small tumors, cherry eye surgeries etc.). More complicated surgeries would be preformed by specialists who do a residency anyway right??

Looking forward to your thoughts....
Click to expand...

For the first one, human doctors earn far more.... and if we had to do the equivalent time committment, many pet owners could not afford our services. That is just an economic reality. Just because prices go up does not mean people who own pets will be willing to pay them OR that those who can't will stop owning pets.

Secondly, in many regions of the country the nearest specialist is more than a few hours away, and the cost for clients is beyond prohibitive. At minimum, if you are in an area where the nearest emergency clinic is a good distance, you need to be able to stabilize, which can involve some surgery. The vet my mother worked at while I was growing up was 4 HOURS from the nearest emergency clinic, and he conducts many surgeries that in my current city are referred to specialists.

If I enter practice instead of research, I would prefer to be a mixed animal vet who lives in a rural area...rural enough that I will need to be able to perform a variety of surgeries. The same areas under those constraints often aren't going to pay for the long term cost of extensive residencies.

I feel like this is one of those judgements that many people make without considering the practicalities of people who live in various situations. I could not, as a vet, say to a patient 'good luck with your HBC or coyote attacked pet while you drive it to the emergency clinic hours away from here because I have not handled this types of surgery and the lower income I make working in a rural area didn't justify a surgical residency.'

I do think there should be an option to personally house pets that survive surgery. So the individual performing can personally take responsibility for the quality of the life of that animal afterwards. However, I do not think that should be something expected of the schools.
 
i agree with alot of what you said sumstrom, however i think it IS the responsibility of the school to foster an attitude of respect for our patients, rather than making us use them and dispose of them
 
If there are schools that do not perform these surgeries and do not use purpose bred live dogs do you think these vets are less qualified that those who come from schools who do? I'm not 100% sure if these are schools that don't use these tactics.
 
JulieDogLove said:
I have to admit I do take some issue with that. Is it fair to animals that we perform terminal surgeries so that we can practice sooner? Maybe we should do residencies so that these animals do not have to suffer? I can't justify terminal surgeries in the interest of time.

The surgeries we will be learning are pretty basic I think (spays, neuters, removal of small tumors, cherry eye surgeries etc.). More complicated surgeries would be preformed by specialists who do a residency anyway right??

Looking forward to your thoughts....
Click to expand...

Hold your horses on that one!!

Is it fair? Animals are property, we don't need to worry about whats "fair". Whats humane, yes, but whats fair, no. If an animal is destined to be destroyed anyways I see nothing inhumane about it being used for a terminal surgery. The end result is the same and its life will have a greater benefit to others that way.

There is very little in veterinary medicine that is fair to the animals.
 
Let's put this all into perspective. IMHO(I just found out what this acronym meant after asking one of my students!:laugh:) I would rather humanely put down an animal after a very invasive surgical procedure where the animal is not in pain than have the animal gassed down in a gas chamber or stuck in the heart by a poorly trained animal control officer. I will be uncomfortable having to put down the animal, but I feel that it beats the alternative. If we lived in a Utopian society, all animals would be adoptable and be adopted if they were adoptable. But we don't, so we have to work with what we have.

As far as purpose bred animals are concerned. I can see where they are necessary for research scenarios, you have to control your variables. I do not agree with using purpose bred animals for terminal surgeries, unless they have served their originally intended research purpose. These are just my opinions, for what they are worth.😉
 
For those interested, I recently wrote a lengthy pair of blog posts explaining why vet students perform terminal surgeries and why I personally chose to opt out of my school's elective terminal surgery lab...

FWIW, the first surgery performed by vet students at the U of MN is a survival spay/neuter lab using shelter animals- all of our patients did just fine! The argument that you don't want the first live animal you cut to be someone's pet is understandable, but that doesn't mean that the first live animal you cut has to be euthanized afterwards.
 
equus2013 said:
i agree with alot of what you said sumstrom, however i think it IS the responsibility of the school to foster an attitude of respect for our patients, rather than making us use them and dispose of them
Click to expand...

So, your point is that humane euthanasia is disrespectful of an animal that, at least at some places, would be killed either way, and in many places in ways that are worse than not waking up from anesthesia? Does that make humane euthanasia inappropriate for the veterinary field in general? Would we have this argument if it was an animal being slaughtered for a new butcher to learn on? Or are dogs/cats the exception to the rule? I may have odd views because I grew up with working dogs on a working farm in an area where dogs were shot for running livestock or wildlife.

Why shouldn't students who have issues with terminal surgeries embrace the responsibility of rehoming the animal? I know the costs and risks of organizations rehoming animals, and that it can be incredibly prohibitive, especially in terms of liability. It would be difficult for a vet school to argue that they didn't have the ability/competency to adequatly evaluate/place an animal if something goes wrong with that animal/placement and a lawsuit follows. I hate to suggest that there are individuals in the world who are like that, but I have had to provide statements for enough fellow trainers to KNOW it happens.
 
StealthDog said:
For those interested, I recently wrote a lengthy pair of blog posts explaining why vet students perform terminal surgeries and why I personally chose to opt out of my school's elective terminal surgery lab...

FWIW, the first surgery performed by vet students at the U of MN is a survival spay/neuter lab using shelter animals- all of our patients did just fine! The argument that you don't want the first live animal you cut to be someone's pet is understandable, but that doesn't mean that the first live animal you cut has to be euthanized afterwards.
Click to expand...

Nicely written and well balanced. I find myself in a similar state of mind already; I do not know if I would be willing to do a terminal surgery, but I would not begrudge others, particularly in programs using animals slated for euthanasia. I also live in an area where the most common method of shelter euthanasia are poorly regulated, maintained, and monitored gas chambers. I would rather a dog/cat/animal be used for a learning experience for a vet where the animal's experience of death in anesthesia rather than shoved into a dirty gas chamber loaded with other animals, most of whom are in a panic.
 
listen. what im saying is by practicing spay/neuters on potentially adoptable animals is a benefit to the students, the animals and the public at large. by using animals "that are going to die/be eu'd anyway' is giving an outlet for disposing of animals. ive been volunteering in the lab at a shelter for 4 years and yes, a lot of old/sick animals get put down, but many are also adopted out to kind souls who want to give an old deserving animal a good home.

if we designate these animals to be killed, where is the benefit? we can just as easily learn surgery on younger animals, and other more invasive technique can be easily learned on donated cadavers.

i understand you are coming from a different background but i was raised to value every life and i will never support terminal surgeries
 
sumstorm said:
I also live in an area where the most common method of shelter euthanasia are poorly regulated, maintained, and monitored gas chambers. I would rather a dog/cat/animal be used for a learning experience for a vet where the animal's experience of death in anesthesia rather than shoved into a dirty gas chamber loaded with other animals, most of whom are in a panic.
Click to expand...

one more quick thing!

gas chambers are barbaric, i think most would agree. the solution to that problem is to advocate different euthanisia methods rather than pushing the problem under the carpet by using them in terminal surgeries
 
equus2013 said:
and other more invasive technique can be easily learned on donated cadavers.
Click to expand...

Cadavers don't bleed.



Anyone ever wonder how an animal rights argument gets started? 🙄
 
equus2013 said:
listen. what im saying is by practicing spay/neuters on potentially adoptable animals is a benefit to the students, the animals and the public at large. by using animals "that are going to die/be eu'd anyway' is giving an outlet for disposing of animals. ive been volunteering in the lab at a shelter for 4 years and yes, a lot of old/sick animals get put down, but many are also adopted out to kind souls who want to give an old deserving animal a good home.

if we designate these animals to be killed, where is the benefit? we can just as easily learn surgery on younger animals, and other more invasive technique can be easily learned on donated cadavers.

i understand you are coming from a different background but i was raised to value every life and i will never support terminal surgeries
Click to expand...

While I think that using donated cadavers and spay/neuters on adoptable animals are really good things that I hope vet schools will all consider and hopefully move towards, I also think that as a vet, if not as a vet student, there are always going to be situations where you can't just say, "I was raised to value every life, end of story." The fact is that there are too many animals. What about someone whose animal has a broken leg (or whatever) and can only afford to euthanize? What about an animal that has bitten a child? What about a shelter where like it or not, there are just too many animals? I think looking at creative solutions to these problems is great. I also think that for some of them the only solution is euthanasia. And if the option is between euthanasia or between letting a vet student learn a valuable skill while the animal does not experience anything under anesthesia, and then euthanasia, I think that choosing the terminal surgery is the better option.

And the thing with alternative euthanasia methods, it's not that shelters are unaware of the possibilities for other methods, it's that there just isn't enough money. Not that all shelters use gas chambers by any means, but for some with less funding, what else can they do?
 
thats very true, there are countless instances where you can't always do what you ethically believe is the best. however, this is one where you do have a choice.

sorry my last few posts have been getting antagonistic...im avoiding studying for the three exams i have coming up
 
equus2013 said:
listen. what im saying is by practicing spay/neuters on potentially adoptable animals is a benefit to the students, the animals and the public at large.
Click to expand...

I don't think you'd have anyone disagreeing with you if it were as easy as saying 'oh, we'll just give free vet care to the shelter animals'. It's not that easy for multiple reasons - just to name a few: public perception (strangely enough, people think this is unfair to shelter animals that will be adopted out because a vet student isn't trained (I've heard it, seriously)), availability of conditions (it's all well and good to perform spay/neuters on animals froms helters - there's never a shortage. But someone going into a more specialized area may NOT have the opportunity to perform a more invasive procedure on an animal that needs it. And they can't not be trained in it.),

by using animals "that are going to die/be eu'd anyway' is giving an outlet for disposing of animals. ive been volunteering in the lab at a shelter for 4 years and yes, a lot of old/sick animals get put down, but many are also adopted out to kind souls who want to give an old deserving animal a good home.
if we designate these animals to be killed, where is the benefit?
Click to expand...

I think this demonstrates a gap in culture/attitude towards pets. Not saying either one is better/worse - but the fact of the matter is that in different areas of the country, attitudes towards pets and strays are extremely different from others. I'm glad that your rescue experience dealt with only the older/sicker animals getting euthanized - but in many areas, that's just not an option. Animals of ALL ages - even healthy adoptable ones - are euthanized every day because there just isn't enough *room* for them.



and other more invasive technique can be easily learned on donated cadavers.
Click to expand...

No. Surgery is completely different than dissection.

i understand you are coming from a different background but i was raised to value every life and i will never support terminal surgeries
Click to expand...

Did you just accuse everyone who's OK with terminal surgeries of not valuing life? 😕
 
equus2013 said:
thats very true, there are countless instances where you can't always do what you ethically believe is the best. however, this is one where you do have a choice.
Click to expand...

We had this exactly discussion in a thread like a month ago.

And myself, among many others here, view terminal surgeries as an acceptable practice. Our choice.
 
JulieDogLove said:
The surgeries we will be learning are pretty basic I think (spays, neuters, removal of small tumors, cherry eye surgeries etc.). More complicated surgeries would be preformed by specialists who do a residency anyway right??

Looking forward to your thoughts....
Click to expand...

No, if you're lucky you will graduate having performed a spay or a neuter. Period. No more. So, do you feel it is better to learn on an animal that is to be euthanized anyway (ie deemed unadoptable by a shelter) so that you can go on to help hundreds of owned animals in the future or cut your teeth on an animal that is going home to loving owners? I also hope you realize that by forcing the issue on terminal surgeries, it often means the animal is euth'd then surgery performed. A much less valuable teaching tool. You really need to understand that all of our cadaver dogs (we don't do terminal surgeries anymore) are dogs that the shelter couldn't take and were headed out anyway. Now each dog's life has more meaning because he/she was instrumental in educating several future vets who will each in turn go on to save hundreds of lives.
 
equus2013 said:
one more quick thing!

gas chambers are barbaric, i think most would agree. the solution to that problem is to advocate different euthanisia methods rather than pushing the problem under the carpet by using them in terminal surgeries

i understand you are coming from a different background but i was raised to value every life and i will never support terminal surgeries
Click to expand...

👍 Cool! I invite you to visit for the summer and volunteer at the extremly high kill shelter just down the road that uses an ancient gas chamber that is cleaned 1-2x/mo while animals are gassed 2-4x weekly. I will happily provide room/board for the summer. I would love to have another person advocating for changes, since all of us locals pushing for it have been completly unsuccessful for at least the last 2 years. I am sure you will be far more effective, and then other vet students who find terminal surgeries acceptable won't be able to 'push the problem under the carpet' when saying that they see the humane euthanasia of animals after a surgery with a painful recovery as acceptable, especially in light of what may be the fate of the animals otherwise.

I do NOT appreciate the suggestion that I do not value life. I disagree that every life is equally valuable; I do a heck of a lot more to place a mellow, easy going rescue pet than a viscious one with a history of attacking people (I believe the vast majority of rescues do as well.) I would argue that many farmers struggling to make ends meet while providing a humane environment for livestock value those creature's lives far more than the average person. Hunters were protecting wildlife and wild areas long before PETA and other animal activism groups were involved. The use of animals as resource does not = lack of value. Show me a person with a prize winning rodeo bull that brings in $ with every deposit of semen, and I will show you someone who sees a lot of value in that animals life (and health.)

You can chose to not support whatever you want. I could say that if you value life, you wouldn't ever own an animal because that is cruel captivity of an animal. I won't, because I don't believe it, just like I don't believe that using animals as resources is wrong, and I know VERY few people, especially in this country, that don't use animals as resources at least indirectly. So if it is ok to benefit from animals used as resources, why is it wrong to use them directly as resources? 😕

of course, as always JMHO.
 
equus2013 said:
gas chambers are barbaric, i think most would agree. the solution to that problem is to advocate different euthanisia methods rather than pushing the problem under the carpet by using them in terminal surgeries
Click to expand...

How exactly would you suggest euthanizing 100 mice following an experiment?

equus2013 said:
if we designate these animals to be killed, where is the benefit? we can just as easily learn surgery on younger animals, and other more invasive technique can be easily learned on donated cadavers.
Click to expand...

Cadavers =/= live animal surgery - not even close IMO

Let me put it to you this way?

Would you want a vet who has NEVER performed an actual spay/neuter to perform their first one on your pet?

Follow up - What about their first ever orthopedic surgery?

When vets graduate, I believe they should be as capable as possible of practicing veterinary medicine - if that means terminal surgeries, so be it.

I am personally against invasive live/teaching surgeries that are done on strays/purpose bread animals unless they have a home already lined up (as opposed to being put back in a shelter or later destroyed).
 
Equus, you seem to speak only of spays and neuters. And most of them are already done on humane society animals. As a sidenote, No Imagination...my first spay was on a client owned animal, but it was kind of a low cost s/n deal, they signed a form acknowledging that a student would be doing it and it was supervised by surgeons...talk about pressure! But it went fine [/B]

what about exploratories, cystotomies, splenectomies, lobectomies, basic ortho work.....i don't see how it is humane to practice these on adoptable animals. we need to know many surgeries, not just s/n.

If the only surgery a vet needed to know was s/n, there would be little excuse to use anything but humane society animals and the like. But what humane society is gonna say "Sure! practice cutting into this dog's bladder!" or "Sure, practice the approach of a tibial tuberosity advancement on this dog!" No way....and you also don't want the first "non spay neuter" surgery you do to be on a client dog when you are fresh out of 4th year.

Using animals that are going to euthanized anyway is a much better way (and on that note, this is NOT an ENDORSEMENT of any sort of a use and dispose policy...vet students are EXTREMELY aware of being respectful of the animal. They are usually even spoiled with attention and treats before being gently anesthetized and humanely euthanized. They feel no or very little pain and are treated with MUCH MORE respect than being chucked at a shelter)

we do not perform terminals at VMRCVM but I would not have a problem if we did assuming that all of the above issues were met.

I do agree, however, that another important part of surgery is patient reviving and aftercare, which is missed in terminal surgeries. An important reason why, if a school choses to have terminals, they need to also have normal ones.
 
more invasive technique can be easily learned on donated cadavers

This is going to come off as mean but....I cannot phrase it any other way....when you have actually DONE live animal surgeries firsthand as primary surgeon, and will be truly able to compare them to cadavers....come back and try to say this again. Seriously. The idea is ridiculous. Once you actually have your hands inside a live animal, searching for that bleeding vein in all the slipperyness and heat..you'll realize that statement is ludicrous.
 
thanks for all the great posts, i apologize for some of my posts, they were incorrect/uncalled for👎 my bad
 
Uncalled for? No, I don't think so at all. Some incorrect? In my opnion/experience, yes. However, it is always good to hear different opinions, debate is healthy, even if we do not agree.

If we all thought the same way, it'd be a pretty boring world. with no jello wrestling or feats of strength. Pssh! :laugh:
 
Last edited:
thats true...what would the world be without jello wrestling? 🙂
 
I do understand the need for terminal surgeries in many cases, but I do find it honorable and admirable that some schools have taken a slightly different approach. For instance, Tufts minimizes terminal surgeries in its curriculum, so that students are not required to perform any unless they take certain elective courses. Many medical schools are also ending terminal surgeries as part of training.

I think another very important aspect of animal usage in vet school is what source the animals are coming from. Tufts, as well as several other schools, have switched from getting purpose-bred animals from a dealer to using shelter animals and other donated animals that were going to be euthanized anyway. I think this is a much better approach than using purpose-bred animals because it does a little to alleviate the overpopulation problem, and these animals (that would be euthanized anyway) are being used for the betterment of animal and human health. During my tour at U of MN, my tourguide told me that they use purpose-bred animals in their curriculum because they are unable to obtain animals from other sources due to public (mis)perception. Community members are unhappy with the idea that these animals are going to be used for terminal surgeries and procedures. However, this is a case where public education may be able to come into play and change the way the system works...

I think that the whole philosophy becomes very complicated when you're dealing with cats and dogs as opposed to mice. But if you really think about it, all of these species are being used for one purpose: to contribute to medicine and the fields of animal and human health.
 
Last edited:
I think another very important aspect of animal usage in vet school is what source the animals are coming from. Tufts, as well as several other schools, have switched from getting purpose-bred animals from a dealer to using shelter animals and other donated animals that were going to be euthanized anyway.


During my tour at U of MN, my tourguide told me that they use purpose-bred animals in their curriculum because they are unable to obtain animals from other sources due to public (mis)perception. Community members are unhappy with the idea that these animals are going to be used for terminal surgeries and procedures.

Some schools cannot do that anymore due to local wording in legislation, in addition to public perception. we do not use shelter animals anymore because many years ago there was questioning about a dealer, and animal rights crazies managed to slip literature into a bill that was passed that effectively put a nix on our school acquiring animals from shelters, either directly or via brokers. Not our fault, a bad dealer's fault. But because of AR overraction, we now have to resort to purpose bred.

And honestly, I don't know how much public education on this subject would help. JQP is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and this is such an emotional issue that I don't think hearing "science" would help. Maybe it would help if heard from the mouths of public figures and not vet students (partners in crime with the "animal abusers" as they see it)....but few public figures are willing to help either.

Sometimes I want to bash close minded "community members' over the head. But then I remember that someone needs to serve me my burgers.
 
Last edited:
Haha this post is pointless now...
 
Last edited:
One other way that the U of MN makes using purpose-bred animals a little more useful is that they are used for organ donation... Since the animals have a very well-documented history, we can be sure that their organs are safe to use for transplants, such as corneal transplantation or bone grafts. I would also rather we be allowed to use shelter animals too, but if we have to use purpose-bred, at least we use them to the fullest.
 
I have enjoyed reading everyones posts. I've learned quite a few key facts. Thanks! (I still wish I could save every animal and give it a good home)
 
JulieDogLove said:
I have enjoyed reading everyones posts. I've learned quite a few key facts. Thanks! (I still wish I could save every animal and give it a good home)
Click to expand...

As do we all!

But here in the real world, I fall in favor of the greater good. Not necessarily just the individual/human (primate) good. I too will have nightmares for the rest of my life of those who have sacrificed their lives so others may benefit.

Kai
 
sumstorm said:
I disagree that every life is equally valuable; I do a heck of a lot more to place a mellow, easy going rescue pet than a viscious one with a history of attacking people (I believe the vast majority of rescues do as well.) I would argue that many farmers struggling to make ends meet while providing a humane environment for livestock value those creature's lives far more than the average person. Hunters were protecting wildlife and wild areas long before PETA and other animal activism groups were involved. The use of animals as resource does not = lack of value. Show me a person with a prize winning rodeo bull that brings in $ with every deposit of semen, and I will show you someone who sees a lot of value in that animals life (and health.)

You can chose to not support whatever you want. I could say that if you value life, you wouldn't ever own an animal because that is cruel captivity of an animal. I won't, because I don't believe it, just like I don't believe that using animals as resources is wrong, and I know VERY few people, especially in this country, that don't use animals as resources at least indirectly. So if it is ok to benefit from animals used as resources, why is it wrong to use them directly as resources? 😕

of course, as always JMHO.
Click to expand...

AMEN
Very well said sumstorm
 
Thought I’d chime in …
I don’t believe that terminal surgeries in veterinary school are necessary. A lot of people here seem to support it but would you be open to other viable options?


  • As for spays/neuters start early, volunteer w/ low cost s/n clinic for at least one weekend a month until you graduate….believe me by 4th year, you’ll be a pro.
  • Network Network Network the minute you start vet school so by summer/winter/spring breaks of 1st, 2nd and 3rd year you’ll have a place to intern and assist in minor and major surgical procedures.
  • 4th year clinical rotations in surgery – large animal and/or small. By then you should already know which hospitals in your area or in your hometown have higher case loads and will offer you even more training/mentoring.
  • Graduate and do another internship….schya right who can afford that these days! So….find a job at a veterinary hospital with high case loads and a fantastic owner/mentor who will show you the ropes and actually give you “surgery time.” (yea not all hospitals will let their vets perform surgeries other than s/n, can you believe that!)
  • Attend conferences for CE credits in surgery and other procedures.

Western University doesn’t have an emergency/high caseload teaching hospital on campus nor do they require/offer terminal surgery rotations. Are the students who graduate destined to be sub par surgeons? No, in fact students who graduate have more hands on experience than most.

http://www.interniche.org/consh/Lrasmussen.html

Thank you StealthDog for the post/article it was very well written
http://winnielovesus.blogspot.com/2009/02/terminal-surgery.html

StealthDog writes - “Frankly, the vast vast majority of surgical procedures will be performed for the first time on a client-owned animal anyway- we have the chance to practice just a few during vet school, while all the rest will be learned after graduation.”

I couldn’t agree w/ you more 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

battie
Terminal Surgeries in Veterinary Schools
Replies
26
Views
5K
Nannarnaluk
N
V
Cadavers, terminal surgeries, etc.
Replies
19
Views
3K
DVMDream
DVMDream
M
Opinions on terminal surgeries
Replies
49
Views
4K
DVMDream
DVMDream
S
Texas A&M and terminal surgeries
Replies
0
Views
949
Sandie
S
V
Terminal surgiries
2
Replies
74
Views
6K
Vet1234
V
Top Bottom