Future vets please don't do this

[alliecat44]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I would just like to say...YAY sumstorm!! And VeganSoprano!! Yay! 👍 👍 👍

By the way, did you catch in the video that these people tuck the dog in every night--and the dog whines if it doesn't have a blanket on at night?

I think I can picture exactly what happened. Sigh. Nice bratty spoiled dog sitting in momma's lap who just didn't want to go with the tech so bit her lips off when she leaned over. But then, I wasn't there so I can't say...but this is my mental image. ARGH.

btw, I have no idea what the legal basis might be for the lawsuit--not for us to decide--but IMHO this was likely a result of coddling and reinforcement over years. Wonder if they'll get a DACVB to testify in court.

 

[DVMDream]

By the way, did you catch in the video that these people tuck the dog in every night--and the dog whines if it doesn't have a blanket on at night?

I think I can picture exactly what happened. Sigh. Nice bratty spoiled dog sitting in momma's lap who just didn't want to go with the tech so bit her lips off when she leaned over. But then, I wasn't there so I can't say...but this is my mental image. ARGH.

Yeah...gotta love those people who tuck their dogs into bed at night. 🙄

I have the exact same mental picture that you have. Little bratty dog in the lab. 😡

 

[Azarael]

Animal restraint is obviously one of our most important skills - I don't think any of us disagree about that! 😉 But it just ISN'T always possible to protect yourself. One of our techs got a black eye from a cat who LAUNCHED ACROSS THE ROOM at her. Cat sitting on the floor, cat launching through air. Predictable? I think not. No one is arguing that you should expect never to be injured - we all KNOW the risks, accidents happen, blah blah blah.

I think the big lesson is that veterinary professionals need to be trained in animal behavior in order to be able to read animals correctly and protect themselves better. But there are situations with poorly socialized and untrained animals where it is absolutely impossible to safely handle an animal without sedation (and preferably other restraint, such as stocks, a twitch, a muzzle, whatever). If the owner has completely failed to socialize their animal, that's their liability. Again, what if a dog attacks someone while they're out on a walk because the person enters their space? Or if someone walks past the yard and the dog is outside? We had to euthanize a dog last year who bit a mailman while they were on a walk. You had better believe the owners were liable for that. The dog's behavior escalated and there is absolutely no sense in taking the risk of the dog seriously maiming or killing someone when there are thousands and thousands of perfectly sweet, well-socialized animals in need of homes being euthanized every day.
My personal opinion is that the owners of this doxie should be responsible for the cost of the tech's medical bills - although I'm not sure of the logistics of worker's comp coverage on this. Wouldn't you feel terrible if your dog ripped someone's face off? Wouldn't you be worried that the next time, it would be a child? A family member? Or you, for that matter?

I understand your viewpoint but disagree with your opinion. I guess it comes down to the issue of responsibility.

In the examples you mentioned (dog biting post officer, dog attacking a passer-by on the street), the dog was clearly acting inappropriately due to irresponsibility on behalf of the owner (in both situations, the owner should not have let the dog loose.) I agree that the owner should be held liable for their pet's actions in those cases.

However, I believe this case is different. I do not believe this owner acted irresponsibly. She brought in her doxen (my abbreviation for dachshund!), who had a history of being tame, to an animal hospital to be cared for by a team of professionals who are trained to handle animals safely. An accident happened; the dog got spooked and the dog bit the technician. I don't think this is the owner's fault. If anything, the technician is responsible because she knew how to safely handle animals and did not do so. Although it's understandable that accidents happen, things like this can't be predicted, and so the tech isn't really at fault either.

Anyone who associates with live animals should understand the risks there are in working with animals. By risks, I mean the unexpected, seemingly random (i.e. your story about the flying cat), behavior an animal may express at anytime. Both the owner and the tech know these risks exist. I think we know them as well. My argument is that no person can be held liable for that behavior unless one's irresponsible activity led to it (because everyone who works with animals knows and understands that this can happen).

In conclusion, while I think it would be a courteous thing for the owner to do, and if it were me I would do my best to help, I don't believe the owner should have to pay for the restructuring of the technicians face because the owner was not acting irresponsibly by bringing her pet in to the animal hospital.

 

[CanadianGolden]

She knows its wrong, but i am not there most of the time she bites, so i don't know how my mom punishes her. We have been punishing her for biting for over a year, yet she still does it. But hopefully when i move out, i will be able to punish her better and it will stop 🙂

That's actually exactly what I am saying--she is most likely fear biting and punishment is contraindicated because it will only increase her anxiety. Again, positive reinforcement and counterconditioning are what will fix this problem. You don't need nail clippers. Just condition her to allow you to touch and squeeze her paws just like when you are trimming. You can even use a pair of regular scissors or human nail clippers to simulate nail clipping. Later, you can buy a pair of clippers to move forward with the desensitization process.

 

[Highlsnds3]

Fearful dogs are as likely, and possibly more likely to bite than aggressive dogs and their owners are more likely to justify, coddle, reinforce (by giving them attention for bad behavior), and have insufficient control of their dogs. This sounds exactly like what you are describing.

You are SO right!!! People just don't seem to be able to grasp the concept that dogs are NOT humans and do not think like them! If a dog growls at someone and the owner coos in it's ear "It's OK baby" all they are doing in the dogs mind is basically telling the dog that what they are doing is OK. The dog is being positivly reinforced for showing aggression👎

 

[DVMDream]

I understand your viewpoint but disagree with your opinion. I guess it comes down to the issue of responsibility.

In the examples you mentioned (dog biting post officer, dog attacking a passer-by on the street), the dog was clearly acting inappropriately due to irresponsibility on behalf of the owner (in both situations, the owner should not have let the dog loose.) I agree that the owner should be held liable for their pet's actions in those cases.

However, I believe this case is different. I do not believe this owner acted irresponsibly. She brought in her doxen (my abbreviation for dachshund!), who had a history of being tame, to an animal hospital to be cared for by a team of professionals who are trained to handle animals safely. An accident happened; the dog got spooked and the dog bit the technician. I don't think this is the owner's fault. If anything, the technician is responsible because she knew how to safely handle animals and did not do so. Although it's understandable that accidents happen, things like this can't be predicted, and so the tech isn't really at fault either.

Anyone who associates with live animals should understand the risks there are in working with animals. By risks, I mean the unexpected, seemingly random (i.e. your story about the flying cat), behavior an animal may express at anytime. Both the owner and the tech know these risks exist. I think we know them as well. My argument is that no person can be held liable for that behavior unless one's irresponsible activity led to it (because everyone who works with animals knows and understands that this can happen).

In conclusion, while I think it would be a courteous thing for the owner to do, and if it were me I would do my best to help, I don't believe the owner should have to pay for the restructuring of the technicians face because the owner was not acting irresponsibly by bringing her pet in to the animal hospital.

I am just curious as to if you even read the story. From your posts it almost seems as though you have not because if you had then you would know the tech did NOT have a hold of the dog it was in the owner's lap and it bit her when she bent over and reached to pick the dog up. The owner did NOT see the bite which means the owner was probably NOT being responsible and controlling her dog. The dog was also in the lobby of the clinic so this SAME bite could have happened if a little kid walked up and tried to touch this dog or if another client had gone up and attempted to pet the dog. The technician was not being irresponsible by holding the dog improperly. This could have happened to ANYONE that got near this dog on that day. So just because it happened to a technician makes it ok that the dog bit?

A similar scenario would be if someone walked into the vet clinic with their dog and a technician came up to the front of the clinic to greet the client and when the tech got close to the dog it lunged and bit her in the leg. The tech is not at fault in that case not even the "should know how to handle animals safely comes into play" because there was NO handling going on. Although in this case as long as the owner had no CLUE her dog would do that it really would not be the owner's fault either. In this story it sounds like the owner coddles her little dog and when she was not paying any attention to the tech (or controlling her dog) her dog got protective and acted out. Again, what if this had not been an employee of the animal hospital that got bit; does that automatically make it not ok for the dog bite or ok for that person to sue? What makes it ok for a dog to jump up from its owner's lap and tear off two inches of flesh from the face of a tech, but not ok to do that to someone who does not work in the veterinary profession?

 

[Minnerbelle]

My argument is that no person can be held liable for that behavior unless one's irresponsible activity led to it (because everyone who works with animals knows and understands that this can happen).

isn't it possible that NOT training/conditioning a puppy to NOT be protective/aggressive/fearful was the irresponsible activity that led to the bite?

 

[NStarz]

isn't it possible that NOT training/conditioning a puppy to NOT be protective/aggressive/fearful was the irresponsible activity that led to the bite?

If anything, this is the more likely situation. If puppies don't learn bite inhibition at a young age, they are MUCH more likely to bite later on in life. Negligence is not cool. And owners can't play ignorant, either. If you're getting/buying a puppy, you should know about training and animal behavior to some extent (though this is usually not the case because anyone can obtain a living breathing animal that is dependent on them and not hold any responsibility for its well being through preventative training). Any good animal shelter (with available resources) will educate an adopter before adopting an animal out as well, which usually includes a stipulation of further training if there is a known history with that animal.

 

[PrimalMU]

Maybe I missed it, but if the only issue is who is going to pay for the plastic surgery to fix the techs face... what about the hospital's insurance policy? If the insurance company wouldn't pay for it I'd be suing them, not the owners of a dog who before that visit was always a good patient.

I also don't agree that an animal with an otherwise nice history deserves to be euthanized. Only animals with a history of aggression (say, 2-3 serious bites) should be considered for mandatory euthanasia.

 

[PrimalMU]

isn't it possible that NOT training/conditioning a puppy to NOT be protective/aggressive/fearful was the irresponsible activity that led to the bite?

Can anyone say "deliberate negligence?"

 

[Tco87]

I don't believe that "Oh, well, you work with animals so you HAVE to know you'll get bit/kicked/mauled" is an acceptable answer. ESPECIALLY not by people in this profession. That's exactly the sort of attitude that allows it to continue to happen - we say it, clients hear it, and then they don't think Fluffy needs to be restrained or taught any manners. I can think of many opportunities I've had to get bitten, or scratched or kicked and thankfully have made it through without any serious injuries which didn't need to happen. I also believe we need to support our fellow doctors and techs when they get involved in cases such as this instead of chastise them for getting bitten. Even in the best of circumstances with all precautions taken, crap happens.

My guess is, depending on the extent of the damage, the tech wished to get compensation for her medical expenses. If my dog bit the lips off of someone I'd be the first one offering to pay for the treatment. My dog, my responsibility, my liability. It is not just intrinsically "a hazard of the job", and if owners want to believe that then we need to start demanding "hazard pay" for our time and services.

I won't say much more than this, but I hope you all learn to love your techs because they will be the ones to save your butt when you're in clinics. As for the small dog bashing - a dog is only as good as it's owner. My two small dogs are the easiest pups to work with, but any dog that's spoiled (little or big) runs the risk of being a pain in the butt and a potentially mean dog! I agree that the balance APPEARS to lean towards small dogs, but I can tell you about some NASTY labs and goldens too.

I agree with everything you said!

The only thing I want to add is this: Why are some people saying that the tech should have used proper restraints/handling? There's nothing in that article to suggest that the technician did anything improper. At the clinic I work at, we try to avoid over restraining because that can make an animal even more afraid and more likely to bite or scratch. If she was just getting the dog to bring him back for a procedure, what handling or restraining should she have been doing?
From what I can tell from reading the article, the tech took the dog from the owners arms and the dog bit her face. There's nothing to indicate that she should have muzzled the dog before trying to pick him up and there's nothing to indicate that she was provoking an aggressive response from him. Just my two cents.

 

[DVMDream]

I also don't agree that an animal with an otherwise nice history deserves to be euthanized. Only animals with a history of aggression (say, 2-3 serious bites) should be considered for mandatory euthanasia.

I also agree. I also think the whole possibly going to be euthanized thing got blown out of proportion from the media. It seems to me that after the bite was reported the county/city of Lafayette charged the owners with a vicious dog charge (basically a fine) and the owners decided that they wanted to take it to court to attempt to get the charges dropped. The Lafayette council member also reported that only 1 dog that had been deemed "vicious" has been euthanized within the last 2 years. The report from the vet clinic says the tech decided to go ahead with pursuing charges because she wanted there to be public record of the bite in case of any future incidents, which seems perfectly logical to me. More than likely this dog will not be euthanized (which it should not be) it will just become a part of the public record that this dog has had a previous history of biting and the owners may be charged a small fine or required to keep the dog in the house or on a leash at all times. So, I honestly think the euthanisia thing has been blown out of proportion and is very highly unlikely.

 

[BarnyardPunch]

I also agree. I also think the whole possibly going to be euthanized thing got blown out of proportion from the media. It seems to me that after the bite was reported the county/city of Lafayette charged the owners with a vicious dog charge (basically a fine) and the owners decided that they wanted to take it to court to attempt to get the charges dropped.

Yeah, no one wants the dog dead, that much is clear. It seems more like the owners don't want their precious baby to be labeled as aggressive. Sounds like he'll have to stay on leash and in a fenced yard. OH NOES! They'd likely also have to report it to their homeowners insurance and their premiums will go up. OH NOES X 2!

Doxies and mini-doxies seem to be "it" dogs right now. People get blinded by the "cute" factor and forget that these dogs were bred to be pretty damn tenacious. They will kill small animals for fun (instinct), they do bite and definitely ought not to be coddled.

We don't know exactly what transpired between the dog and the tech and the owner, so it's impossible to assign absolute fault. It does seem to be more of a media campaign against having their "baby" labeled as "bad" than anything else.

 

[NStarz]

Yeah, no one wants the dog dead, that much is clear. It seems more like the owners don't want their precious baby to be labeled as aggressive. Sounds like he'll have to stay on leash and in a fenced yard. OH NOES! They'd likely also have to report it to their homeowners insurance and their premiums will go up. OH NOES X 2!

Doxies and mini-doxies seem to be "it" dogs right now. People get blinded by the "cute" factor and forget that these dogs were bred to be pretty damn tenacious. They will kill small animals for fun (instinct), they do bite and definitely ought not to be coddled.

We don't know exactly what transpired between the dog and the tech and the owner, so it's impossible to assign absolute fault. It does seem to be more of a media campaign against having their "baby" labeled as "bad" than anything else.

Good point. Unfortunately, doxies were bred to be quite fearless--they hunted badgers and those are nasty little buggers if you bother them.

 

[Shanomong]

.

 

[Poochlover11]

I think that as vets or vet techs that yes we need to be prepared for the occasional scratch/nip-and it is very important to learn how to handle dogs properly. But that dog bit the ladies freaking lips off (as in almost her entire upper lip and bottom lip and then he swallowed them). Again none of us know the entire situation, but I think that a large part of the blame should go to the owners. That dog is obviously in charge in that house and if he isn't well behaved at the vet and eats someone's lips off is that the vet tech's fault? No-I don't feel sorry for the owners because they need to take responsibility for being irresponsible trainers of their dog.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

I think the most disturbing part about this is that people really think its part of the job to be bitten like that (not necessarily people on SDN, but people on the dogster site). It's one thing to be nipped at or scratched, and you do take the risk of being bitten, but in my experience, there are some dogs you really can't approach safely, and those dogs should be sedated by the owners before they come in. As for not being muzzled, if what the owners said was true, and he'd never bitten before, I can see a vet tech not muzzling that dog. Or the owners might not have wanted a muzzle because he's their "precious angel" or whatever. It seemed like he was being handed over to be taken to the back and the vet tech was bitten, they weren't doing dental procedures on him awake. And regardless of him being a nervous dog, bad calls in judgment happen, but I can't really blame the vet tech for suing as her lips were bitten off.

👍

Sure, bites and scratches happen. But the media coverage of this is bizarre....not enough info. However, we should never expect to have fingers, lips, ears bitten off because it is "part of our job"....seriously....the whole veterinary profession takes way too much lying down...

 

[Electrophile]

Remember a couple weeks ago when I mentioned if I could not work with one single breed? Yeah... 🙁

One thing I wish was better understood and done by more people in this country is to train your dog to wear a muzzle in public and at the vet. Using a good quality muzzle on your dog should not be a stigma and I hear it is quite common for dogs to wear them in Europe in public. All my dogs are muzzle trained and while they all typically do fine at the vet, I try to bring one along. The Jafco plastic basket muzzle is my favorite because you can use it for positive reinforcement, it's light and easy to clean, very sturdy, they can still drink and take treats from the holes, less chance of injury to you (wire muzzles hurt a LOT if you get rammed by the dog!), and the dog can still pant.

 

[Ben and Me]

I hear it is quite common for dogs to wear them in Europe in public.

I think muzzles are required by law in Europe for certain breeds - I know that in Ireland, every greyhound (and there are a lot - greyhound racing is popular over there) I saw had on a basket muzzle.

Doesn't look like greyhounds are required to wear muzzles (at least not according to this website) but other breeds are. Interesting laws re: who may be walking the dog, how long the leash can be, etc.

http://www.ispca.ie/Restricted-Dog-Breeds.aspx

 

[StartingoverVet]

I think muzzles are required by law in Europe for certain breeds - I know that in Ireland, every greyhound (and there are a lot - greyhound racing is popular over there) I saw had on a basket muzzle.

It is sad how poorly socialized must the Greyhounds be if they need muzzles. It is such a docile breed away from the track. If they need a muzzle then just about any dog would need a muzzle.

 

[scb44f]

One thing I wish was better understood and done by more people in this country is to train your dog to wear a muzzle in public and at the vet. Using a good quality muzzle on your dog should not be a stigma and I hear it is quite common for dogs to wear them in Europe in public.

I like this idea. Though I admit it's not one I've put much thought into, there is definitely a bad connotation with muzzles. I remember when I was about 14, I was walking my big (relative to me) Rottweiler mix, using a halti head collar. A little girl saw the dog, wanted to pet it, and I heard her mom say, "No, that dog's mean. It has a muzzle on." I didn't correct her but nearly a decade later it bugs me that people have no clue.

 

[Electrophile]

It is sad how poorly socialized must the Greyhounds be if they need muzzles. It is such a docile breed away from the track. If they need a muzzle then just about any dog would need a muzzle.

I am not really a greyhound person (so if someone is and they know more, please chime in), but the greyhound people I know only let their dogs off leash together with a muzzle on because of their high prey drive and occasional misdirected excitement onto each other. This is particularly important if they encounter a small dog that can be easily mistaken for a rabbit and if they are running full tilt and get competitive, they can be nippy with each other. They call them "turn out muzzles."

I don't bring my dogs to the small dog parks, but if we are out on the leash free trails, both my off leash dogs (my male Malinois in my avatar and my female Malinois) wear a Jafco muzzle because they likewise have very high prey drive. Although they both have decent recall and wear an e-collar as that's the only real way you can hope to control them at a distance and I try to stick to the less used dog trails, if we came up on a small dog suddenly or some other larger, more aggressive dog off leash that wants to rumble, it's a good precaution to avoid a dog fight.

I don't necessarily support mandating muzzles in public per se, but I do wish they were seen as a good common sense measure (like a leash and collar) and less of "OMG, you have a dangerous dog!"

 

[Whyevernot55]

I don't necessarily support mandating muzzles in public per se, but I do wish they were seen as a good common sense measure (like a leash and collar) and less of "OMG, you have a dangerous dog!"

Ditto this. We have a couple of clients who muzzle their dogs in public - walking, in the clinic lobby, etc. - just as a precaution. One is a 130lb Great Dane who is literally the sweetest dog on the entire planet. She's not aggressive to people, dogs, cats, or anything else, but she is enormous and black and has a big scary bark. The muzzle is mostly to keep her from barking, and to keep people with teacup dogs from having heart attacks. And frankly, it's sensible. She's an enormous dog, and while she's never made a move toward a smaller animal, you can never predict anything. On the other hand, I can draw blood on the dog without anyone restraining her.
/end ramble. I just wish people were less freaked out about muzzles - especially people whose dogs NEED to be wearing one!

 

[twelvetigers]

We have a few blood donor greyhounds at the teaching hospital that wear basket muzzles every time they go out, and it's because they do tend to play rough even being really sweet dogs. The lab doesn't have to wear one.

 

[Electrophile]

I agree 100% and that's a good example! Also, lightweight plastic basket muzzles are really good for dogs who cannot seem to leave surgery sites alone, but who don't do well with an e-collar. My male Malinois broke a clear plastic e-collar (Elizabethean, not remote training collar) in half when he had a laceration by his eye and chewed up a regular plastic e-collar trying to get to his neuter incision since he got a hold of the folded over edge on the inside. 🙄 With the Jafco muzzle on him, he could have it on for hours resting in his crate comfortably without constantly banging into everything like the darn e-collar.

 

[sumstorm]

I don't bring my dogs to the small dog parks, but if we are out on the leash free trails, both my off leash dogs (my male Malinois in my avatar and my female Malinois) wear a Jafco muzzle because they likewise have very high prey drive. Although they both have decent recall and wear an e-collar as that's the only real way you can hope to control them at a distance and I try to stick to the less used dog trails, if we came up on a small dog suddenly or some other larger, more aggressive dog off leash that wants to rumble, it's a good precaution to avoid a dog fight.

I'm curious why an e-collar is necessary for recall? I have a SAR (high prey drive, high energy dog) GSD and I won't work her, despite a ton of pressure, with an e-collar. She recalls to a shepherd's whistle and works well out of site (better than many dogs on leash).

I also wouldn't put her in a muzzle because of what you mentioned; other dogs. I was running w/ her yesterday when another shepherd jumped her. She, and probably I, would have been injured. Instead she pinned the dog(after loosing a chunk of fur), I slid a spare leash on the other dog & yelled for her owner to get her. My dog will accept a muzzle, but dogs should be able to defend themselves when appropriate. Training helps them know what is appropriate.

 

[Electrophile]

This is getting OT from the topic, but my dogs are also well trained for the recall from about 100+ yards off leash and always carry a high level treat for coming to me off leash. However, unless they have a leash on, there is no way to 100% guarantee they will come, especially if the drive of the distraction is higher than the drive for the reward of the toy or food. The e-collar is the closest to a leash. They are certainly not popular in many training circles, but this is the one application I use them in. Particularly when my father's dogs were out with him at a big 200+ acre dog park about a year and a half ago and they both kicked up a deer that they chased out of the park and he couldn't call them back from it. One got hit and killed by a car and the other was lost for 3 days. So that's why it's kind of a sensitive thing for me. 🙁

My male Malinois in particular could likely kill a small or even decent sized dog if he wanted to with his power even on accident (hence why we don't go to the typical little 2 acre dog parks that are popular). Surprisingly enough, he can still defend himself fairly well even in a muzzle (which is why they train police dogs to muzzle fight), at least well enough to give me a few seconds to get over to a possible fight to break up. If you have broken up serious dog fights where both want to kill each other (been there, done that, had to rehome a dog for it!), not just a skirmish, it's still easier and safer for the humans to separate them when you just have to pry the jaws off of one instead of both of them gripping onto each other.

 

[Shanomong]

.

 

[sumstorm]

Surprisingly enough, he can still defend himself fairly well even in a muzzle (which is why they train police dogs to muzzle fight), at least well enough to give me a few seconds to get over to a possible fight to break up. If you have broken up serious dog fights where both want to kill each other (been there, done that, had to rehome a dog for it!), not just a skirmish, it's still easier and safer for the humans to separate them when you just have to pry the jaws off of one instead of both of them gripping onto each other.

It may be easier with a muzzle if you have two cooperative owners, but breaking up a dog fight between an aggressive dog and another dog is a really good way to get the human harmed when the other dogs owner can't be bothered or screams bloody murdur. I have ample experience in SAR and forensics (tracking suspects) so plenty of experience with dogs with law enforcement.... but that doesn't stop idiot owners with aggressive dogs. Of course, my shepherd also happily releases on cue, so her gripping the other dog wasn't a problem. The sheriff was happy with the outcome, fined the other owner, and drove me home.

Can't offer help on recall. I won't use shock, but if my dog didn't recall and work exceedingy well off leash, she wouldn't have earned that freedom. May be the difference between dogs with jobs and dogs enjoying recreation. She IS trained to return to me at obvious pathways, just to limit vehicle risks. And I admit, in her first year of life, her training averaged 30+ hours every week, and most folks can't dedicate that much time to training. Even now, we have to average 12 hours a week just to keep our certifications and legal status up to date.

 

[Electrophile]

This is such a great idea. I have a Rottie who had an FHO and the worst part of it post-op was the e-collar paralysis... every time we put it on she would stand in that one spot drooling until it came off. We would got to work, come home 8 hours later, and she'd still be standing there drooling 🙁 She's getting a THR soon and I'm definitely going to give this a try. Thanks!

Awwww... 🙁 Yeah, she'd probably be worth trying it with. You might want to try the female Rottweiler version of this one. I'm actually thinking of buying one for my petite 65-70 lbs Rottie, so I may have to let you know how it goes:

http://leerburg.com/jafco.htm

Whichever muzzle you choose, make sure you start acclimating her to it a few weeks before. I like the Jafco ones (I swear I am not being paid by them!) because you can put peanut butter, cream cheese, cheese whiz, canned dog food, treats, etc at the bottom nose part of the muzzle so you get the dog thinking of it as a "tasty treat cup" instead of "scary uncomfortable thing that my owners make me wear when I have to do something painful." You can easily handwash them out. Then just have her get used to it with longer and longer periods of wear. The only thing you may have to be watchful of is some dogs will scrape their muzzle against the incision site, though I had a particularly stubborn Siberian husky foster dog who scraped his e-collar against his neuter site. 🙄

Another possibility (though they can be expensive too) is a Comfy Cone:

http://www.allfourpaws.com/

 

[nyanko]

lol rawrcakes give your little "baby" some prozac or maybe a bullet.

that's all.

 

[Shanomong]

[.

 

[twelvetigers]

(insert eye-rolling emoticon here...)

: rolleyes : = 🙄

twelvetigers, always helpful in the most lame situations. Lol.

 

[1Vista1Grey]

at a cafe last year, we saw a girl bite her father. Hard enough to leave red whelts visible from our table. The parents (dining with another set of parents) laughed like it was a joke, and said they didn't know how to stop her biting other kids in kindergarten. Umm.... Stop treating it like a joke.

bahahahaha!!!!

 

[Highlsnds3]

Shanomong how about the Bite Not? http://www.bitenot.com/dog.html They are great, unless your dog is SUPER limber 🙂 I've used them on a few dogs, most recently an IG that had an analglandectomy, among other things. She also has e-collar paralysis, but walks well with the Bite Not. Good luck!

 

[alicat2441]

I have been a pet owner for 15 years and before that had dogs all my life. If I was a vet tech and got bitten-which happens- contrary to what alliecat44 and some others think-I definitely wouldn't file charges. Yes some instances can be prevented, but you can't fix stupid and that is what this vet tech was-STUPID. Why was the dog being held up to his/her face and why wasn't it muzzled. My father had a cairn terrier and he was great, until you took him to the vet. He would go absolutely crazy and had to be muzzled and for some vet work had to be sedated. He NEVER bit anyone, but the first question out of the vets mouth was when was the last time the dog bit someone. Needless to say that was the last time that vet was used.

Reading some of the responses in forums from vet and pre-vets, all I have to say is that a lot of you need to get over yourself. alliecat44- please give updates on which states you are practicing so I can avoid you at all cost.I have read some of your responses to other questions and all I can say is snarky- with a capital S. I am in the medical field and interact daily with people and if I treated them like you answer questions I would have lost my job and license long ago. But alliecat44 isn't the only one -there are a number of you guys that need to be less snarky with answers. You vets and especially pre-vets need to do this soon because your business deals with treating not only animals, but reading and treating people-whether you like it or not. That's not going to change due to the fact that it will still be owners paying the bills and keeping your business afloat.

 

[sumstorm]

I am in the medical field and interact daily with people and if I treated them like you answer questions I would have lost my job and license long ago.

Vet med and human med are not the same thing. med pros tend to be either the easiest or worst owners to work with as vets. If you are going to site your experience, how about you validate your statements? what's your profession? your experience, professionaly, in vet med?

 

[Minnerbelle]

He would go absolutely crazy and had to be muzzled and for some vet work had to be sedated. He NEVER bit anyone, but the first question out of the vets mouth was when was the last time the dog bit someone. Needless to say that was the last time that vet was used.

So you say that the vet tech was stupid for not taking precautions with this dog... but you think it's unacceptable for the vet to ask the owner of a snarling dog that needs sedation about the dog's aggression? 😕😕😕 Not sure if I'm reading this correctly, but it seems like everything would have been fine as long as you didn't instantly become offended and just explained to the vet that your dog is horrible with vets but fine at home. If your dog is just as horrible at home as he is at the vet's, then he would be a public safety/health problem.

Reading some of the responses in forums from vet and pre-vets, all I have to say is that a lot of you need to get over yourself. alliecat44- please give updates on which states you are practicing so I can avoid you at all cost.I have read some of your responses to other questions and all I can say is snarky- with a capital S.

...and what would you call the tone of your post?

I am in the medical field and interact daily with people and if I treated them like you answer questions I would have lost my job and license long ago. But alliecat44 isn't the only one -there are a number of you guys that need to be less snarky with answers.

I highly doubt the way people respond here is the same as the way they would respond in a clinical setting. I mean, this is a "pre-vet" forum, not a forum for people to practice their clinical communication skills just so other health professionals don't get offended. If you think this is bad, go to the pre-allo forum and chastise them about their snarky answers. I promise you they are faaaaaaaar worse.

You vets and especially pre-vets need to do this soon because your business deals with treating not only animals, but reading and treating people-whether you like it or not. That's not going to change due to the fact that it will still be owners paying the bills and keeping your business afloat.

People like you are exactly why I will avoid private practice at all costs.

 

[twelvetigers]

Thanks for the handy links, but I think we all know who our moderator is. Also, thanks for joining our forum and emulating her username for the sole purpose of dragging an old thread back out just to call her 'snarky'. Verrrrry helpful and conducive.

:troll:

 

[Minnerbelle]

Thanks for the handy links, but I think we all know who our moderator is. Also, thanks for joining our forum and emulating her username for the sole purpose of dragging an old thread back out just to call her 'snarky'. Verrrrry helpful and conducive.

:troll:

haha, actually now that I look through alliecat's posts... I don't understand why they would be targeted as snarky over anyone else's. I have a feeling our moderator's trolling herself so that she can lock a thread??? 😛

 

[alliecat44]

haha, actually now that I look through alliecat's posts... I don't understand why they would be targeted as snarky over anyone else's. I have a feeling our moderator's trolling herself so that she can lock a thread??? 😛

Um, believe it or not, I have better things to do......... (Wait, was that snarky?! 🙂 )

 

[Minnerbelle]

Um, believe it or not, I have better things to do......... (Wait, was that snarky?! 🙂 )

yeah, def. tell me which state you're going to be practicing in so i can go and get your license revoked! 😡

(and obviously, i have nothing better to do... sigh...)

 

[BlacKAT33]

I have been a pet owner for 15 years and before that had dogs all my life. If I was a vet tech and got bitten-which happens- contrary to what alliecat44 and some others think-I definitely wouldn't file charges. Yes some instances can be prevented, but you can't fix stupid and that is what this vet tech was-STUPID. Why was the dog being held up to his/her face and why wasn't it muzzled. My father had a cairn terrier and he was great, until you took him to the vet. He would go absolutely crazy and had to be muzzled and for some vet work had to be sedated. He NEVER bit anyone, but the first question out of the vets mouth was when was the last time the dog bit someone. Needless to say that was the last time that vet was used.

Reading some of the responses in forums from vet and pre-vets, all I have to say is that a lot of you need to get over yourself. alliecat44- please give updates on which states you are practicing so I can avoid you at all cost.I have read some of your responses to other questions and all I can say is snarky- with a capital S. I am in the medical field and interact daily with people and if I treated them like you answer questions I would have lost my job and license long ago. But alliecat44 isn't the only one -there are a number of you guys that need to be less snarky with answers. You vets and especially pre-vets need to do this soon because your business deals with treating not only animals, but reading and treating people-whether you like it or not. That's not going to change due to the fact that it will still be owners paying the bills and keeping your business afloat.

seriously? this was entertaining to wake up to.

 

[KKibo]

At the clinic I work at, it is one of the tech's responsibilities to NOT let the doctor, or the client, get bit. Yeah, **** happens that can't be helped, but generally if anyone is to get bit it is the technician. If it happens you go to the doctor and you get the day off. woopdiefreakingdoo.

As far as filling charges... really? I mean come on, its one thing if you are walking down the street and are attacked by someone's dog. Its another when that dog is being agitated. It's just stupid, get over it and come back to work the next day.

As for the whole "its a cute little wiener dog" crap...I'd rather handle feral cats all day long than some of the "cute little dogs" we get at our clinic.

 

[Azarael]

I have been a pet owner for 15 years and before that had dogs all my life. If I was a vet tech and got bitten-which happens- contrary to what alliecat44 and some others think-I definitely wouldn't file charges. Yes some instances can be prevented, but you can't fix stupid and that is what this vet tech was-STUPID. Why was the dog being held up to his/her face and why wasn't it muzzled. My father had a cairn terrier and he was great, until you took him to the vet. He would go absolutely crazy and had to be muzzled and for some vet work had to be sedated. He NEVER bit anyone, but the first question out of the vets mouth was when was the last time the dog bit someone. Needless to say that was the last time that vet was used.

Reading some of the responses in forums from vet and pre-vets, all I have to say is that a lot of you need to get over yourself. alliecat44- please give updates on which states you are practicing so I can avoid you at all cost.I have read some of your responses to other questions and all I can say is snarky- with a capital S. I am in the medical field and interact daily with people and if I treated them like you answer questions I would have lost my job and license long ago. But alliecat44 isn't the only one -there are a number of you guys that need to be less snarky with answers. You vets and especially pre-vets need to do this soon because your business deals with treating not only animals, but reading and treating people-whether you like it or not. That's not going to change due to the fact that it will still be owners paying the bills and keeping your business afloat.

I understand where alicat2441 is coming from (but what's with the anonymity...?). As pre-vets, we can't be absorbed into seeing the veterinary profession from only our side, and y'all definitely shouldn't make fun or shoot this kid down for expressing his opinion because it comes from an outside perspective.

I can completely understand the anger an owner would feel if he knew his own vet hospital would sue him when he brought his pet in for care. I think the point that alicat2441 brought up about vets automatically assuming fault on the part of an owner is a serious one. And we can keep arguing about whether what happened in this particular situation was "right" or "wrong", but I think, to say the least, that many people would be surprised if they knew their vets thought this way about their client's animals.

 

[sumstorm]

First, he is claiming to be a medical professional, very different than a kid. And, as a medical professional, he isn't willing to ID himself or his position. For all I know, his definition of medical professional is transcriptionist; a very important job, but not necessarily one whose medical opinion or business opinion I would take to heart.

Second, he admits to having or having had an aggressive dog and being offended when a vet inquires about bite history. So it is appropriate for a vet, an employer, to jeopardize his staff by asking them to handle an aggressive dog without inquiring about bite history, at least in his view. So a medical professional would rather risk someone being bit that be asked about a history which is part of a relevant medical history.

Third, we don't know the details. I don't think anyone here said ‘if a dog bites you while working, you should automatically go after the owner via legal means. ‘ What has been debated here is whether, by working in the profession, we assume a responsibility for what may be permenant disfigurement and whether our staff assumes the responsibility. Considering I was bit in the face by a dog I WAS NOT handling who came over the chest high reception wall to bite me, I do think it is a very gray area and owners are responsible in some situations, particularly if there is a history of aggression, bite, etc. I am not saying that is the case in this situation; I never trust media on these things, so I don't actually know.

Finally, part of the outrage was that the dog would have a record of a bite history, which is completely appropriate. A dog bites, especially enough to require hospital treatment, should have a record made of that bite. Then the legal bodies in that local have the right to determine if that dog is dangerous and should have additional restrictions place on it.

In addition, the opinions on SDN are often of pre-vets, vet students, vets and/or people claiming to be such . Some will become vets, some won't. Some will be vets that never work with a privately owned animal after school…some will never work with a live animal after school, possibly because they would rather not deal with this kind of drama. That does not mean that the opinions we have now will be the same in a decade; it doesn't mean that they are legally right or wrong, and it doesn't mean that there aren't differences in opinion within the field. It doesn't mean that those opinions on whether a dog's owners should be held accountable for a bite reflect how people handle and work with animals or clients. In this case, my understanding is that the clinic is NOT pursuing a lawsuit; an individual is. So it is out of the vet's hands.

 

[sumstorm]

I can completely understand the anger an owner would feel if he knew his own vet hospital would sue him when he brought his pet in for care.

I wonder if you will understand the anger an owner feels when they threaten you, trash you online and everywhere else, and tries to sue you when their pet bites them in the vehicle before they even enter the practice. It happens and PLIT pays it off (at least the couple times it happened in the area I worked.)

Oh, and I hope you can comprehend that the HOSPITAL isn't sueing anyone.

 

[sumstorm]

I went back to look at what is happening. This isn't, from what I read, a lawsuit, but rather a viscious dog issue, which to me is completly reasonable:

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/22823277/detail.html

Death threats, though....doesn't seem too reasonable.

I agree with this view:

http://www.semissourian.com/blogs/1452/entry/33860/

 

[DVMDream]

First, he is claiming to be a medical professional, very different than a kid. And, as a medical professional, he isn’t willing to ID himself or his position. For all I know, his definition of medical professional is transcriptionist; a very important job, but not necessarily one whose medical opinion or business opinion I would take to heart.

Second, he admits to having or having had an aggressive dog and being offended when a vet inquires about bite history. So it is appropriate for a vet, an employer, to jeopardize his staff by asking them to handle an aggressive dog without inquiring about bite history, at least in his view. So a medical professional would rather risk someone being bit that be asked about a history which is part of a relevant medical history.

Third, we don’t know the details. I don’t think anyone here said ‘if a dog bites you while working, you should automatically go after the owner via legal means. ‘ What has been debated here is whether, by working in the profession, we assume a responsibility for what may be permenant disfigurement and whether our staff assumes the responsibility. Considering I was bit in the face by a dog I WAS NOT handling who came over the chest high reception wall to bite me, I do think it is a very gray area and owners are responsible in some situations, particularly if there is a history of aggression, bite, etc. I am not saying that is the case in this situation; I never trust media on these things, so I don’t actually know.

Finally, part of the outrage was that the dog would have a record of a bite history, which is completely appropriate. A dog bites, especially enough to require hospital treatment, should have a record made of that bite. Then the legal bodies in that local have the right to determine if that dog is dangerous and should have additional restrictions place on it.

In addition, the opinions on SDN are often of pre-vets, vet students, vets and/or people claiming to be such . Some will become vets, some won’t. Some will be vets that never work with a privately owned animal after school…some will never work with a live animal after school, possibly because they would rather not deal with this kind of drama. That does not mean that the opinions we have now will be the same in a decade; it doesn’t mean that they are legally right or wrong, and it doesn’t mean that there aren’t differences in opinion within the field. It doesn’t mean that those opinions on whether a dog’s owners should be held accountable for a bite reflect how people handle and work with animals or clients. In this case, my understanding is that the clinic is NOT pursuing a lawsuit; an individual is. So it is out of the vet’s hands.

👍 +100

Like sumstrom said the arguement wasn't: Oh no Fluffy bit my finger! I am suing her owners.

The tech was simply going to pick up the dog out of the owner's lap, when the dog lunged and bit off 2 inches of her lips. It would be no different if the owner were sitting in a public place and some kid walked up and tried to pet the dog and the dog lunged and bit the kids lips off.

I really think it depends on the situation and at some point there has to be a line that is crossed. Like sumstrom's situation where she was bit in the face definitely crosses that line. No tech should ever feel like it is just a part of the job when a dog lunges at them without being provoked and bites. Those are signs of an aggressive dog that need to be reported.

My two cents.

But I have to say the new troll really did make me laugh. That was a fairly trolly post, he/she really should go check out the pre-allo forum. Goodness, if some of us are snarky, then I am afraid to know what the troll would think of those pre-allos.

 

[BlacKAT33]

But I have to say the new troll really did make me laugh. That was a fairly trolly post, he/she really should go check out the pre-allo forum. Goodness, if some of us are snarky, then I am afraid to know what the troll would think of those pre-allos.

this is exactly what i was thinking when i laughed out loud while reading the trolly post. especially this line "a lot of you need to get over yourself" i never would have thought we'd be hearing this and not the pre-allos