Rising Costs of Vet School

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Seeing it visually like that (the two graphs) is a clear and succinct way to illustrate the tremendous problem facing our profession.

That stuff is so depressing. I wonder where the breaking point in the profession is.
 
What school is $58k/year?! 😱


Look at it this way... imagine how much it would be if we were applying 10 years from now!
 
What school is $58k/year?! 😱

Western probably. They were really high. I think my total debt graduating from them would've been something like $260,000.
 
I'm also calling BS on this statement:

• Only students from wealthy families will be able to afford veterinary school, leading to a profession composed of practitioners who cannot relate to clients of limited means.

I think that has less to do with wealth and more to do with general empathy and understanding.
 
I'm also calling BS on this statement:



I think that has less to do with wealth and more to do with general empathy and understanding.

Yeah, I thought that statement was way over the top. Family wealth doesn't have anything to do with empathy and relating to clients, as far as I can see. Besides, the issue isn't that less wealthy people can't afford vet school, but that nobody can afford vet school and that everyone is having to rack up oodles of debt. If anything that puts vet school hopefuls on a more even playing ground, financially speaking.
 
I mean, if you use that logic, you could conclude that poor veterinary students (IE 97% of us) can't relate to rich clients who can afford to spend $10,000+ on chemo for their dog...

😉
 
I'm also calling BS on this statement:



I think that has less to do with wealth and more to do with general empathy and understanding.


While I understand what you are saying, I also understand somewhat where they are coming from. I grew up riding in Pony Club with some incredibly wealthy girls. While my family wasn't poor we weren't nearly as well off as they were. There were a few girls who, while incredibly kind and sweet, just didn't get certain things. Like one time we gave a girl a ride in our '91 Chevy Suburban and she spent 5 minutes looking for the seat warmers. When we explained that there were no seat warmers she was in complete shock. She simply could not fathom that not all vehicles come with the luxury package. There were also several times where girls would be like "Why don't you just ________" and when I explained we couldn't afford it they were dumbfounded.

Again, they were super sweet and smart girls, but just clueless to how other people lived. Most of them were in a really rich area where in the high school parking lot the students drove 10x nicer cars than the teachers. If someone was raised in that environment and then went to a super rich private school I can see how it could be a problem. Even if they had tons of vet experience it easily could have been at a ritzy practice where money was never an issue.

I don't think it will be a problem that consumes the entire profession, but I can see how it could be a problem in some instances.
 
While I understand what you are saying, I also understand somewhat where they are coming from. I grew up riding in Pony Club with some incredibly wealthy girls. While my family wasn't poor we weren't nearly as well off as they were. There were a few girls who, while incredibly kind and sweet, just didn't get certain things. Like one time we gave a girl a ride in our '91 Chevy Suburban and she spent 5 minutes looking for the seat warmers. When we explained that there were no seat warmers she was in complete shock. She simply could not fathom that not all vehicles come with the luxury package. There were also several times where girls would be like "Why don't you just ________" and when I explained we couldn't afford it they were dumbfounded.

Again, they were super sweet and smart girls, but just clueless to how other people lived. Most of them were in a really rich area where in the high school parking lot the students drove 10x nicer cars than the teachers. If someone was raised in that environment and then went to a super rich private school I can see how it could be a problem. Even if they had tons of vet experience it easily could have been at a ritzy practice where money was never an issue.

I don't think it will be a problem that consumes the entire profession, but I can see how it could be a problem in some instances.

Ok, I have a few questions for you... 🙂

How old were those girls? You said pony club -- so they must been teenagers, at the oldest, right (I'd assume they weren't 21 year olds going for their HA or whatever, right 😀)? It's been my experience that most folks do a lot of maturing between the ages of 16 and 22.... 😉

I worked at a "ritzy" practice in a wealthy part of town -- and we still had plenty of clients who couldn't afford (or chose not to) the recommended treatments. I also went to a "rich" high school and college... One of the wealthiest girls I know is also the sweetest, nicest, least assuming people I've ever met. You'd never know that she had money unless you asked what her father does.

I've met plenty of rich folks who are empathetic and plenty of rich folks who are just as clueless as those Pony Club teens.

I've also met plenty of less wealthy folks who are eager to put on their "judgement hat" about folks who have money...and plenty of less wealthy folks who are empathetic about all different situations, including rich clients who choose not to spend $$ on their pets.

I think it has a lot less to do with wealth than how someone was raised and what kind of interpersonal skills and empathy that they've developed.

I just have a hard time discounting someone's ability as a veterinarian based on their familial income, whether that income is high or low!

🙂
 
Ok, I have a few questions for you... 🙂

How old were those girls? You said pony club -- so they must been teenagers, at the oldest, right (I'd assume they weren't 21 year olds going for their HA or whatever, right 😀)? It's been my experience that most folks do a lot of maturing between the ages of 16 and 22.... 😉

I worked at a "ritzy" practice in a wealthy part of town -- and we still had plenty of clients who couldn't afford (or chose not to) the recommended treatments. I also went to a "rich" high school and college... One of the wealthiest girls I know is also the sweetest, nicest, least assuming people I've ever met. You'd never know that she had money unless you asked what her father does.

I've met plenty of rich folks who are empathetic and plenty of rich folks who are just as clueless as those Pony Club teens.

I've also met plenty of less wealthy folks who are eager to put on their "judgement hat" about folks who have money...and plenty of less wealthy folks who are empathetic about all different situations, including rich clients who choose not to spend $$ on their pets.

I think it has a lot less to do with wealth than how someone was raised and what kind of interpersonal skills and empathy that they've developed.

I just have a hard time discounting someone's ability as a veterinarian based on their familial income, whether that income is high or low!

🙂


I completely agree with everything you are saying. I wasn't saying it will be an issue, just that I would not be totally surprised if there were one or two vets out there with this type of issue.

And while these girls were young (18) I know some people who transferred from their private schools because they couldn't handle how all the rich students expected them to be able to go shopping every weekend and buy fancy cars. It is not something that all people grow out of.

Sorry I am trying to play devil's advocate today. I am in a positively terrible mood tonight.
 
While I understand what you are saying, I also understand somewhat where they are coming from. I grew up riding in Pony Club with some incredibly wealthy girls. While my family wasn't poor we weren't nearly as well off as they were. There were a few girls who, while incredibly kind and sweet, just didn't get certain things. Like one time we gave a girl a ride in our '91 Chevy Suburban and she spent 5 minutes looking for the seat warmers. When we explained that there were no seat warmers she was in complete shock. She simply could not fathom that not all vehicles come with the luxury package. There were also several times where girls would be like "Why don't you just ________" and when I explained we couldn't afford it they were dumbfounded.

Again, they were super sweet and smart girls, but just clueless to how other people lived. Most of them were in a really rich area where in the high school parking lot the students drove 10x nicer cars than the teachers. If someone was raised in that environment and then went to a super rich private school I can see how it could be a problem. Even if they had tons of vet experience it easily could have been at a ritzy practice where money was never an issue.

I don't think it will be a problem that consumes the entire profession, but I can see how it could be a problem in some instances.

you can't compare girls with adult professionals.
Just by being in this field we are exposed to less wealthy areas (especially shelters) and rich areas. Most people have gotten hands on experience through volunteering or working at a range of places. It is also been talked about throughout our schooling, especially in our intro to clinical classes. Just a couple weeks ago I had to do a skit with bunnity about why she wouldn't neuter her dog lol OMG that acting was horrible!! i hate acting!! and bunnity, altho you're super shy you are a kick ass dynamic actress!
 
I completely agree with everything you are saying. I wasn't saying it will be an issue, just that I would not be totally surprised if there were one or two vets out there with this type of issue.

And while these girls were young (18) I know some people who transferred from their private schools because they couldn't handle how all the rich students expected them to be able to go shopping every weekend and buy fancy cars. It is not something that all people grow out of.

Oh, I agree 100%...in fact, I'm sure there are many vets out there like that. But for everyone who's like that, there are other wealthy folks who aren't like that...so I don't think it's really a good idea to draw the conclusion that the article did...and honestly, I find it a bit offensive.

I also think that vet school makes those who are wealthier pretty self-conscious about it. It's definitely no longer a situation where everyone in your friend group has a 3-series BMW. 😉 So, even if they were like that at 18 (or 22), I'd bet that a lot of them have had a bit of a wake up call!

I just felt like that article made it sound like it was more "black and white" than it is.

You're playing devil's advocate, and I'm avoiding studying... 😛
 
you can't compare girls with adult professionals.
Just by being in this field we are exposed to less wealthy areas (especially shelters) and rich areas. Most people have gotten hands on experience through volunteering or working at a range of places. It is also been talked about throughout our schooling, especially in our intro to clinical classes. Just a couple weeks ago I had to do a skit with bunnity about why she wouldn't neuter her dog lol OMG that acting was horrible!! i hate acting!! and bunnity, altho you're super shy you are a kick ass dynamic actress!


Read Above: I agree with you but am in a "humanity is awful" type mood and am playing devil's advocate.
 
Read Above: I agree with you but am in a "humanity is awful" type mood and am playing devil's advocate.

lol yea its cool. there are always a couple "crazies" and "aholes" in every class too!

So in terms of the link above, I didn't read everything because I dont have time lol but I looked at the pics (graphs). Just something to think about, be careful about these stats. The starting salaries aren't separated by LA, SA, industry etc. They also don't say if they included residencies or internship salaries which would lowering the starting salary.

The best thing I have seen talking about all of these statistics (about 10 min long power point presentation) was on AVMA site. I know it was going around a year ago on SDN and I'm not sure the last year that was surveyed in it. But I definitely trust those stats more.

Hmm...i'll try to find that video for you. It is actually really interesting if you have time to listen to it all

edit: i give up, i know ive asked you this before TT lol help me find it plzz 🙂 jeez, i should really email it to myself so i stop losing it every year
 
Last edited:
..so I don't think it's really a good idea to draw the conclusion that the article did...and honestly, I find it a bit offensive.

I also think that vet school makes those who are wealthier pretty self-conscious about it. It's definitely no longer a situation where everyone in your friend group has a 3-series BMW. 😉 So, even if they were like that at 18 (or 22), I'd bet that a lot of them have had a bit of a wake up call!

I just felt like that article made it sound like it was more "black and white" than it is.

You're playing devil's advocate, and I'm avoiding studying... 😛

Well, to be fair, the article wasn't really concluding that, per se, but offers it as part of a speculation on "possible consequences" that any concerned person might foresee. I still think it's a far-reaching one without much logical background, but it's not presented as a main point of the article.
 
Well, to be fair, the article wasn't really concluding that, per se, but offers it as part of a speculation on "possible consequences" that any concerned person might foresee. I still think it's a far-reaching one without much logical background, but it's not presented as a main point of the article.

I'm going to jump in here to say that actually, the possible consequence presented does have logical background. There have been many many studies on why empathy differs within individuals, and UC Berkeley just recently published findings in November 2010 that link socioeconomic status with feelings of compassion.

Here's the abstract of the article:
Lower social class (or socioeconomic status) is associated with fewer resources, greater exposure to threat, and a reduced sense of personal control. Given these life circumstances, one might expect lower class individuals to engage in less prosocial behavior, prioritizing self-interest over the welfare of others. The authors hypothesized, by contrast, that lower class individuals orient to the welfare of others as a means to adapt to their more hostile environments and that this orientation gives rise to greater prosocial behavior. Across 4 studies, lower class individuals proved to be more generous (Study 1), charitable (Study 2), trusting (Study 3), and helpful (Study 4) compared with their upper class counterparts. Mediator and moderator data showed that lower class individuals acted in a more prosocial fashion because of a greater commitment to egalitarian values and feelings of compassion. Implications for social class, prosocial behavior, and economic inequality are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
You can be offended all you want, but that doesn't make the findings any less true. The writers of that article did actually have reason on their side in assuming that those who are more well-off will have a harder time relating to lower- to middle-class clients.

I'm not saying that everyone who is upper-class is cold and heartless. Neither was the UCB study, and neither was the vet debt article.

And also, it may be that those individuals who are interested in veterinary medicine are more inclined to be compassionate/empathetic (makes sense to me anyway), so that even the richest of vet students will be on the "more compassionate" end of the spectrum. Who knows.

I just had a similar, unrelated conversation with someone on this topic and it got a little heated so forgive me if I'm coming across too confrontational. Not my intention. 🙂

And about the high debt "evening the playing field"... I couldn't disagree more, but I've already written too much. I have to go back to studying now!
 
I'm going to jump in here to say that actually, the possible consequence presented does have logical background. There have been many many studies on why empathy differs within individuals, and UC Berkeley just recently published findings in November 2010 that link socioeconomic status with feelings of compassion.

Here's the abstract of the article:
Lower social class (or socioeconomic status) is associated with fewer resources, greater exposure to threat, and a reduced sense of personal control. Given these life circumstances, one might expect lower class individuals to engage in less prosocial behavior, prioritizing self-interest over the welfare of others. The authors hypothesized, by contrast, that lower class individuals orient to the welfare of others as a means to adapt to their more hostile environments and that this orientation gives rise to greater prosocial behavior. Across 4 studies, lower class individuals proved to be more generous (Study 1), charitable (Study 2), trusting (Study 3), and helpful (Study 4) compared with their upper class counterparts. Mediator and moderator data showed that lower class individuals acted in a more prosocial fashion because of a greater commitment to egalitarian values and feelings of compassion. Implications for social class, prosocial behavior, and economic inequality are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
You can be offended all you want, but that doesn't make the findings any less true. The writers of that article did actually have reason on their side in assuming that those who are more well-off will have a harder time relating to lower- to middle-class clients.

I'm not saying that everyone who is upper-class is cold and heartless. Neither was the UCB study, and neither was the vet debt article.

And also, it may be that those individuals who are interested in veterinary medicine are more inclined to be compassionate/empathetic (makes sense to me anyway), so that even the richest of vet students will be on the "more compassionate" end of the spectrum. Who knows.

I just had a similar, unrelated conversation with someone on this topic and it got a little heated so forgive me if I'm coming across too confrontational. Not my intention. 🙂

And about the high debt "evening the playing field"... I couldn't disagree more, but I've already written too much. I have to go back to studying now!

Interesting, I hadn't heard about that study. It doesn't seem to correlate with my personal experiences, so it does put things in a new light for me.
I'd be interested to know why you disagree so much with my comment that high debt evens out the playing field, so if you need another break from studying feel free to indulge me 🙂 That was more of a spontaneous thought while I was typing and I'm not really committed to the idea one way or the other, so don't worry about offending or sounding confrontational. I just want to know how you see it.
 
As mentioned above, you really do have to wonder where the breaking point will be. While there is certainly potential for high paying careers, its certainly not the norm in vet med as so many people seem to think it is. It makes me think back to a comment made by an adcom woman I spoke with. She said something along the lines of "Vet med is an exclusive community and we want to make sure the best people get in", which was mostly in regards to grades but really makes me wonder if the ability or insanity to shell out so much money is part of it. I know schools need to update their equipment, etc, but WHY is it so necessary to keep driving that cost up, especially when certain fields are becoming more and more lacking in professionals because of the debt/cost ratio?

I'll be paying ~$52,000 per year at AVC while the "in state" are only paying around $10,000. I find that absolutely shocking, even in other schools. I know some schools (like Tufts) have a very low IS/OOS differential. I'll be paying roughly 5x the amount for the same education that my "IS" peers get 😕
 
I'm hoping to be IS but why is OOS tuition so much more? Is it a tax thing?
 
I'd be interested to know why you disagree so much with my comment that high debt evens out the playing field, so if you need another break from studying feel free to indulge me 🙂

I disagree with the theory that high debt would even out the playing field because I think that people from upper-classes would be more comfortable taking on so much debt than those in lower-classes. If you come from a comfortable socioeconomic background, you're probably (more) familiar with these kinds of loans, and you arguably have a stronger support system if something bad happens, because your family has money. I'm certainly not saying this is true in every case, but I think that the idea of so much debt would actually discourage more people with lower socioeconomic statuses from pursuing a DVM.
 
I disagree with the theory that high debt would even out the playing field because I think that people from upper-classes would be more comfortable taking on so much debt than those in lower-classes. If you come from a comfortable socioeconomic background, you're probably (more) familiar with these kinds of loans, and you arguably have a stronger support system if something bad happens, because your family has money. I'm certainly not saying this is true in every case, but I think that the idea of so much debt would actually discourage more people with lower socioeconomic statuses from pursuing a DVM.

Debt is the only reason I ever have doubt about pursuing this. We don't make ends meet as it is. If something happens and I have all this debt...I'm done. But I decided I couldn't live my life on the off chance "What if" but it is still very scary and you are very right it does discourage.
 
The profession is already incredibly biased towards the wealthy, like every other professional field in America.

And I'll stick my neck out and make the statement that empathy is a product of experience, and the wealthy are less likely to have the experiences that lead to real empathy with the less fortunate members of society.

If you don't have experience with poverty, or financial hardship, you're not going to be truly empathetic to it. By definition, empathy is a shared experience.
 
That was more of a spontaneous thought while I was typing and I'm not really committed to the idea one way or the other, so don't worry about offending or sounding confrontational. I just want to know how you see it.

I know you weren't asking for my opinion but I hope you won't mind it. (TRUE STORY!)

For an example that is no where near the same level but the same principle. I had two cousins that graduated the same year, from the same school, and went to the same beauty school. They were from opposite sides of the family. Cousin 1's family is rich. Owns a lot of farms, wants for nothing. Cousin 2's family scrapes by.

Cousin 1's family bought her a building for a shop, a tanning bed, made a sign, bought advertising, did everything for her so she was ready when she graduated.

Cousin 2's family bought her a really nice cart a care kit for her new job at a local place next to wal-mart.

Cousin 1 is already retired before 35. Cousin 2 finally got her own salon a year ago and is up to her ears in debt.

Moral of the story, having a wealthy family definitely makes life easier! They have security. Cousin 1 knew that no matter what she didn't have to worry. Cousin 2 knew that if she did get a job right out of school she was in a lot of trouble!

I see a life of living like a college kid in my future but at least I'll be doing what I love! (Right?)😉
 
Nyanko's response brings up a question I have had, but I apologize to bree b/c this deviates a bit from the originally intended discussion:

if a person has resided in a state for, say, only a year for the purposes of gaining IS tuition, is she not viewed as favorably for admissions b/c she or her family have not been paying state taxes - and thus contributing to the pot of money going to the vet school - for as much time as another applicant who has spent significantly more time in that state? in other words, is the amount of time someone has resided in a particular state a factor in admissions?
 
And in state tuition is cheaper than out of state because public universities are (much less than they used to be, ugh) supported by their state taxpayers. The cost of educating each individual student is actually much higher than the tuition cost at public universities; the rest of it comes from the state. For those who haven't been (or whose parents haven't been) paying into the state tax system, it is only fair that they have to come up with a larger portion of the actual cost of the education themselves.

I didn't even think of it that way, but it makes sense to some degree. Although if you start thinking that way, you'd have to start favoring people who contributed more in tax money (the wealthier people).

I won't go into my own personal story but I think it isn't always so easy to divide people into strictly "wealthy vs poor". I think a lot of how they came to be in their socioeconomic situation are things that aren't factored in and can play an enormous role.
 
I'd be interested to know why you disagree so much with my comment that high debt evens out the playing field, so if you need another break from studying feel free to indulge me 🙂 That was more of a spontaneous thought while I was typing and I'm not really committed to the idea one way or the other, so don't worry about offending or sounding confrontational. I just want to know how you see it.

I think Ricegrad and nyanko put it well; I don't think I could've said it better. Essentially, wealthier students either a) don't have to take out loans in the first place (or not nearly as much) because their families can afford to just pay outright, or b) they don't feel absolutely terrified at the thought of a 200K loan. And also, as nyanko said, wealthier students may not have as much debt going in.

Most of the people in my family couldn't even fathom taking out a loan for that much money, unless you were guaranteed to make 200K+ coming out (read: specialist doctor, corporate lawyer).

EDIT: I don't meant to generalize. I know there are wealthier students out there who had to pay/work their own way through because their parents didn't want them to feel entitled, wanted them to understand the value of a dollar, etc etc. But I think they're in the minority... :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Another bit of food for thought, on the debt relief programs that are being set up: all of them hinge on food animal. Personally, I wouldn't mind doing a stint in food animal/large animal, especially if it meant lowering the amount of debt that I'm stuck paying myself. But I know several vets who post on here have mentioned being railroaded into certain jobs because of the amount of experience they already have in the field, and lack in other areas. I'm wondering how difficult it would be to make the move back into small animal after working in large animal. Also, how horrible is it of me(in the eyes of the LA/FA community) to only want to do a few years of LA for the purpose of paying off loans? (Be nice please. I'm not trying to incite comment here, just reflecting.)
 
Another bit of food for thought, on the debt relief programs that are being set up: all of them hinge on food animal. Personally, I wouldn't mind doing a stint in food animal/large animal, especially if it meant lowering the amount of debt that I'm stuck paying myself. But I know several vets who post on here have mentioned being railroaded into certain jobs because of the amount of experience they already have in the field, and lack in other areas. I'm wondering how difficult it would be to make the move back into small animal after working in large animal. Also, how horrible is it of me(in the eyes of the LA/FA community) to only want to do a few years of LA for the purpose of paying off loans? (Be nice please. I'm not trying to incite comment here, just reflecting.)

I'm right there with you. Primarily I started out as wanted to work with Dogs and Cats. But then I looked at how am I going to pay for this? Scholarships, grants, whooo look large animal and food animal vet shortage grants! Sure I can do that!

Wish I knew how they pick the places that have shortages though because my area only has one vet that handles LA and she is always booked up. Part of the reason I want to do LA. Well gotta get ready to shadow her! TTYL!
 
Another bit of food for thought, on the debt relief programs that are being set up: all of them hinge on food animal. Personally, I wouldn't mind doing a stint in food animal/large animal, especially if it meant lowering the amount of debt that I'm stuck paying myself. But I know several vets who post on here have mentioned being railroaded into certain jobs because of the amount of experience they already have in the field, and lack in other areas. I'm wondering how difficult it would be to make the move back into small animal after working in large animal. Also, how horrible is it of me(in the eyes of the LA/FA community) to only want to do a few years of LA for the purpose of paying off loans? (Be nice please. I'm not trying to incite comment here, just reflecting.)

I wouldn't think it was that terrible. My main interest lies in equine, where there is already an excess of vets and those vets work for peanuts. I would also be willing to work in food animal for a couple of years in order to get ride of a lot of debt before going back and doing equine. That way I can still do what I love without the stress of not making enough money to cover my loans. But that's just a consideration...I have no idea how things will actually pan out.
 
I think that the food animal programs are designed so that you have to commit several years to the profession. I know several vets who switched from LA to SA, so it's clearly possible. LA is a much more physically demanding specialty, and less lucrative without the incentive programs.

I don't think it's an accurate assumption that students from wealthy parents will be more comfortable with huge debt loads. They are generally more accustomed to a comfortable lifestyle and so the idea of making so many monetary sacrifices is difficult. If the student is used to having everything they want, and the realization that vet school debt won't allow them to have that is scary.

We need vets empathetic to all populations. Poor students may be unable to empathize with rich people who spoil their teacup yorkies. Rich students may be unable to empathize with poor people who feed their dogs Old Roy and have to budget to simply purchase vaccines. Urban students may be unable to empathize with farmers who treat their livestock according to business practices. Rural students may be unable to empathize with urban families who confine their animals in a tiny apartment.

So... that's why we should just have diverse vet school classes ;-)
 
I think the real difficulty is experienced by students that have no state schools and no WICHE contracts, i.e. students from Connecticut or Rhode Island. They are stuck with a predefined set of choices: Paying out-of-state tuition, applying to schools that would let them enroll as in-state applicants after a year, or moving to a state to establish residency prior to applying.

Being from a state where my only option is a private university, I also feel the crunch as a non-traditional, financially independent student. I will have to make decisions about my career based on financial considerations.

What this will ultimately mean, I think, is that we're going to see a greater proportion of students that were initially well off, going into areas of the profession where they'll continue to earn on the high end of the scale, very similar to BakersDozen's example. Students who graduate with a large amount of debt will be be more likely to delay the pursuit of their true calling because they will be working in areas that grant them loan forgiveness. By the time they're financially ready to, for example, buy a private practice, it might not be the best personal decision for them.

I see this as a reflection of the problems America is facing as a whole right now. The dichotomy between rich and poor in this country is astounding: The richest 400 people in America have more wealth than half of all Americans combined. Also, according to an op-ed article in the NY Times, "the effective tax rate on the nation's richest people has fallen by about half in the last 20 years, and General Electric paid zero dollars in U.S. taxes on profits of more than $14 billion. Meanwhile, roughly 45 million Americans spend a third of their posttax income on food — and still run out monthly — and one in four kids goes to bed hungry at least some of the time."

I'm including these facts because I believe they, along with the rising cost of Vet Med, are proof that our system is inherently broken. If the cost of U Penn had been $5000 more per year, I never would have applied, and would be stuck doing this again next cycle. I probably would have moved somewhere with a state-sponsored school. If you live in any of the 24 states that aren't home to a state school (and I'm not sure if WICHE or affiliated states get state tuition with their host universities, maybe someone can help me here?), you have some very serious decisions. I really believe that a veterinary education will soon be unattainable for a good part of the population, ESPECIALLY if interest rates continue to rise.

$300,000 in loans, which is roughly what I will have when I graduate Penn, will become $670,000 in payments if I stretch that principle out over 25 years, which I might have to do. If I specialize, and accrue more interest over the 4 years after I graduate, I'll be over $700,000 dollars paid.

SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS

That, frankly, is disgusting and unconscionable to me, especially knowing that higher education is free to residents of many other countries.

I'm going into vet med knowing full well the significance of these numbers, but it took a lot of thought and a lot of introspection. We're continuing to move in this direction, and we will end up seeing the consequences in our profession. At some point, something will have to give, whether it is in our government's handling of student loans and educational financing, or in the structure of the professional degree and the cost of attaining it. But the exponential growth of this financial burden is unsustainable.
 
There's absolutely no precedent for that. People who pay more in taxes do not get more out of the public services they provide, in any application that I've ever seen of tax money. I mean, isn't that the POINT of tax money? Everyone puts in some amount that is then used to benefit programs under the jurisdiction of the governmental entity responsible for it? So if it's state taxes and state government, and they want to fund a state education system, meeting their residency rules establishes that you are making a contribution to that entity, no matter how much or how little it may be, and thus are entitled to the benefits it provides. Not making any contribution does not entitle you to its benefits. There's a clear-cut difference between the two.

Oh, no, I agree and I'm not saying that it should be the case. However, I can see how some might argue that by contributing more money, they should get more out of it. Not my own opinion, just a thought that crossed my mind.
 
how horrible is it of me(in the eyes of the LA/FA community) to only want to do a few years of LA for the purpose of paying off loans? (Be nice please. I'm not trying to incite comment here, just reflecting.)

I think that practices such as that are what has been a major contributor to the LA vet fall out. People get their loans paid off or to a more managable point and they dip out for something more convenient for their lifestyle. Not to say that it isn't understandable, but that leaves all these creaky old men (and women) who wanted to be LA vets in the first place left to provide care for like, an entire state worth of LA. So while I understand the desire, I also think it will hurt the profession in the end.
 
Another bit of food for thought, on the debt relief programs that are being set up: all of them hinge on food animal. Personally, I wouldn't mind doing a stint in food animal/large animal, especially if it meant lowering the amount of debt that I'm stuck paying myself. But I know several vets who post on here have mentioned being railroaded into certain jobs because of the amount of experience they already have in the field, and lack in other areas. I'm wondering how difficult it would be to make the move back into small animal after working in large animal. Also, how horrible is it of me(in the eyes of the LA/FA community) to only want to do a few years of LA for the purpose of paying off loans? (Be nice please. I'm not trying to incite comment here, just reflecting.)

I've considered the exact same thing. Personally, I wouldn't feel comfortable taking advantage of a program that is meant to help out those who really want to make a profession out of LA medicine. I know that I would be charging through those years of USDA work as fast as I could so that I could get back to working with cats and dogs or wildlife. But I don't think that's what the program is intended for, so I won't actually be doing that.
Then again, no one's going to say you can't do that, so it becomes a personal choice.
 
FYI-the USDA Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment Program that I think you guys are referring to is very competitive and selective-something like well over 200 applied for the 62 spots given in its first year of action.

Applicants will have letters of reference, previous food animal/rural/government experience in vet school, all that stuff. Not all spots are exclusively food animal-some shortage areas also have a general vet shortage and so there are opportunities to do a mixed practice as well. But you're much more likely to get the spot if you can back it up with years of production/food animal interest.

The shortage spots are nominated by the state, then a federal committee picks from those nominated. There is very specific criteria to be nominated as a shortage area. If you have more questions I can try to answer them, I have a lot of info on the VMLRP.
 
I'm also calling BS on this statement:



I think that has less to do with wealth and more to do with general empathy and understanding.

I won't say that *only* wealthy people can go. But I will say, lots of people who get in only manage to do so because they are wealthy (or at least not poor).

I'll use myself as an example. I was rejected by my in-state school (a few times). This year, I applied to 10 schools. The application fees alone were staggering. VMCAS fees, transcript fees, individual school application fees. Applying to 10 schools costs a *lot* of money for someone who is poor. And student loans don't cover it. If you are middle/upper-middle/rich - you probably don't even think of it. But if you are poor, it's pretty much an impossible hurdle.

And it doesn't stop there. Look at how much it realistically costs to attend an interview. I have to drive an hour just to get to the airport (assume I have no car). Then I've got to pay for a plane ticket, a hotel, and a rental car. Many of the interviews require a multiple day stay because they want to give you a tour of the campus/talk/whatever. And you need to allocate enough time so that if something goes wrong, you don't miss your interview.

You'll also need appropriate attire, and how you look does affect people's opinion of you. Do you want to wear something from the discount rack, or have a nice suit that was measured just for you?

Now, assume you've gotten five interviews. Yikes!

If you are well-to-do or have well-to-do parents; most of this doesn't even register as a concern. If your parents are poor and you are working for minimum wage on a horse farm, barely able to pay your rent; coming up with 5k-6k so you can apply and interview at vet schools is nearly impossible.

I had years where I made 20k while working full time. Just paying my bills was hard. Just getting time off work was a huge financial burden. Now to take time off work *and* shell out all this money. I couldn't have done it.

Oh, and then you finally get an acceptance letter; and they say, 'Send us $3,000 before April 15th or you can't come'. Financial aid isn't going to get to you before April 15th. On top of all the other money you've just spent; you now need to come up with another 3k! Good luck.

Thankfully, in my case, I had a significant other who basically paid all my bills, and my application fees, and gave me money for my interviews.

Still, the fact remains, if I didn't have a 'sugar momma' or 'well-to-do' parents; I would not be a vet student. Because I did have ~10k to drop, I was able to get accepted.
 
Cost me ~$5,000 to apply to vet school over the past 3 years. I went from $6,000 in the bank account to < $300 in a matter of months. Was lucky that A&M didn't require a deposit.

I wouldn't say you have to be wealthy (I'm certainly not) but you do have to plan ahead of time or, like me, don't see anything else you want in the mean time to spend money on and just fortuitously have a big enough cushion off hand.
 
I've considered the exact same thing. Personally, I wouldn't feel comfortable taking advantage of a program that is meant to help out those who really want to make a profession out of LA medicine. I know that I would be charging through those years of USDA work as fast as I could so that I could get back to working with cats and dogs or wildlife. But I don't think that's what the program is intended for, so I won't actually be doing that.

Hmm... I always thought that the intention of the VLMRP was not to help out future LA vets, but to help out the under-served communities they will be assigned to. That's why there is such specific criteria to be a shortage area, like rugbychick16 said. Also like she said, these areas are not always LA/food animal. They're just under served, and there's likely a reason.

There is a similar loan forgiveness program for doctors and dentists who agree to practice for a number of years in an under served urban or rural area. The powers that be understand that it is not a preferred area to practice and that the pay is crap (when you have that much debt), but they don't want these people to be without medical/dental care completely... So I thought it was sort of a business deal: You serve in this area where we know you don't necessarily want to practice (or literally cannot afford to), and we will forgive some/all of your loans.

Of course, some of the doctors/dentists/vets actually will want to work in under served areas because it genuinely interests them, but I don't think that's what the government cares about. Of course, I very well may be wrong, that was just the impression I got.
 
Hmm... I always thought that the intention of the VLMRP was not to help out future LA vets, but to help out the under-served communities they will be assigned to. That's why there is such specific criteria to be a shortage area, like rugbychick16 said. Also like she said, these areas are not always LA/food animal. They're just under served, and there's likely a reason.

There is a similar loan forgiveness program for doctors and dentists who agree to practice for a number of years in an under served urban or rural area. The powers that be understand that it is not a preferred area to practice and that the pay is crap (when you have that much debt), but they don't want these people to be without medical/dental care completely... So I thought it was sort of a business deal: You serve in this area where we know you don't necessarily want to practice (or literally cannot afford to), and we will forgive some/all of your loans.

Of course, some of the doctors/dentists/vets actually will want to work in under served areas because it genuinely interests them, but I don't think that's what the government cares about. Of course, I very well may be wrong, that was just the impression I got.

But I think that with LA medicine it is different, because there is such a dire shortage of (young) veterinarians in that field. It is not the same as a doctor or dentist serving a few years in an under-served area of the country...in this case it is the entire industry that is chronically under-served, and needs to look toward providing for the future.
But I also think the point is moot because, as someone else said, they tend to screen pretty heavily for those that have a background and strong interest in practicing large animal medicine.
 
I think that part of the reason the LA incentive programs are so important is because it is SO hard to do it forever. The practice I work for now has moved to only equine and SA because it got to be too much on the original owner as he grew older. LA is so labor intensive and can be so dangerous that it just isn't usually feasible or enjoyable to continue into old age. That's why I really think I would like working in a mixed practice where as I aged I could eventually give over that portion to some younger kid coming in.

But of course I'll probably change my mind once I actually get into vet school
 
EDIT: nevermind! 🙂
 
Last edited:
I may be mistaken, but I think that is per semester rather than year.

OH my bad! :smack:

Well I just spent the last 30 minutes googling every AVMA accredited school for 2010-2011 tuition and fees and none of them are near $9,352 then. 😕

I think NC State is the cheapest I found then, at just below $12 K. 👍 twelvetigers
 
I'm pretty sure it's the cheapest overall. The numbers go up every year, so the figure above may just be old? I dunno. Actually, Mississippi may be the cheapest for IS students overall...

Oklahoma, Georgia, Texas, and Kansas all have low IS tuition as well. Well, I think Kansas does, but their website only list things per credit hour. Lame.
 
Top