Steps to becoming a Vet tech or Vet assistant

Veterinary School Application Advising Ad
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
2

2short4life

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
I'm guessing a Vet tech and vet assistant are two different things, but what are the steps or requirements to become one of the two above?

Thanks:laugh:
Members don't see this ad.
 
hey
there are schools that offer vet tech and vet assit programs, like PIMA medical, and some colleges offer vet nursing

most places will let you be an assistant without going to classes though and you get to do the same stuff, but you have to go through the vet tech program to be certified or you can grandfather in after so many years

hope that helped
 
Sometimes people use the two terms loosely, which can be confusing. I'm a vet assistant, and I've just had lots of on the job training. There are degree programs for both, but depending in the state you live in, you are pretty much required to complete a program to be a tech. There are a whole bunch of programs, anywhere from 2-4 year formal programs for vet techs in which you can earn an associates or bachelors degree. That's about all I know in terms of the steps, you'll have to search for programs to get specifics. Good luck!
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Vet Techs are required to attend a 2 year AVMA-accredited Associates degree program in Veterinary Technology and then must pass a state board exam to become licensed. There are also a few Bachelors degree programs out there, but I'm not sure what benefits they will give you. Some states allow people with on the job training to take the board exams and become licensed. There are some limitations to this depending on specific state regulations.

From a legal standpoint, it is against the law for anyone but a board certified tech to use the title of Licensed (or certified, or registered, etc) Veterinary Technician. Its similar to nurse titles in that sense, except there is just the single level for vet techs.

Veterinary assistants, however, do not require any schooling. There are a few training programs out there to train people as assistants, but in my opinion they are pretty much worthless since they are unlikely to increase your wage potential.

PM me if you have any specific questions about the process.
 
PrimalMU said:
Vet Techs are required to attend a 2 year AVMA-accredited Associates degree program in Veterinary Technology and then must pass a state board exam to become licensed. There are also a few Bachelors degree programs out there, but I'm not sure what benefits they will give you. Some states allow people with on the job training to take the board exams and become licensed. There are some limitations to this depending on specific state regulations.
Click to expand...


This is all absolutely correct, I just thought I'd clarify for my state (since I know how the process works here.)

In Maryland, you become a vet tech by passing the VTNE (the national licensing exam.) Only people with an associates degree in veterinary technology or with a bachelor's degree in a related science (such as biology, chemistry, etc) are allowed to sit for the exam. Your own state should have a licensing board for veterinary technicians- they may have more specific information for your area online.
 
I haven't heard this, but if it's true I'm guessing that a large part of it is because so many people are getting bachelor's degrees now without being quite sure what they want to do with them. I know quite a few techs who have bachelor's degrees.

The most common thing in my area is to employ unlicensed techs/assistants. There are a lot of really good people who just never went to school or never took the test. By the same token, there are a lot of people who've worked three months cleaning kennels and consider themselves a vet tech.
 
WhtsThFrequency said:
I actually heard that the 2-year programs are decreasing and the new "norm" is becoming the 4 year program.
Click to expand...

It might be true that 4-year programs are becoming more common, but I highly doubt they outnumber 2-year programs just yet. The college where I will be entering the vet tech program has a 2-year and a 4-year, but the 4-year is just the 2-year program with added agricultural classes and the required general education classes to qualify for a bachelor's degree. The additional classes, from what I can see (not having a syllabus for any of them), don't really give much more tech related education. I'm sure this varies for each program, though.
 
WhtsThFrequency said:
I actually heard that the 2-year programs are decreasing and the new "norm" is becoming the 4 year program.
Click to expand...

Wow, Id be curious to know where you heard this. Do you possibly remember? Was it online or through school? Id love to check it out. Before I decided to go to veterinary school, I thought about becoming a veterinary technology educator. In my state we had two associates programs but no bachelor programs. I went to several colleges and universities and tried to get them interested but no one would even hear of it because while they have more than enough classes to qualify the program, to start a whole new program takes an extensive amount of money (department employees, supplies, office space ect) and without a grant or some other funding source, they basically said "Aint gonna happen".
Long story short, Veterinary Technologist Degrees (which is the 4 year program equivalent to an AAS Veterinary Technology degree) must be granted by a university level institution. Unfortunately most technology programs are at the community college level.

I think in an effort to keep technicians in the field; some colleges have started offering a 2+2 program where someone who already has a AAS can transfer in and get their bachelors degree. The additional 2 years typically offer a more indepth coverage of veterinary technology including buy not limited to management, emergency and critical care, anesthesia, dentistry and internal medicine. You might think of it as a good primer for pursuing a veterinary technology specialty certification-although its not required.

If your information is true, then I think that would be a great step to giving technicians the acknowledgement and designation they deserve. Ive heard more than one person say "well techicians are not equivalent to nurses because nurses get a 4 year degree". I would love if people couldnt say that anymore. Of course my response is always...your right technicians are not like human nurses, we learn and do much much more, and we learn it all in half the time they do. So 😛 to them.
 
LVT2DVM

Argh I've been searching and I don't know where I read it (it was online....) well, it wasn't so much that 2 years are dropping off the face of the earth and 4 years are where its at - it was more along the lines of 4 year programs gradually increasing and becoming more highly regarded than 2 years.....damn, I will keep looking for it....sometimes I can be Google-Incompetent.

I really hope it is true to....I have the UTMOST respect for vet techs and they absolutely do not get the credit they deserve, a real 4 yr degree would definitely help that in the "public eye" yknow?....I got in a bit of a tussel on an allo board because I compared LVTs to RNs and they got their panties in a wad....but I stuck up for ya! 😉

35 k would be high for a Vet Tech? What do they make? I would have assumed it was more like between 30 low, 35 mid, 40 being a mid/high, am I wrong? Jeez Louise! That stinks.
 
According to [http://www.allalliedhealthschools.com/faqs/veterinary-tech-salary.php], the average salary for a veterinary technician in 2005 was $26,710 a year (about $13.56/hour). The site also says that NAVTA places the average in 2003 as being $30,500 a year ($15.25/hour). The Bureau of Labor and Statistics places the average earnings for the middle 50% as being between $10.44 and $15.77 per hour, with the average at $12.88 in May 2006.
 
I took a Veterinary Assistant course online then I started volunteering at a local animal shelter, after graduation I got hired at that same animal shelter working in their ICU unit.

I now also volunteer at Noahs animal hospital 4 days a week for even more hands on training.

So far I have assisted in 2 surgeries and also I assist in Noahs ICU unit in the hospital.

I hope to be financially able to start Vet Tech school in the summer of 2008😀

I havent chosen which school yet, its a toss up between SPC or Penn Foster, both are AVMA acredited schools.
Anyways this is how I got my start in veterinary medicine.
Here are some pictures of me at work in the ICU at the animal shelter http://cocsister.multiply.com/
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Vet assistant and vet tech are very different, but in some states they kind of blur together as far as what they are legally able to do. But a vet tech almost always has to have gone to a 2 or 4 year vet tech program and then taken a test for their certification. Sometimes if you've been trained on the job and have 5+ years experience, depending on the state, you could take the test and become certified without the schooling. Most states seem to be moving away from this though.

A vet assistant doesn't have to have any formal schooling and could be hired right out of high school if that worked for the clinic they applied to. I personally think vet assistant programs are generally a waste of time and money just because most clinics would give you the same skills while you're getting paid for it. I got hired as a vet assistant out of college and do venipuncture, give injections and oral meds, place catheters, prep for and monitor surgeries, measure for and assist with rads, do nail trims, ear cytologies, anals, and clip and cleans, do client callbacks, give estimates, take histories, etc. If I weren't heading to vet school this fall I'd be getting trained on dental prophy too. In Oregon an assistant can do everything but surgery, extractions, rabies vaccines, suturing, intubation, placing microchips, and inducing anesthesia (if I remember correctly).

The advantage of being an assistant over a tech is that you can still learn a ton without having to be in school all that time, and it's enough to decide if you want to be in the field or not. For me it was perfect because I just needed experience in a clinic to make sure I could handle being a vet, and it's given me that. The advantage of being a tech over an assistant is that you actually have the knowledge of why you're doing what you're doing... whereas as an assistant you do what you're instructed to do but don't always know why or what the mechanism of it is inside an animal. If I thought it was going to take me a long time to be a vet, being a vet tech would be a much more fulfilling interim career than being an assistant, IMO, because you are taught much more and have a much better understanding of what you do.
 
Well put, athenaparthenos. One of the things I've had to decide was whether or not I wanted to finish up my pre-vet pre-reqs and hope to get into vet school or go into vet tech school. After having a job as an assistant last summer I decided that the veterinary field was my calling, and that I would be happy being a doctor as well as a tech. That said, I've opted to go enter a tech program this fall. Luckily since I've already got 4 years of college behind me I've got all my gen ed done and will have plenty of holes in my schedule for the rest of my pre-reqs.

Another major plus is that I will get plenty of large animal experience (something I can't seem to find where I live) in the tech program I'm attending (Morehead State University in KY). They have their own farm, and are actually currently building a LA clinic on their farm.
 
LVT2DVM said:
If your information is true, then I think that would be a great step to giving technicians the acknowledgement and designation they deserve. Ive heard more than one person say "well techicians are not equivalent to nurses because nurses get a 4 year degree". I would love if people couldnt say that anymore. Of course my response is always...your right technicians are not like human nurses, we learn and do much much more, and we learn it all in half the time they do. So 😛 to them.
Click to expand...

Interesting response. My Mom is an RNC (almost a Nurse practitioner YAY!) and they CERTAINLY know just as much as a tech. I'm sick of this whole comparing human med to vet med. It's rediculous. They learn gram stains, many different tests, this and that. They also learn how to treat people so a hospital doesn't get sued.

Can you learn how to become a nurse on-the-job, no? Does that mean I'm saying that vet med is easier? No. They have to worry about liability because everything is taken much more seriously. A tech can screw up a bit with little notice; a nurse does that and the hospital is sued.

Maybe I'm getting a bit defensive. Well, not defensive, just fed up with this grudge against human med. It's all medicine... No matter which branch your passionate about.
 
Kara31191 said:
Interesting response. My Mom is an RNC (almost a Nurse practitioner YAY!) and they CERTAINLY know just as much as a tech. I'm sick of this whole comparing human med to vet med. It's rediculous. They learn gram stains, many different tests, this and that. They also learn how to treat people so a hospital doesn't get sued.

Can you learn how to become a nurse on-the-job, no? Does that mean I'm saying that vet med is easier? No. They have to worry about liability because everything is taken much more seriously. A tech can screw up a bit with little notice; a nurse does that and the hospital is sued.

Maybe I'm getting a bit defensive. Well, not defensive, just fed up with this grudge against human med. It's all medicine... No matter which branch your passionate about.
Click to expand...


Ya know, I had a long response, but I decided not to post it. Despite how much knowledge techs have versus the knowledge nurses posses, the economy will dictate that techs will never be as "prestigious" as nurses. I just wish techs had a bit more respect. I've honestly seen more human nurses attacking techs than the other way around, especially whenever a debate comes up on whether or not techs should be labeled as nurses. Maybe they feel threatened? I don't know, but as I said before, they will always have more prestige and really shouldn't stick their noses in vet medicine's business (honestly, the definition of nurse is "to [SIZE=-1]try to cure by special care of treatment, of an illness or injury." Its not some magical title that only applies to humans).[/SIZE]
 
Kara31191 said:
They have to worry about liability because everything is taken much more seriously. A tech can screw up a bit with little notice; a nurse does that and the hospital is sued.
Click to expand...

I seem to recall it is MY license and liability on the line for the actions of every single person I employ. That doesn't make it less serious. Try more.

If you think liability is not taken seriously in veterinary medicine because it is "just an animal" and lawsuits are not lodged against us, this is not the profession for you.
 
Vet Assistants are equal to an CNA in people medicine

Vet Techs (non certified) are equal to an LPN in people medicine

CVTS or RVTS are equal to an RN in people medicine

I live in Saint Petersburg Florida and here CVT'S starting pay is only $10.00 an hour. Cashiers at Walmart make this same amount to start! Even a part time cashier + Full Benefits for both part time or full time.

If you work for an non profit shelter like I do you only make min wage which is $6.77 an hour, & No Benefits, No holiday pay or time and a 1/2 pay.
Im thinking about getting a job at Walmart! LOL
 
Kara31191 said:
Interesting response. My Mom is an RNC (almost a Nurse practitioner YAY!) and they CERTAINLY know just as much as a tech. I'm sick of this whole comparing human med to vet med. It's rediculous. They learn gram stains, many different tests, this and that. They also learn how to treat people so a hospital doesn't get sued.

Can you learn how to become a nurse on-the-job, no? Does that mean I'm saying that vet med is easier? No. They have to worry about liability because everything is taken much more seriously. A tech can screw up a bit with little notice; a nurse does that and the hospital is sued.

Maybe I'm getting a bit defensive. Well, not defensive, just fed up with this grudge against human med. It's all medicine... No matter which branch your passionate about.
Click to expand...


I come from a long line of nurses. My mom's a nurse practitioner, and both of my grandmas were nurses. Both of my grandmothers were "diploma" nurses, which was mostly on the job training with some classes thrown in. The way I understand it was that nursing didn't move to universities until the 60's.

I think a vet tech is comparable to a nurse. However, from my understanding, a vet assistant is more comparable to a CNA (both can either be trained OTJ, or get a PIMA certificate, and they do a bunch of the "grunt" work that those higher-up-the-ladder don't really want to do).
 
TrocarKarin said:
I come from a long line of nurses. My mom's a nurse practitioner, and both of my grandmas were nurses. Both of my grandmothers were "diploma" nurses, which was mostly on the job training with some classes thrown in. The way I understand it was that nursing didn't move to universities until the 60's.

I think a vet tech is comparable to a nurse. However, from my understanding, a vet assistant is more comparable to a CNA (both can either be trained OTJ, or get a PIMA certificate, and they do a bunch of the "grunt" work that those higher-up-the-ladder don't really want to do).
Click to expand...

Hello Trocarkarin, You are right I think, Vet Assistants really do most of the grunt work, also Vet Assistants would be the same as an CNA in human nursing. I think its cool that you come from a long line of nurses also.
🙂
 
athenaparthenos...where are you located? I am in VA and assistants and unlicensed techs are not permitted to give injections of any kind. They can pull blood but generally do not even place catheters due to the flush. Just curious...

I work in an emergency hospital as an assistant and our nurses (techs) are absolutely unbelievable. The skills they have, as well as their care and compassion, just blow me away. As an assistant, I pretty much just do grunt work. I didn't need any experience whatsoever to get the job (in fact, we are having trouble trying to find people that are not overqualified but have some sort of experience. Between the two, we will take folks who have less, rather than more, experience.)
 
VeganChick said:
athenaparthenos...where are you located? I am in VA and assistants and unlicensed techs are not permitted to give injections of any kind. They can pull blood but generally do not even place catheters due to the flush. Just curious...
Click to expand...

From my earlier post: In Oregon an assistant can do everything but surgery, extractions, rabies vaccines, suturing, intubation, placing microchips, and inducing anesthesia (if I remember correctly).
I'm in Portland, OR 🙂 I think a fair amount of smaller clinics around here don't employ licensed techs because they would require a higher salary, and in a small clinic the doctors do the duties a tech would do in a larger clinic where the doctor's time is in more demand, and the assistants take care of the rest.

Believe me, I still do a lot of grunt work though -- cleaning and autoclaving and phones aren't all that exciting, heh. I'm so happy though because we finally got a kennel tech in do closing at night -- no more staying an hour and a half after close just to finish the closing list! 😍
 
I am not sure where you are located, but in NJ things are little bit different. To be a veterinary technician, you do not need to be certified, and can learn everything on the job. Unfortunately, to be certified you now MUST take a class. There was a period of time where you could take the exam without a course to be certified, but now you must have a degree. I have heard that they might be requiring technicians to have attended a technician program, but so far I have not heard anything concrete. I do not know how I feel about that changing here. Most of the technicians I know are not certified, and a lot of them are very very very talented. I think it would be unfair for them to lose their title and potentially their rate of pay. For that matter, I have worked with several certified technicians and I was not impressed by their skills or knowledge (I do not mean to say they all were not good at what they do, just that taking a course does not guarantee that you are going to be a good technician). I think that they should return to allowing technicians who have learned through experience to take the exam to be certified. There are a lot of techs out there who have been doing this for decades and to have to stop and go back to school to learn things that they already know would be insulting.
 
enchantingme2 said:
I am not sure where you are located, but in NJ things are little bit different. To be a veterinary technician, you do not need to be certified, and can learn everything on the job. Unfortunately, to be certified you now MUST take a class. There was a period of time where you could take the exam without a course to be certified, but now you must have a degree. I have heard that they might be requiring technicians to have attended a technician program, but so far I have not heard anything concrete. I do not know how I feel about that changing here. Most of the technicians I know are not certified, and a lot of them are very very very talented. I think it would be unfair for them to lose their title and potentially their rate of pay. For that matter, I have worked with several certified technicians and I was not impressed by their skills or knowledge (I do not mean to say they all were not good at what they do, just that taking a course does not guarantee that you are going to be a good technician). I think that they should return to allowing technicians who have learned through experience to take the exam to be certified. There are a lot of techs out there who have been doing this for decades and to have to stop and go back to school to learn things that they already know would be insulting.
Click to expand...

The problem is that OTJ rarely learn the "why's" of what they do, only the "how's". Its important to require schooling in order to be certified from the standpoint of advancing the profession (and therefore veterinary medicine).

And btw, according to the NJVMA:

"The NJVMA will provide certificates of registration to applicants who have completed all of the following for each category and be known as: a. Graduate Veterinary Technician: Graduate of an accredited two, three or four year program in Veterinary technology approved by the AVMA and who has passed the Veterinary Technician National Exam or an equivalent examination approved by the NJVMA.

b. Veterinary Technician: Person who has passed the Veterinary Technicians National Exam or an equivalent examination approved by the NJVMA, and who has three years clinical experience under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian.

c. Veterinary Assistant: Person whose training, knowledge and skills are less than that required of a veterinary technician and who provides support to veterinarians.

d. The NJVMA may issue a certificate of registration if the applicant has been issued a certificate of registration, certification or licensure in another state whose requirement are at least equal to those of the NJVMA."

According to that, technicians must have passed the VTNE in order to use the title of "technician." Unless they have taken the VTNE, they are legally considered assistants, no matter how much OTJ training/experience they have. This illustrates the importance of distinguishing between veterinary technicians and veterinary assistants.
 
enchantingme2 said:
I am not sure where you are located, but in NJ things are little bit different. To be a veterinary technician, you do not need to be certified, and can learn everything on the job. Unfortunately, to be certified you now MUST take a class. There was a period of time where you could take the exam without a course to be certified, but now you must have a degree. I have heard that they might be requiring technicians to have attended a technician program, but so far I have not heard anything concrete. I do not know how I feel about that changing here. Most of the technicians I know are not certified, and a lot of them are very very very talented. I think it would be unfair for them to lose their title and potentially their rate of pay. For that matter, I have worked with several certified technicians and I was not impressed by their skills or knowledge (I do not mean to say they all were not good at what they do, just that taking a course does not guarantee that you are going to be a good technician). I think that they should return to allowing technicians who have learned through experience to take the exam to be certified. There are a lot of techs out there who have been doing this for decades and to have to stop and go back to school to learn things that they already know would be insulting.
Click to expand...

Enchanting, I agree with you that it would be insulting for techs that already know what they are doing to have to go to school for licensure. I think that they should just be able to take the VTNE test and get their license.
I live in Florida and here the techs dont have to be licensed either, nor do assistants, the animal hospital where I volunteer at doesent even have ANY CVTS oh they have Techs but none are licensed and let me tell you they KNOW their stuff! Also working at the animal shelter SPC Tech students have to do 16 hours at an animal shelter working in the sick room, I have had to so far show two tech students from SPC how to pill a cat, and how to run fluids correctly, one didnt even know what drontal was! So I think that lots of tech students really dont get enough training or I dont know what!😕
 
PrimalMU said:
Ya know, I had a long response, but I decided not to post it. Despite how much knowledge techs have versus the knowledge nurses posses, the economy will dictate that techs will never be as "prestigious" as nurses. I just wish techs had a bit more respect. I've honestly seen more human nurses attacking techs than the other way around, especially whenever a debate comes up on whether or not techs should be labeled as nurses. Maybe they feel threatened? I don't know, but as I said before, they will always have more prestige and really shouldn't stick their noses in vet medicine's business (honestly, the definition of nurse is "to [SIZE=-1]try to cure by special care of treatment, of an illness or injury." Its not some magical title that only applies to humans).[/SIZE]
Click to expand...

Sorry. i'm just sick of the grudge, on both sides. My Mom acts like vetmed is less than it is, and my vet says human med is going to h***. Either way, I shouldn't have posted such a response.

Well, the only thing I meant about the liability is that, in the eyes of the law, animals are property and humans are lives. That's what I mean by the difference in liability. Not that either liscense is superior. Sorry if I offended. I didn't mean to. It's just a sore spot. Sorry, again.
 
VA Cj said:
Enchanting, I agree with you that it would be insulting for techs that already know what they are doing to have to go to school for licensure. I think that they should just be able to take the VTNE test and get their license.
I live in Florida and here the techs dont have to be licensed either, nor do assistants, the animal hospital where I volunteer at doesent even have ANY CVTS oh they have Techs but none are licensed and let me tell you they KNOW their stuff! Also working at the animal shelter SPC Tech students have to do 16 hours at an animal shelter working in the sick room, I have had to so far show two tech students from SPC how to pill a cat, and how to run fluids correctly, one didnt even know what drontal was! So I think that lots of tech students really dont get enough training or I dont know what!😕
Click to expand...

I know Im gonna get flack for this one but heres goes. Ive been an LVT for 14 years and I know my stuff..With your philosophy would you agree then that I should be able to become a veterinarian simply by passing the NAVLE without attending vet school?? Im sure people are gonna say its "different" so please explain why? Im curious to see your logic.
 
LVT2DVM said:
I know Im gonna get flack for this one but heres goes. Ive been an LVT for 14 years and I know my stuff..With your philosophy would you agree then that I should be able to become a veterinarian simply by passing the NAVLE without attending vet school?? Im sure people are gonna say its "different" so please explain why? Im curious to see your logic.
Click to expand...

That's a really interesting point. I would say it is different, probably mostly because of liability and autonomy issues. (Autonomy in the sense that LVTs cannot hang out a sign and practice all on their own, they have to practice under a vet who must have had schooling. Same thing for nurses, cannot practice without being under a doctor, except possibly nurse practitioners...I'm a little hazy on that.)

Anyway, still a very interesting point. I hadn't thought of it that way before.
 
VAgirl said:
That's a really interesting point. I would say it is different, probably mostly because of liability and autonomy issues. (Autonomy in the sense that LVTs cannot hang out a sign and practice all on their own, they have to practice under a vet who must have had schooling. Same thing for nurses, cannot practice without being under a doctor, except possibly nurse practitioners...I'm a little hazy on that.)
Click to expand...


Thats the whole underlying point. There is a growing trend in the regulation of the veterinary technician profession to begin requiring schooling so that techs can practice more autonomy (not in diagnosing, prognosing, or performing surgery, of course). By not supporting required schooling for techs, you are not supporting the advancement of the veterinary profession. In fact, in my opinion, being of the opinion that OTJ trained techs should be just as certified as techs who have gone through schooling, you are marginalizing the field of veterinary medicine much like someone who is of the opinion that nurses (any nurses, not just those with 4-year degrees) would if they could become certified without actual schooling. To say that techs should be allowed to take the VTNE without formal schooling because "they've been doing it for so long," you are essentially putting emotion before logic (wow, I sound like a Vulcan!). From a purely objective point of view, it is essential for schooling to be required for certified techs if the position of veterinary technician is to move forward. And no, it won't be an easy transition, but I imagine it wasn't an easy transition when human nurses did it, but I think we can all agree that patients are better off for it.

BTW, all the "you's" in there were general "you's", not specific "you's." 🙂
 
PrimalMU, you make some very good points. There will be growing pains, which are never easy, but often result in something very good in the end.

Here's a question...if we removed the question of what becomes to current techs who are working without having received any formal education (especially those who've been working for 10+ years in the field) does that change anyone's opinion on whether or not requiring education of vet techs is a good thing? So, pretend you have no current techs and you're launching the brand new field of veterinary techicians...would you make education a requirement? If yes, then it does seem that PrimalMU is right, that emotion is getting in the way of logic, potentially to the detriment of the field.

And don't worry, Primal, I knew the "you"s were not directed at me. 🙂 This is such an interesting discussion!
 
LVT2DVM said:
Im sure people are gonna say its "different" so please explain why? Im curious to see your logic.
Click to expand...

Name a procedure your allowed to perform or a medication your allowed to dispense on your own accord? Everything you can do is under the license of a veterinarian. Legally you cant decide an animal needs catheter and place one, nor can you decide an animal needs fluids and give them, or put an animal on oxygen.

Legally a certified vet tech cant do anything unless working under a veterinarian which is just as much as a non-certified vet tech can do. Certification is just an external attestment to ones skills.
 
david594 said:
Legally a certified vet tech cant do anything unless working under a veterinarian which is just as much as a non-certified vet tech can do. Certification is just an external attestment to ones skills.
Click to expand...


Depending on state regulations, there are some things that only veterinary technicians can do. One example is giving rabies vaccinations. In some states, assistants would not be allowed to administer a rabies vaccination, regardless of how much direct supervision by a veterinarian there is. So, its more than just a "title." It does indeed come with legal responsibilities that cannot be performed by non-certified "techs."
 
david594 said:
Name a procedure your allowed to perform or a medication your allowed to dispense on your own accord? Everything you can do is under the license of a veterinarian. Legally you cant decide an animal needs catheter and place one, nor can you decide an animal needs fluids and give them, or put an animal on oxygen.

Legally a certified vet tech cant do anything unless working under a veterinarian which is just as much as a non-certified vet tech can do. Certification is just an external attestment to ones skills.
Click to expand...

In some (my) state licensed techs can, in emergency situations, intubate, place IV caths, give fluids and give life-saving injections without a doctors instruction. Non-certified personnel cannot. While Ive never been put into a situation where this needed to occur, the fact the regulations have included an exception to the rule leads one to believe there is a difference.

Most of this discord could be eliminated if all 50 states would adopt the same titles/job descriptions for veterinary personnel, a goal the technology profession has been working towards for many years. As PrimalMU stated an interest alot of veterinarians have is to elevate the status of the certified tech to more like a nurse practitioner who has some autonomy and then allow "field-trained" employees to fill the traditional technician positions. We are seeing some states working towards this goal by allowing technicians to perform what are considered traditional "doctor" duties and more 4 year BS degree programs for veterinary technology. But again without agreement of titles across the state the debate will unfortunately continue.
 
So what do you say about the Certified Veterinary Technicians I work with who received their BS in Animal Science, worked their 4000 hours in a clinical setting and then passed the national veterinary technician exam?

They passed the same certification exam you did, but are they somehow less fitting of the certified title? They passed the exam, so I personally don't think they are. If you disagree with me on this, then the flaw is in the certification exam and it should be made more challenging to keep such unqualified individuals from passing it.

Graduate Certified Veterinary Technician versus just a regular Certified Veterinary Technician?
 
Do Animal Science programs require pharmacology classes? Thats one series of classes that I doubt Animal Science majors would have. How would they know that you aren't supposed to prescribe an NSAID with prednisone? The VTNE often isn't the only certification test required. Some states may require both, just the VTNE, or just the state board certification test. States like California recognize (I assume) that the VTNE is flawed, and have put in place a more difficult state examination. Besides, we all know that exams can't test every bit of knowledge. I would still rather put my faith in someone with training specific instruction. However, I would certainly rather have someone with an Animal Science degree teching than someone with no schooling at all.

How would you feel if someone completed a pre-med series of courses, volunteered at a hospital for 4000 hours, and then decided they wanted to take the test and become a RN?

If we want to further the veterinary profession we MUST have standards. Right now, we don't have any sort of comprehensive standardization between states. Its not a matter of whether or not someone can pass a test, its a matter of whether or not people without the specific schooling should be allowed to take the test in the first place. As I mentioned before, I'm not speaking from emotion, I'm just trying to put this into perspective so people can see why the profession needs more standardization.
 
Ya know, this whole discussion is about how the testing system is flawed. California is no exception. 😉

I have to wonder why all these pre-vets are arguing the loopholes of the system rather than recognizing that standards such as required vet tech specific schooling is good for the field of veterinary medicine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kirb
Traditional Small Animal GP Vet Assistant vs Dentist Vet Assistant Job
Replies
3
Views
241
juggling-zebra0831
J
M
  • Question Question
Vet Experience or Animal Experience?
Replies
5
Views
227
mnnatio
M
Cowsrcool
Current Vets and Vet students: WWYD?
2
Replies
72
Views
5K
indysadventures
indysadventures
L
International (pre) vet experiences after undergrad?
Replies
7
Views
261
juggling-zebra0831
J
Charlie Rollin
Best time to tour vet schools?
Replies
3
Views
875
battie
battie
Top