Things that make a bad vet

[DVMDream]

FWIW, even asking them to do welfare checks may not do a darn thing in certain areas. And animals are still considered property by law.

Yup, I made a few of these calls for welfare checks to be done on patients after they left with no treatment at all.... nothing ever came of any of these welfare checks.

Depending upon where you live, these may not even be an option and even if it is, some departments don't take them seriously. Also, it is easy for anyone to simply say they got rid of the animal.. the officers can't go into the house and if the animal's owner isn't just willing to show them the dog/cat then nothing will happen.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

This is becoming such an attacking thread. You may all believe what you want. And I will believe what I want. It's clear that this thread has been slightly derailed and I am done with this back and forth madness.

We are all going into the same field. We should be respectful and nurturing towards each other.....not this.

They're just trying to make you realize that your future as a veterinarian isn't all sunshine and daisies. You can say all of these nice things about saving animals and scraping up funds and whatnot, but we don't live in an ideal world. There will be those pets that you never hear about again after you refuse to euthanize and kick them out your door. For me, those are the cases that would really keep me up at night. "Gee, I hope the owners did right by the animal and at least brought it to a shelter."

 

[Minnerbelle]

That is slightly rude. But that's your opinion. I don't know you nor do you know me.

That is my opinion based on a decade plus of shelter experience in many settings and hundreds of euthanasias in many settings for many reasons. Clearly you don't get it, and I don't think you have the capacity to get it at this point in your life. Do yourself a favor and just stop. Do what Dyachei suggested and bookmark this page and come back as you're graduating vet school. Necrobump it at that time and let us know if your opinions haven't changed.

 

[LetItSnow]

I think the key is to be polite, respectful, and perhaps not do it so often it affects the practice atmosphere. I have seen plenty of offices with people who are vocal. They are just professional about it.

Well. It's life. You can always choose to have convictions and stand on them. But the tech that tells me they won't put a catheter in an animal I'm about to euth because they don't think it's a justifiable euth is the tech that would be out a job if I had any say in it. Whether the conviction makes that worthwhile is up to the individual.

 

[LetItSnow]

But I have personal experience with this. I have worked in a very high kill shelter, a very high kill practice (where unfortunately people often came just to euthanize their pets....good because we didn't jack our prices up....but not so good all the time.), and I have seen no-kill shelters home hundreds of CH cats, dozens of three or even two legged creatures ... I have seen a snippet of both sides. And I do stand with the idea of no-kill shelters. But that doesn't mean I won't euthanize when circumstances command it. Whether that's safety of the animals involved or lack of support to keep them alive.

Believe me, you don't have the experience you think you do.

I'm not being condescending or insulting. It's just the way it is.

 

[Minnerbelle]

Well. It's life. You can always choose to have convictions and stand on them. But the tech that tells me they won't put a catheter in an animal I'm about to euth because they don't think it's a justifiable euth is the tech that would be out a job if I had any say in it. Whether the conviction makes that worthwhile is up to the individual.

It's like the marriage license lady.

 

[cowgirla]

To bring this back around to the PRE-vet part. Remember that euthanasia is a common interview topic. Hint- saying you'll refuse to do certain things is not a good answer. Schools are looking for more than a simple "no way." Have a reason, have an explanation, have alternatives but don't stand in front of your interviewers and say you will never do something- whether that is euthanasia, declaw, slaughterhouse work, etc. vet schools want students with open minds who are willing to learn and evolve.

 

[CalliopeDVM]

Well. It's life. You can always choose to have convictions and stand on them. But the tech that tells me they won't put a catheter in an animal I'm about to euth because they don't think it's a justifiable euth is the tech that would be out a job if I had any say in it. Whether the conviction makes that worthwhile is up to the individual.

You bet! They wouldn't be working for me, or at least not working with me. In the clinic, we all have to be a team, and staff that can't support my plans to the clients (not just in words but in tone, body language, expression, etc) would have no place working for me. And those things are very hard to hide from clients unless you're a seasoned pro.

 

[CalliopeDVM]

vet schools want students with open minds who are willing to learn and evolve.

We should all strive to be that person all through life.

 

[LetItSnow]

It's like the marriage license lady.

I just snorted coffee reading that. Thanks.

 

[Minnerbelle]

I just snorted coffee reading that. Thanks.

Anytime.

 

[missdarjeeling]

They're just trying to make you realize that your future as a veterinarian isn't all sunshine and daisies. You can say all of these nice things about saving animals and scraping up funds and whatnot, but we don't live in an ideal world.

Part of me wonders how you'd even do this all the time, logistically, even if you were 100% convinced it was the only right thing to do. It's exhausting enough to get through the day sometimes, and where on earth would you get the time and energy? Doctors often stay late finishing up records or go out of their way for certain pets and clients. Some that I've worked with have helped clients on their own free time and have gone above and beyond what would be expected. They give enough of themselves to the pets they see, and the idea of them giving even more by making themselves responsible for trying to rescue and re-home any pet that needs it seems like a recipe for pretty much instant burnout and serious depression.

 

[Starry-chan]

This is becoming such an attacking thread. You may all believe what you want. And I will believe what I want. It's clear that this thread has been slightly derailed and I am done with this back and forth madness.

We are all going into the same field. We should be respectful and nurturing towards each other.....not this.

Personally, I think everybody is doing a good job of expressing their disagreement in a respectful way.

Nonetheless, I understand how having a lot of people disagree with you can sting. It can be scary to have deeply held convictions challenged and it can sting to feel like you're all by yourself up against a bunch of people that disagree with you. But it will be okay. Take a break from the forum. Let the shock wear off. Then come back and talk to us again. It will make you a stronger person

 

[pinkpuppy9]

I kind of want to start a bad vet student thread. Or at least a bad first year vet student thread.

Seriously, how many times were we warned not to say "Well, my clinic did it this way."

 

[orca2011]

To bring this back around to the PRE-vet part. Remember that euthanasia is a common interview topic. Hint- saying you'll refuse to do certain things is not a good answer. Schools are looking for more than a simple "no way." Have a reason, have an explanation, have alternatives but don't stand in front of your interviewers and say you will never do something- whether that is euthanasia, declaw, slaughterhouse work, etc. vet schools want students with open minds who are willing to learn and evolve.

I've just been watching this, but just wanted to emphasize this point. I had this exact question about convenience euthanasia as an interview question. Initially going into vet school, I wasn't really for them because two of the three vets I worked with refused to perform them (looking back on it it, it was kind of odd since we were also attached to the local shelter where said dogs could be surrendered had the potential to be euthanized anyway...) I stated this in my interview and explained how I would try to figure out more about the situation and look into other options. Now, 5 months away from graduation, I would still talk to the client and see if there was more to the story and ask about other options, but would be open to humanely euthanizing them as it may be in there best interest. I've also worked with more and more clinicians who are open to it. And I now get really frustrated with all the post on facebook of people bashing veterinarians for performing them when they have absolutely no idea what the whole story was or what was going through the veterinarians mind.

 

[katryn]

I've just been watching this, but just wanted to emphasize this point. I had this exact question about convenience euthanasia as an interview question. Initially going into vet school, I wasn't really for them because two of the three vets I worked with refused to perform them (looking back on it it, it was kind of odd since we were also attached to the local shelter where said dogs could be surrendered had the potential to be euthanized anyway...) I stated this in my interview and explained how I would try to figure out more about the situation and look into other options. Now, 5 months away from graduation, I would still talk to the client and see if there was more to the story and ask about other options, but would be open to humanely euthanizing them as it may be in there best interest. I've also worked with more and more clinicians who are open to it. And I now get really frustrated with all the post on facebook of people bashing veterinarians for performing them when they have absolutely no idea what the whole story was or what was going through the veterinarians mind.

I'm a year and a half out, and am still trying to figure out how I feel about it. The one euthanasia that I would have considered a "convenience", the owner obviously didn't think so. We had a long and heart rending discussion about possible options and came to the joint conclusion that the owner really did think euthanasia from a known loving home was a better option than attempted rehoming. With that one experience, I can at least say I am ok with it as long as owners are making a thoughtful and informed decision.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Well, that's how I get all my animals, through owners being dicks. I've seen this happen only once, and I will NEVER let it happen again. It will become my animal where I will adopt it out before it is euthanized.

Better get a ranch in Nevada or something.

 

[LadyOtheFarm]

I don't know if I can word this right but:

A vet might be bad if he performs many convenience euthanasias and doesn't tell his staff anything about any of the cases so the staff is left thinking the vet has turned into a monster who is willing to kill without thought or question.

No, he should not need to explain every little thing. No, he is not accountable to his staff for his decisions. Yes, lots of death can make conversation uncomfortable.

My point is just that if the actions being taken cause concern in the staff for the mental welfare and decision making of the vet, than maybe he ought to mention "there were reasons" to explain so they don't freak out over whether or not the vet is ok.

So to restate: not saying convenience euthanasia is terrible all the time, not saying you need to always explain everything to your staff, but if they can go home and wonder if Dr.----- has lost it and is killing everything in sight or is taking out a desire for death (even for himself) on his patients by offering easy death with no consequences.... if your staff or community is worried about you or debating whether to hate you over it or the community has started to see you as Dr death, you might want to speak up and let them know there were reasons and you didn't blindly walk into a room and kill that puppy for the mean owner without asking any questions.

Now that I've put enough qualifiers on that, I think it's clear as mud. So...
COMMUNICATION IS GOOD!

 

[pinkpuppy9]

I don't know if I can word this right but:

A vet might be bad if he performs many convenience euthanasias and doesn't tell his staff anything about any of the cases so the staff is left thinking the vet has turned into a monster who is willing to kill without thought or question.

No, he should not need to explain every little thing. No, he is not accountable to his staff for his decisions. Yes, lots of death can make conversation uncomfortable.

My point is just that if the actions being taken cause concern in the staff for the mental welfare and decision making of the vet, than maybe he ought to mention "there were reasons" to explain so they don't freak out over whether or not the vet is ok.

So to restate: not saying convenience euthanasia is terrible all the time, not saying you need to always explain everything to your staff, but if they can go home and wonder if Dr.----- has lost it and is killing everything in sight or is taking out a desire for death (even for himself) on his patients by offering easy death with no consequences.... if your staff or community is worried about you or debating whether to hate you over it or the community has started to see you as Dr death, you might want to speak up and let them know there were reasons and you didn't blindly walk into a room and kill that puppy for the mean owner without asking any questions.

Now that I've put enough qualifiers on that, I think it's clear as mud. So...
COMMUNICATION IS GOOD!

Yeah....I've been that staff member before. I asked my boss why a seemingly healthy cat ended up euthanized, I got "I have no idea why." It's those answers that get you concerned.

 

[Pugsforlove2014]

Yeah....I've been that staff member before. I asked my boss why a seemingly healthy cat ended up euthanized, I got "I have no idea why." It's those answers that get you concerned.

*shiver*

 

[LadyOtheFarm]

It's fair to be annoyed with staff that questions your every decision, but if you start scaring them or making many decisions that with no explanation look like bad things are going on internally, it's also fair for them to question you, for your sake.

 

[heyyimhayley]

Yeah....I've been that staff member before. I asked my boss why a seemingly healthy cat ended up euthanized, I got "I have no idea why." It's those answers that get you concerned.

One of my coworkers booked an appointment for a cat euth, and I saw that the cat was 2 years old and had no health issues in the record, so I asked my coworker why, and she told me she didn't ask because it's uncomfortable to be like "so why do you want us to kill your pet?" And I think in most cases, when you look at the record and it's an elderly or chronically ill animal, you shouldn't ask, but I thought it was weird not to in that scenario.

As it turned out, she had misheard the clients last name, and it was actually for a different cat with the same name who was old and sick, not the healthy one she had booked the appointment for anyway.

 

[dyachei]

One of my coworkers booked an appointment for a cat euth, and I saw that the cat was 2 years old and had no health issues in the record, so I asked my coworker why, and she told me she didn't ask because it's uncomfortable to be like "so why do you want us to kill your pet?" And I think in most cases, when you look at the record and it's an elderly or chronically ill animal, you shouldn't ask, but I thought it was weird not to in that scenario.

As it turned out, she had misheard the clients last name, and it was actually for a different cat with the same name who was old and sick, not the healthy one she had booked the appointment for anyway.

Yeah, but there's no harm in having the client come in and talk even if it's a young pet. Sometimes, owners just are *really* frustrated.

 

[heyyimhayley]

Yeah, but there's no harm in having the client come in and talk even if it's a young pet. Sometimes, owners just are *really* frustrated.

I agree. If I had taken the call, I would have definitely suggested they to talk to a doctor about it first. My coworker just was like "okay here's your euthanasia appointment."

 

[dyachei]

I agree. If I had taken the call, I would have definitely suggested they to talk to a doctor about it first. My coworker just was like "okay here's your euthanasia appointment."

I mean, even at the "euthanasia appointment". A lot of those turn into a discussion and potential diagnosis +/- treatment at my clinic.

 

[heyyimhayley]

I mean, even at the "euthanasia appointment". A lot of those turn into a discussion and potential diagnosis +/- treatment at my clinic.

That would make sense. I just don't think I've ever seen that happen where I work though... PTS appointments are pretty much always PTS... Unless appointments are listed as "possible pts" but even those from what I've seen are majority of the time PTS, but sometimes they are discussion and try new treatment.

 

[LadyOtheFarm]

Dyachei you really sound like a great vet, great boss and great human being all around from reading your posts.
Thank you for being you, even when it sucks!

 

[dyachei]

Dyachei you really sound like a great vet, great boss and great human being all around from reading your posts.
Thank you for being you, even when it sucks!

I promise I'm not. But I am very much for communication with owners. And assuming positive intent.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

I mean, even at the "euthanasia appointment". A lot of those turn into a discussion and potential diagnosis +/- treatment at my clinic.

Even with the bad clinic I was at....anyone who called and just outright requested euthanasia (even if it was an elder pet that had problems), we always explained that we would do a euth consult/exam first. There were never any in-and-out euths at that clinic. The other clinic I was at....there were a few.

 

[dyachei]

Even with the bad clinic I was at....anyone who called and just outright requested euthanasia (even if it was an elder pet that had problems), we always explained that we would do a euth consult/exam first. There were never any in-and-out euths at that clinic. The other clinic I was at....there were a few.

every vet is different. as is every clinic.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

every vet is different. as is every clinic.

Would you argue that it's appropriate to euthanize a patient you've never seen before without at least examining the pet first, because every vet/clinic is different? That's what I was getting at. Maybe you do think that's okay, and that's fine, you're the boss at your clinic. I just think it's perfectly acceptable to be provided a reason as to why you're killing this animal (even if it's not the best one, as was discussed before)

 

[dyachei]

Would you argue that it's appropriate to euthanize a patient you've never seen before without at least examining the pet first, because every vet/clinic is different? That's what I was getting at. Maybe you do think that's okay, and that's fine, you're the boss at your clinic. I just think it's perfectly acceptable to be provided a reason as to why you're killing this animal (even if it's not the best one, as was discussed before)

I don't think you need an exam. But I take things on a case by case basis. But...I always confirm with the owner why they want to euthanize. And I always euthanize. I don't have techs do it.

 

[Minnerbelle]

Would you argue that it's appropriate to euthanize a patient you've never seen before without at least examining the pet first, because every vet/clinic is different? That's what I was getting at. Maybe you do think that's okay, and that's fine, you're the boss at your clinic. I just think it's perfectly acceptable to be provided a reason as to why you're killing this animal (even if it's not the best one, as was discussed before)

If the patient looks legitimately ready for euth from faxed records, is visually very sickly, or is very old, I don't feel the need to make the pet or the owners go through the trauma of an exam as if I'm judging their ability to know when it is time. I always talk to each case prior to euthanasia and ask to make sure that they are not interested in trying anything at this point to improve quality of life and that they do not have doubts about euthanizing. If they have doubts, then we talk about it, and I'll do an exam in our comfort room. If I euthanize anyway, I don't tack on a charge. If they decide to try diagnostics/treatment, great!

My staff is generally good at determining how they schedule these (they can decide where to put the owners and how to proceed when the pet arrives). If the pet seems apparently fine, or if the owners seem unsure, they just put them in as a poss euthanasia consult. If my staff can't decide, they'll err on the side of caution or come as me how they want me to schedule that. It's a very collaborative approach we take to our euthanasias, and it's extremely rare that we're all not on the same page. My staff always has the opportunity to take the pets themselves if they want to and can financially be responsible for them. Which is why it's difficult for me to understand where all this euthanasia bitterness is coming from.

I did have a tech at my previous job who gave me a really hard time for euthanizing an otherwise healthy young paraplegic dachshund. Yeah, it was incredibly sad, but unless she was going to personally take the dog and put in $5000 to try and fix that ASAP, or manage the paraplegia for life, it was a reasonable decision for the owner. It was insubordination on her part, and I never wanted to work with that tech again. Very inappropriate.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

If the patient looks legitimately ready for euth from faxed records, is visually very sickly, or is very old, I don't feel the need to make the pet or the owners go through the trauma of an exam as if I'm judging their ability to know when it is time. I always talk to each case prior to euthanasia and ask to make sure that they are not interested in trying anything at this point to improve quality of life and that they do not have doubts about euthanizing. If they have doubts, then we talk about it, and I'll do an exam in our comfort room. If I euthanize anyway, I don't tack on a charge. If they decide to try diagnostics/treatment, great!

My staff is generally good at determining how they schedule these (they can decide where to put the owners and how to proceed when the pet arrives). If the pet seems apparently fine, or if the owners seem unsure, they just put them in as a poss euthanasia consult. If my staff can't decide, they'll err on the side of caution or come as me how they want me to schedule that. It's a very collaborative approach we take to our euthanasias, and it's extremely rare that we're all not on the same page. My staff always has the opportunity to take the pets themselves if they want to and can financially be responsible for them. Which is why it's difficult for me to understand where all this euthanasia bitterness is coming from.

I did have a tech at my previous job who gave me a really hard time for euthanizing an otherwise healthy young paraplegic dachshund. Yeah, it was incredibly sad, but unless she was going to personally take the dog and put in $5000 to try and fix that ASAP, or manage the paraplegia for life, it was a reasonable decision for the owner. It was insubordination on her part, and I never wanted to work with that tech again. Very inappropriate.

But you're still at least consulting with the owner and looking at previous exam records. If someone I've never met before calls me and tells me they want me to euthanize their pet, I would like to know why, and verify it if possible.

 

[dyachei]

But you're still at least consulting with the owner and looking at previous exam records. If someone I've never met before calls me and tells me they want me to euthanize their pet, I would like to know why, and verify it if possible.

Yes, but she and I are saying that it doesn't have to happen over the phone, where it may be very awkward. It can happen during the visit.

 

[LetItSnow]

Would you argue that it's appropriate to euthanize a patient you've never seen before without at least examining the pet first

I do it all the time. When people call us looking for euthanasia at 2am, they are asked if they would like an exam and to talk to the doctor first, or to just euthanize with no exam.

My staff know that I expect them to gather enough information that I know why I'm euthanizing the animal, however.

The flip side to requiring an exam is that it means requiring an owner to pay $122 on top of the euth and cremation cost. For the vast majority of cases that means charging them $122 just for me to walk in and say "yup, your animal is in really bad shape and this seems like a pretty appropriate choice." If I can save people that additional cost and not force them to go through an exam so that I can tell them what they already know, I'm all in favor. So I don't think it's at all bad that we offer euthanasia without an exam.

 

[Minnerbelle]

But you're still at least consulting with the owner and looking at previous exam records. If someone I've never met before calls me and tells me they want me to euthanize their pet, I would like to know why, and verify it if possible.

It's not my receptionist's job to decipher and judge for the client. If owners call wanting to schedule euthanasia. They schedule it. We decide what to do when they come in. They usually say, "oh no, can you tell me what's going on?" And leave it to the owner to say what they want to say. Even if they don't offer much info, it just gets scheduled and we deal with it later. They'll ask if they want an exam and consult first or if they're pretty sure. They're told the doctor will likely want to talk to them first regardless.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

It's not my receptionist's job to decipher and judge for the client. If owners call wanting to schedule euthanasia. They schedule it. We decide what to do when they come in. They usually say, "oh no, can you tell me what's going on?" And leave it to the owner to say what they want to say. Even if they don't offer much info, it just gets scheduled and we deal with it later. They'll ask if they want an exam and consult first or if they're pretty sure. They're told the doctor will likely want to talk to them first regardless.

Sorry, my post was worded poorly. Add on that you would euthanize said animal without discussing with the owner you've never met before.

 

[Minnerbelle]

Sorry, my post was worded poorly. Add on that you would euthanize said animal without discussing with the owner you've never met before.

I mean, a big part of it is also to cover my butt. I don't ever want to be in a doctor killed my pet and that's not what I wanted media circus. Much less room for error when you talk to the owner.

It's also the places that have drop off euthanasias without vet speaking with owner that are more likely to euthanize the wrong pet that's sitting in a cage in the hospital.

 

[dyachei]

I feel like there are always exceptions to prove the rule.

 

[Shreddr22]

We had a beautiful young belgian malinois come in with an incredibly large bladder stone. Upon palpation, you could grasp it in your hand..it was cylindrical and probably 4-5 inches long or so, and on the xray it was massive. She was a sweet dog, unfortunately suffering from all the symptoms of a terrible uti. The owner began to refer to her as "it" about halfway through the exam and talk about his other dogs, he had many. He was a young, rough sort of guy, and I instantly disliked him. When the doctor discussed surgery with him he didn't even want to listen, he got a little angry and insisted that he just wanted to "put it down" to avoid the care and recovery after surgery. He said it wasn't a question of money, he just didn't want to deal with "it". The doctor backed off because we were clearly dealing with someone unreasonable who was likely not going to listen to anything anyone else had to say about it. Of course the man didn't want to be present, he had coward written all over him. He waited outside, and we euthanized her about 10 ten minutes later. Yes it was hard to look her in the eyes, we all wanted so badly to perform that surgery and alleviate her suffering so that she would live pain-free and grow into an even more beautiful animal with many years of life. And it might sound bad, but it was also disappointing because I wanted very much to see that massive bladder stone in person, as did the doctor. But the reality is that her owner was not your ideal human being. Her recovery would not have been easy, and it's also very unlikely that he would he have followed instructions about diet, medication, rechecks, etc. If we had refused euthanasia she would have gone home, suffered even more, and died a terrible death. Sometimes there's nothing you can do but alleviate not only the suffering that is occurring, but also the suffering that is sure to come without treatment.

I had a bad day yesterday because I did everything in my power as a technician to guide the owners of a dog suffering from late-stage leptospirosis to understand that their dog was going to die and that he was suffering very much. Of course I didn't push them towards it per say or verbally state that he was going to die. The most I could do was inform them that their animal was very critical, that the bloodwork indicates full liver and kidney failure (per the doctor's instructions), and that euthanasia is their decision, and that we can also continue treatment if they so choose to. They couldn't bring themselves to euthanize, and it was so much more about themselves vs. what was better for the animal. So they left convincing themselves to feel hopeful, and in the meantime I watched the dog suffer and slowly deteriorate for hours in the isolation ward. I believe it is the veterinarian's job to express to the owner the prognosis and the severity of the situation, and I feel that this was not done yesterday. The veterinarian on the case had a day off that day, and I felt it was left to me to fight for the right decision for that dog, and I did my best but it wasn't good enough because I'm not a doctor and I cannot give a prognosis no matter what. I can understand why the owners wanted to be hopeful, but I also feel like they were not quite given the quick and dirty facts about what was happening and what was going to happen from a doctor as in "there is no recovery at this point, and euthanasia would be my recommendation." Anyway, bad day for me but nothing compared to what the animal was feeling.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

We had a beautiful young belgian malinois come in with an incredibly large bladder stone. Upon palpation, you could grasp it in your hand..it was cylindrical and probably 4-5 inches long or so, and on the xray it was massive. She was a sweet dog, unfortunately suffering from all the symptoms of a terrible uti. The owner began to refer to her as "it" about halfway through the exam and talk about his other dogs, he had many. He was a young, rough sort of guy, and I instantly disliked him. When the doctor discussed surgery with him he didn't even want to listen, he got a little angry and insisted that he just wanted to "put it down" to avoid the care and recovery after surgery. He said it wasn't a question of money, he just didn't want to deal with "it". The doctor backed off because we were clearly dealing with someone unreasonable who was likely not going to listen to anything anyone else had to say about it. Of course the man didn't want to be present, he had coward written all over him. He waited outside, and we euthanized her about 10 ten minutes later. Yes it was hard to look her in the eyes, we all wanted so badly to perform that surgery and alleviate her suffering so that she would live pain-free and grow into an even more beautiful animal with many years of life. And it might sound bad, but it was also disappointing because I wanted very much to see that massive bladder stone in person, as did the doctor. But the reality is that her owner was not your ideal human being. Her recovery would not have been easy, and it's also very unlikely that he would he have followed instructions about diet, medication, rechecks, etc. If we had refused euthanasia she would have gone home, suffered even more, and died a terrible death. Sometimes there's nothing you can do but alleviate not only the suffering that is occurring, but also the suffering that is sure to come without treatment.

I had a bad day yesterday because I did everything in my power as a technician to guide the owners of a dog suffering from late-stage leptospirosis to understand that their dog was going to die and that he was suffering very much. Of course I didn't push them towards it per say or verbally state that he was going to die. The most I could do was inform them that their animal was very critical, that the bloodwork indicates full liver and kidney failure (per the doctor's instructions), and that euthanasia is their decision, and that we can also continue treatment if they so choose to. They couldn't bring themselves to euthanize, and it was so much more about themselves vs. what was better for the animal. So they left convincing themselves to feel hopeful, and in the meantime I watched the dog suffer and slowly deteriorate for hours in the isolation ward. I believe it is the veterinarian's job to express to the owner the prognosis and the severity of the situation, and I feel that this was not done yesterday. The veterinarian on the case had a day off that day, and I felt it was left to me to fight for the right decision for that dog, and I did my best but it wasn't good enough because I'm not a doctor and I cannot give a prognosis no matter what. I can understand why the owners wanted to be hopeful, but I also feel like they were not quite given the quick and dirty facts about what was happening and what was going to happen from a doctor as in "there is no recovery at this point, and euthanasia would be my recommendation." Anyway, bad day for me but nothing compared to what the animal was feeling.

Please tell me that the dog was at least sedated if you were palpating a bladder stone.

Also, I always try to remind myself that while I wouldn't leave my pet alone during a euthanasia, not everyone feels the same way. Very few people in this world experience literally watching someone/something they love go from alive to dead in a matter of seconds. It's a very, very tough thing to cope with.

Just as a question, how clear were the owners on the prognosis of the second dog? I've known some owners to be told that things are bad (such and such organ is shot, whatever), but they didn't really grasp that there was nothing that could be done to save the dog until the doctor flat out told them there was nothing left and that the dog would never turn around.

 

[Shreddr22]

Please tell me that the dog was at least sedated if you were palpating a bladder stone.

Also, I always try to remind myself that while I wouldn't leave my pet alone during a euthanasia, not everyone feels the same way. Very few people in this world experience literally watching someone/something they love go from alive to dead in a matter of seconds. It's a very, very tough thing to cope with.

Just as a question, how clear were the owners on the prognosis of the second dog? I've known some owners to be told that things are bad (such and such organ is shot, whatever), but they didn't really grasp that there was nothing that could be done to save the dog until the doctor flat out told them there was nothing left and that the dog would never turn around.

Not clear. This is why I had a problem with it. We see a lot of poorly educated members of the population and communication on health issues is often challenging. I feel that communicating well regarding the prognosis was very important in this situation in order to avoid what happened.

With regards to the bladder stone, during his physical the doctor found something very hard and went from there. He thought at first it may have been a tumor, it was so apparent. There was no sedation for the physical.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

Not clear. This is why I had a problem with it. We see a lot of poorly educated members of the population and communication on health issues is often challenging. I feel that communicating well regarding the prognosis was very important in this situation in order to avoid what happened.

With regards to the bladder stone, during his physical the doctor found something very hard and went from there. He thought at first it may have been a tumor, it was so apparent. There was no sedation for the physical.

It's not so much a matter of education as it is hearing it more straightforward or from someone in a white coat. It's the same when someone's family member is in a hospital bed. Unless someone straight up says "There is no chance of recovery," a lot of people don't quite know what's going on, what to expect.

I only said sedation because palpating a bladder stone over and over (or at all, in a lot of cases) can be so painful. It makes me cringe, lol.

 

[Shreddr22]

It's not so much a matter of education as it is hearing it more straightforward or from someone in a white coat. It's the same when someone's family member is in a hospital bed. Unless someone straight up says "There is no chance of recovery," a lot of people don't quite know what's going on, what to expect.

That makes good sense to me.

I only said sedation because palpating a bladder stone over and over (or at all, in a lot of cases) can be so painful. It makes me cringe, lol.

Yeah the initial palpation he did was very gentle, then we did an xray. After she was euthanized we were able to get a little more of an idea of how big it really was. I'm sure if he had surrendered her to us for disposal the doctor would have wanted to open her up. That's legal right?

 

[pinkpuppy9]

That makes good sense to me.


Yeah the initial palpation he did was very gentle, then we did an xray. After she was euthanized we were able to get a little more of an idea of how big it really was. I'm sure if he had surrendered her to us for disposal the doctor would have wanted to open her up. That's legal right?

Not entirely sure. It's expected that you follow through with the disposition of the body that the owners requested, but idk about doing necropsies. My doctor did an unauthorized post-mortem abdominal explore because she palpated a foreign body in a dog that was not going to recover, but yeah the owners didn't want the body then either. Doesn't mean it was legal I guess.

 

[lailanni]

Based off of my experience, the bolded statement above raises a red flag to me. Behavior like that can escalate into a hoarding situation very quickly. Now, I'm not saying you're a hoarder/will become one or anything like that. I will say that I've heard a particular client express similar sentiments to yours and she has had over 40 animals in her house at times (and the authorities are regularly on her case, and her house is probably unfit for living in). That's 40 animals in hers, plus however many she can foster out.

Veterinary medicine will never be perfect. That doesn't mean that we should be euthanizing left and right, but I think it's important to grasp the fact that we cannot save every single animal. We can't. Offering to adopt a client's pet can be a slippery slope, whether you intend to adopt it out yourself or not.

That's pretty much where I stand. From my experience with rescues it's a very, very slippery slope from a no-kill rescue to a hoarding situation. At what point does taking in another animal mean the rest of the animals will receive diminished care and attention? Sure, maybe you're keeping one more creature alive - but is it really a kind thing to do if they're all leading stress filled lives in cramped quarters with poor nutrition/medical care - possibly for a very long time or until they're dead? There are worse things than death.

Other than that, I think good vet qualities are just attempting to be a decent human being. Vets aren't super heros. We're as human as the rest of the world. I don't think it's fair to expect every DVM to be more perfect than anyone else. Also I always give my fellow DVMs benefit of the doubt, I have no idea what their situations are. I doubt very much that anyone tries to be a bad DVM. We all have something we'd like to work on.

You know the saying - no one is the bad guy in their own story. Just be try to be kind to others - and to yourself.

 

[TerraVet]

How do you know it's laziness and not insecurity that they won't be able to treat the case? There's a lot of internal dialogue (at least for me) when I ask someone else to see a case. I think we are jumping to conclusions a little bit. So I guess I want to know how you know it's just because they don't want to bother with a case?

The first is unacceptable as a human being, not just as a vet.

Because the vet admits so. And not in a tongue-in-cheek kind of way. :/

Insecurity definitely plays a part, but this is also a vet who chooses never to look things up, wants techs to call in cases when a doc should really call, never pitches in to help any other doctor or tech, and constantly complains that they are overworked. This person pretty much hates the job and wishes they could leave but doesn't. Sigh.