Vet Doing Something You Disagree With

[NStarz]

Yeah, definitely. Many people get into these positive reinforcement/punishment debates and think you're either pie in the sky not ever saying no to your dog because it might hurt its self esteem or on the other extreme, you're kicking and beating on your dog because it didn't sit that exact second. That's not how it works. It's a sliding scale.

If you were in clinics and you did something wrong that you had no idea that you weren't supposed to do it because you were just learning (just like puppies are just learning social skills and rules about being mouthy and biting), what's going to be more appropriate, the attending clinician screaming at you and throwing you down on the floor saying "Bad bad student!!! FAIL!!!" or an moderate "hey, that's not right, here's what you need to do, so let's not do that again."

Totally agree with your points.

...So I guess the take-home message is shut your mouth and do as you're told? Lol.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[CatVet2Be]

In a puppy there is no risk of serious harm to the person doing it.

But the problem isn't just the harm that could come to the person, it's that it causes the dog to feel helpless and doesn't actually teach anything. In fact in a fearful dog the helplessness induced will worsen the anxiety and reactions to situations. If you're doing it in a puppy you're teaching it to feel helpless and may be breeding future fearful behavior.


I loved what I learned in our animal behavior class, it made me realize how important it is for a small animal practitioner to be knowledgeable on the most current techniques. The information we give our clients can hugely influence how happy they are with their pet and ultimately whether the pet gets euthanized or rehomed later on.

 

[sumstorm]

If you were in clinics and you did something wrong that you had no idea that you weren't supposed to do it because you were just learning (just like puppies are just learning social skills and rules about being mouthy and biting), what's going to be more appropriate, the attending clinician screaming at you and throwing you down on the floor saying "Bad bad student!!! FAIL!!!" or an moderate "hey, that's not right, here's what you need to do, so let's not do that again."

I watched a vet get in a new vet assistant's face and scream at her for over five minutes while waiving her arms around for leaving a non-critical door open (which routinely happened and there wasn't any reason she should have thought to close it). The same vet then stormed through the door, leaving it open. What did the assistant learn? the vet was unpredictable and could be frightening, and that the door wasn't really that important. As this stuff went on over time, the assistant would hesitate to ask the vet any questions, and would avoid her. (that wasn't the only episode like that.) So when clients called with a question, she would just pull the file and leave it on the vets desk with no details, because she at least then she knew she would be yelled at for not getting more info, not for spelling a drug or disease wrong, even if she had never heard of it before....and it annoyed clients to have to wait till the vet got enough time to answer their questions, especially if they were basic questions.

Sorry, that just made me think about that experience.

 

[sumstorm]

I loved what I learned in our animal behavior class, it made me realize how important it is for a small animal practitioner to be knowledgeable on the most current techniques. The information we give our clients can hugely influence how happy they are with their pet and ultimately whether the pet gets euthanized or rehomed later on.

If you have any interest if LA, you might like Temple Grandin's work.

 

[karmapple]

Even if you DON'T have an interest in large animal (which I know CatVet2Be most certainly does not ) you'll still like Temple Grandin's work. Her books are amazing.

 

[Electrophile]

I watched a vet get in a new vet assistant's face and scream at her for over five minutes while waiving her arms around for leaving a non-critical door open (which routinely happened and there wasn't any reason she should have thought to close it). The same vet then stormed through the door, leaving it open. What did the assistant learn? the vet was unpredictable and could be frightening, and that the door wasn't really that important. As this stuff went on over time, the assistant would hesitate to ask the vet any questions, and would avoid her. (that wasn't the only episode like that.) So when clients called with a question, she would just pull the file and leave it on the vets desk with no details, because she at least then she knew she would be yelled at for not getting more info, not for spelling a drug or disease wrong, even if she had never heard of it before....and it annoyed clients to have to wait till the vet got enough time to answer their questions, especially if they were basic questions.

Sorry, that just made me think about that experience.

YES! That's exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of. It also comes down to not only the appropriateness of the correction, but also the temperament of the person. Some people have a "hard" temperament and can get screamed at for 5 minutes and barely bat an eye. Like water off a duck's back. Some have a "soft" temperament and you can almost tell that person about to pee their pants that time and all the next times the "dominant" person addresses them. The funny thing about alpha rolling a hard dog is that they can eat your lunch. Alpha rolling a soft dog will have them tucking their tails and even peeing in submission if you look at them wrong. So then the question is, really, what did the dog actually *learn* by this experience? Probably not a whole lot. If you are going to use positive punishment, you must also teach the animal what you want it to do, not just what you don't want it to do.

 

[CatVet2Be]

She's great, I actually started reading Animals in Translation before school started but haven't had a chance to finish it yet. But I definitely agree that her stuff is fascinating, even though as Karmapple very astutely pointed out, I'm definitely a SA person.

 

[DVMDream]

I watched a vet get in a new vet assistant's face and scream at her for over five minutes while waiving her arms around for leaving a non-critical door open (which routinely happened and there wasn't any reason she should have thought to close it). The same vet then stormed through the door, leaving it open. What did the assistant learn? the vet was unpredictable and could be frightening, and that the door wasn't really that important. As this stuff went on over time, the assistant would hesitate to ask the vet any questions, and would avoid her. (that wasn't the only episode like that.) So when clients called with a question, she would just pull the file and leave it on the vets desk with no details, because she at least then she knew she would be yelled at for not getting more info, not for spelling a drug or disease wrong, even if she had never heard of it before....and it annoyed clients to have to wait till the vet got enough time to answer their questions, especially if they were basic questions.

Sorry, that just made me think about that experience.

Did she work with the same b*tch I worked for?? I asked her once to clarify if she had written a 1 or 2 on a rx because the ink had smeared. She ripped the rx out from my hand and read the rx out loud in a condenscending tone. Of course there had been many other occasions where she yelled for no reason. I was so close to getting in her face and yelling right back and then walking out of the clinic. That clinic was h e l l. Not too long after I saw a review on the internet about that clinic saying that the tension in the clinic was so bad that if you merely dropped something the place would blow up (and that was from a client). I ended up getting fired from there because she claimed that there weren’t any part time positions available anymore (she used me until she could hire more people). Anyway best day of my life was when I got fired from there. I also attempted to avoid her at all costs; not so much getting yelled at but so I did not cuss her out and possibly throw her through a wall.

 

[NStarz]

She's great, I actually started reading Animals in Translation before school started but haven't had a chance to finish it yet. But I definitely agree that her stuff is fascinating, even though as Karmapple very astutely pointed out, I'm definitely a SA person.

Excellent book! May I also recommend on a similar basis, Culture Clash.

 

[sunshinevet]

My SAR dogs, bot high energy, high drive dogs are trained to offer any leg the tech prefers for blood draws. They can also be naso-gastric tubed. All by R+ training in a very short period of time due to necessity. Guess what happens when someone tries to heavily restrain my shepherd for a blood draw? I get to see it regularly at vet clinics where they refuse to accept that a dog doesn't have to be held down. It takes an average of 5 people to hold her down. She doesn't bite, but she sure can buck. I could work on counter conditioning her to this, but I find it pretty insulting when people can't even be bothered to listen. It always amazes me when they come up and say 'oh, we will need to sedate her for this' and I say 'bring her here' and can do a draw by myself just my saying 'sit', 'lift', 'freeze.' And the other amazing thing.....their tech can do the exact same thing. And the entire hassle could be avoided if they would have listened and/or let me demonstrate as I offered before. There are extremly good reasons that SAR dogs shouldn't be very accepting of restraint....that criminal we are tracking down will not hesitate to grab a dog and injure or kill it. I advocate that my dog behave herself, but I also advocate that people respect her.

Amazingly, I recently went to a vet where I said 'if your really gentle about it and don't hold her tightly, she will be great'...and this vet and her staff, who is wonderful to her patients and clients and staff, did listen, and had 0 issues. Sometimes how one treats the animal is important (and I would love to see anyone alpha roll that dog...though she readily flops for those she trusts....just like wolves will do.)

Sorry Sumstorm, but this did bother me a little - while obviously your dogs are excellently trained, and if vets listened to you about their behaviour it would make their life a whole lot easier, if we did this to every client who told us their dogs never bite or aren't aggressive or don't require restraint or muzzling, I think there would be a lot more of us walking around without faces... so while I can see your viewpoint and how frustrating it must be, surely you can see theirs? Unless they know you and your dogs, in that case their just a bit thick

 

[critterfixer]

I'm pretty sure if your doctor saw something medically wrong with your sex life, it would be malpractice for him to ignore it and not say anything.

Malpractice might be a bit strong, but certainly a physician has an obligation to look for health issues that might be a contributing factor.

And in the same vein, ANY trainer that would try to address a behavior issue in a dog without FIRST requiring a medical work up by a veterinarian is not a very good trainer, IMO.

Of course a veterinarian is qualified to address behavior issues. Many, if not most, behavior problems stem from some aspect of the animal's husbandry. Does someone want to argue that husbandry is not in the purview of the veterinarian? As dyachei said, euthanasia is THE leading cause of death in puppies. If we don't address potential behavior issues with clients, we are failing both our clients and their animals.

I am not arguing that a veterinarian can take the place of a behaviorist (and note than many behaviorists ARE veterinarians), but we are certainly the first line players and not only can, but SHOULD address behavior as a HEALTH issue as we would any other disease that was the leading cause of death. And when the medical issues, be they endocrine imbalances, neuromuscular pain, or not addressing the animal's housing, excercise, feed, and interaction needs, have been addressed by the veterinarian, if the behavior problem persists, we are the ones who should make a referral or recommend the client seek the services of a qualified trainer.

And that trainer should consider themselves in partnership with the veterinarian and the client--not the only player.

 

[CookieBear]

Totally agree with your points.

...So I guess the take-home message is shut your mouth and do as you're told? Lol.

You have a very worthy point, but I just don't know if you'd be able to make any type of suggestion without it resulting in resentment towards you. It sounds like you're the 'new kid on the block' there. It'd be (hopefully) different if you had just been hired as a DVM associate, but as the new volunteer tech there, you may inadvertently burn your bridges if you try offering up ideas right now unsolicited.

Which is, unfortunately, really crappy. You could wait and see if you ever get the opportunity to broach the subject, or, you could look around and see if there's another practice who will let you shadow. Maybe there's another one out there with a different approach, particularly on behavior.

This is probably too passive-aggressive (but really just passive?).. but say you heard about an upcoming nearby behavior conference, featuring noted/respected speakers - and you found one of the brochures and happened to leave it on the DVM's desk... maybe it just arrives in the mail one day. That probably wouldn't result in anything though - but one could hope.

I wish there was more attention devoted to teaching behavior, training approaches, animal handling, etc., in the vet-med program. I understand that time and curriculum space is already a hot commodity.

I read Dr. Temple Grandin's _Animals In Translation_ around when I started (or right before) vet school. I loved it. I wish I had time to read more of her stuff now - it will have to wait.

Dr. Sophia Yin and Dr. Patricia McConnell are two other sources on behavior and training whom I also like alot. I've read and applied alot of McConnell's techniques with my own dogs, and Yin's books are on my Amazon Wishlist too!

Sorry you're in that situation. Perhaps you can find another DVM to shadow.

 

[cwazy cat lady]

I would say that dispensing extremely outdated and disproved advice that is the complete opposite advice of any veterinary behaviorist is a huge deal. I would say recommending training methods that could lead to a fearful/ aggressive dog in the future is also a huge deal.

Agreed. It's the truth that vets are not necessarily a good source for behavior advice. Here is just ONE example I have experienced: I see a lot of inappropriate elimination in cats and through my work provide free help to the public. From these owners/cats' histories, I have heard of vets (strangely) telling people who come to them with a housesoiling cat that they should just do X (like just put mothballs at the location) and send them home without seeking out a potential medical cause and certainly not pointing to more in-depth resources.

I don't think vets are qualified via their vet degree to be behaviorists or trainers. Some may go above and beyond to learn those skills, but I have met very few that I would consider an exclusive resource...

Don't even get me started about 'The Dog Whisperer' .

 

[NStarz]

One of the best arguments I've heard against Cesar Milan's 'methods':

If you do his methods wrong, you may break your dog's rib.

If you get positive reinforcement wrong, what's the worst that could happen? "Oh darn, I treated at the wrong time!"

 

[MaChien]

It's nice to see how many future vets agree with positive renforcment. I know to many people (involved with animals) that think ceaser millan is the god of dogs. i dont really follow tv trainers, but this is a lady i think is pretty dang good http://www.dogmantics.com/Dogmantics/Home.html

 

[cwazy cat lady]

One of the best arguments I've heard against Cesar Milan's 'methods':

If you do his methods wrong, you may break your dog's rib.

If you get positive reinforcement wrong, what's the worst that could happen? "Oh darn, I treated at the wrong time!"

You may break your dog's rib... and you may get bitten. On one episode (I have only seen a handful) I saw Cesar get bitten while forcing a dog to allow him to brush his coat. The dog was terrified. It was so obviously WRONG, I couldn't believe it! The dog learned that being brushed is still scary and that Cesar (or his owner) was not to be trusted--forcing him to endure something frightening. Thankfully, if I recall, Cesar did not stop once he was bitten (so he did not reinforce the behavior). Nevertheless, I can easily think of a method that might require a bit more patience and forethought, but would allow people to not only ultimately groom their pets, but get their animals to have a more positive experience during the brushing.

I liken it to politics: You can earn compliance by using an iron fist and intimidating people; alternatively, you can earn respect, trust, and authority by showing good judgement, compassion, leading by example, etc.. Which is more lasting and authentic? I'd put my bets on the latter option.

I tell people all the time: If you are 'the bearer of all things good' for your pet, your chances of getting him to follow your lead is higher. And the likelihood that he challenges your authority is smaller...

 

[StealthDog]

Love Sophia Yin Here are her thoughts on dominance theory...

 

[Bill59]

While I don't want to start a debate about the proper methods of training...

Good luck with that.

 

[cwazy cat lady]

Love Sophia Yin Here are her thoughts on dominance theory...

AGREED! I had never seen her site, but she came to my workplace over the summer with the CATalyst council for a presentation and she is an inspiration!! What a great site she has, too. I even see the clip that I was referring to in one of my posts above. The little white poodle mix(?) that bites the heck out of Cesar when he forces it to let him brush it. Disturbing stuff!

 

[Electrophile]

My personal thoughts on Cesar Millan are that his positives are that he emphasizes that today's dogs aren't fashion accessories or pseudochildren, so they need exercise, a job to do if possible, and structure. I think that is very positive. He also has done a great deal with the image of pit bull terriers and Rottweilers that many trainers want nothing to do with (and OMG, who doesn't love Daddy the pit bull?!).

However, I think how he phrases things don't always compute for the owner/handler. Using positive energy, calm assertive leadership, owning the space, etc are kind of abstract things for many novice dog owners and I don't think many of them really get it. He says in his second book that he does indeed use food and other forms of positive reinforcement (which I think I've seen a little more in his show too, but I don't watch it much any more), we just don't get to see much in the shows. I also really wish that despite the many disclaimers, he wouldn't show alpha rolls when dealing with those kinds of highly aggressive animals. Too many imitators may be problematic when trying those kinds of maneuvers, even if it "works" for Cesar.

Anyways, I've heard Cesar is a genuinely nice man from people I've known who have met him and he cares a lot for animals and donates to great causes. And I think like many trainers/behavior consultants, you can take away some good key points, but others, not so much.

 

[NStarz]

My personal thoughts on Cesar Millan are that his positives are that he emphasizes that today's dogs aren't fashion accessories or pseudochildren, so they need exercise, a job to do if possible, and structure. I think that is very positive. He also has done a great deal with the image of pit bull terriers and Rottweilers that many trainers want nothing to do with (and OMG, who doesn't love Daddy the pit bull?!). QUOTE]


I don't doubt his love for dogs...I once had a 'trainer' come to my house who promoted leash-jerk corrections and he said he would NEVER hurt a dog (yeah right!) I don't agree that Ceaser is doing positive things for pitties, though. From his show, the public's perception of pitties is that they need to be forced into submission in order to be well-behaved, social dogs. Definitely not so.

 

[Electrophile]

I don't doubt his love for dogs...I once had a 'trainer' come to my house who promoted leash-jerk corrections and he said he would NEVER hurt a dog (yeah right!) I don't agree that Ceaser is doing positive things for pitties, though. From his show, the public's perception of pitties is that they need to be forced into submission in order to be well-behaved, social dogs. Definitely not so.

A temperamentally correct APBT is very social with people, but certainly not necessarily with other dogs. I'm guessing you haven't worked with highly dog reactive/aggressive pit bulls before? They are one of my favorite breeds and I've got one in my therapy dog class that I teach (and we're working on counter conditioning and desensitization so that she can be within about 5 feet of another dog as long as the other dog is ignoring her and we build up to it with focus work), but when they click "on" for going after another dog, treats are generally not enough to get them back. Do I manhandle them into submission? Absolutely not, but waving a cookie in their general direction is not going to do it.

From Cesar's show, I think it shows that you can have happy, well adjusted pit bulls, even if they are dog aggressive, with the right training and lots of exercise, as they are a working breed and need stimulation. I don't care how many PhDs someone has, rollerblading with half a dozen pit bulls is pretty impressive.

 

[NStarz]

I have actually worked with many, many APBT, mostly in a shelter environment. I have to say that an APBT who does not like other dogs is the exception and not the rule. While I would never put two untested dogs in an off leash play group unsupervised, many are content to go for runs together (and these are highly unsocialized dogs, often with behavioral and people issues). It's interesting how many different experiences people can have in the same area.

 

[Electrophile]

So...how many dead dogs did you all end up with then? Dog aggression is not absolute in the breed, but it's kind of like having a lab who doesn't like swimming or a Jack Russell terrier who doesn't like digging. Exceptions rather than the rule. There are exceptions, but certainly in general, dog aggression is very, very strong in this breed as that was their main purpose. Can pit bulls be taught to tolerate the presence of other dogs and are there some that just naturally try to get along with other dogs? Sure, just like there are some labs out there that hate the water and terriers that leave the tulips alone. But for example, responsible pit bull owners know not to let their dogs go to dog parks because even though their dog might not start a fight, it very well may end it. You have to know the limitations of the dog and strong tendency towards dog aggression is one of the limits of the APBT.

 

[Bearby]

heh, I brought my friend's dog to the dog park once and there was a guy with a staffordshire. The staffordshire came up and just decided to pick a fight with my friend's dog. I grabbed it by its back legs like I was taught at work and someone yelled at the owner that he needed to get his pit bull out because that wasn't the first time it had attempted to attack another dog. The guy applogized to me and took his dog out but not after making sure it was known that his dog was not an APBT. I found it amusing because most people dont know what a shaffordshire is so just live with the fact that its going to be called a pit bull.

 

[bunnity]

I have actually worked with many, many APBT, mostly in a shelter environment. I have to say that an APBT who does not like other dogs is the exception and not the rule. While I would never put two untested dogs in an off leash play group unsupervised, many are content to go for runs together (and these are highly unsocialized dogs, often with behavioral and people issues). It's interesting how many different experiences people can have in the same area.

I also work in a shelter that is 80-90% pit bulls and the vast majority of the ones that are suitable for adoption (ie people-friendly) are dog-friendly as well. Over half these dogs are from cruelty situations and have remained friendly despite the awful things that have happened to them. Not surprisingly, the ones with the most dog issues (and the ones that we mandate must be the only pet in the home) are those that have been fought in the past.

I understand that dog aggression is a tendency in the breed, but you also have to take into account that pits are often bred more haphazardly than other dogs - a lot of people breed for looks / color (blue seems to be in style), and size (from the giant ones to the new "pocket pits"), or are just randomly breeding with the other pit bull down the street. That happens in other breeds too, but pits don't really have that upper class super bloodline focused breeding that a lot of other breeds do, so I don't think pits are as standardized as many other breeds.

I do tell my adopters that if they want a dog park dog, a pit may not be the best choice. Part of that is because pits play rougher, part of that is because IF a fight happens, the pit could easily kill the other dog based on size and strength, and part of that is because if two labs on the other side of the dog park get in a fight, the pit will be blamed for riling them up or something.

 

[NStarz]

I do tell my adopters that if they want a dog park dog, a pit may not be the best choice. Part of that is because pits play rougher, part of that is because IF a fight happens, the pit could easily kill the other dog based on size and strength, and part of that is because if two labs on the other side of the dog park get in a fight, the pit will be blamed for riling them up or something.

Agreed. Unfortunately, when pitties play, it is often very noisy and physical, and many people may also take that to be 'fighting' which will further jeopardize their already poor image in the public's eye. A great teamed pair of pits/pit mixes, though, will make for an awesome time! They are SOOO much fun to watch play!

 

[sofficat]

Agreed. Unfortunately, when pitties play, it is often very noisy and physical, and many people may also take that to be 'fighting' which will further jeopardize their already poor image in the public's eye. A great teamed pair of pits/pit mixes, though, will make for an awesome time! They are SOOO much fun to watch play!

A group of vet students were sitting on lawn chairs in a circle talking and all the dogs were running around playing... well it wasn't long until they decided to play in the middle of the circle. So there were 2 pit bulls and a lab just going at it and we were all cheering- then we laughed at how awful this could look to others.... a group of vet students cheering on a growly/loud dog "fight"...

 

[168135]

I seen a lot of questionable things go on at one of the clinics I volunteered at (more along the lines of malpractice though) and come to think of it, one of I didn't normally volunteered with snapped at me for not bringing her a pair of scissors. When she asked, I automatically thought she wanted a straight pair. We had a bucket full of curved ones, but I didn't know where the straight ones were kept. Stupid on my part for not knowing that any pair of scissors would have done the job... she didn't even tell me what she needed them for, but geesh, no need to give me attitude. I was still pretty new! The only thing I could do was keep it to myself. I could have stopped volunteering, but then I would have been out 250 hours.

I did casually ask the vets why they did things the way they did, and got some pretty weird answers. All I could do was say "I see what you mean..." and tell my mom not to take the cat in there for surgery.

 

[pulseczar]

At one clinic I volunteered at, a German Shepard patient refused to step onto the weighing machine for a weigh. The vet got frustrated after everyone tried everything to get the dog weighed to no avail. I was stunned when the vet all but choke-slammed the poor thing onto the weighing machine. The dog was so frightened it urinated and defecated all over the machine, and its ankle was also badly cut. I wished I had the guts to say something, but I needed the hours.

 

[Harumph]

I agree with bunnity & Nstarz on the pitbull issue.

The doggy daycare I worked at had about 6 pitbulls there at once on a regular basis along with the other dogs, and new ones were often introduced. The only problems we ever had were with a black lab and an Akita. My pit has been attacked by loose dogs before (*****ic owners...) and she hasn't fought back.

Also, I'm not sure where I found this statistic so sorry if it's off, but I know I read somewhere that even among dogfighters, only about 1 in 8 puppies born can be trained to fight. The rest are not dog-agressive enough and need to be euthanized/abandoned. Even in professional rings it's really common to see dogs simply run to their owners once a fight starts and ignore the other dog.

I'm not saying you don't need to keep an eye on pitties, I'd certainly never bring mine to a dog park, but I don't think their tendency to fight is as innate as, say, a Collie's tendency to herd or a lab's tendency to retrieve.

Anyways, sorry for going off topic.

 

[sofficat]

At one clinic I volunteered at, a German Shepard patient refused to step onto the weighing machine for a weigh. The vet got frustrated after everyone tried everything to get the dog weighed to no avail. I was stunned when the vet all but choke-slammed the poor thing onto the weighing machine. The dog was so frightened it urinated and defecated all over the machine, and its ankle was also badly cut. I wished I had the guts to say something, but I needed the hours.

You need the dog's weight and I'm sure the vet had a ton of other things to do and didn't want to spend another 20 minutes trying to positively reinforce the dog to walk up on the scale.
I'm not saying the vet did the right thing (esp if it was so brutal the dog got hurt), but I am saying that sometimes you just need to get that freakin weight and you have no more time to 'be nice.'

 

[twelvetigers]

We have a table scale. So, all large dogs have to be lifted onto it, which is a pain, but the weighing will happen without an issue once they are on the table... only a couple times have we foregone the weighing... and both times were with a Weimaraner...

Just a side thought.

There are things that my boss does that I don't love, but there are things she does very well, so I just try to focus on the good. Unless it's something that REALLY bothers you, something highly questionable, I would just keep my mouth shut.

 

[TorchWorker]

I didnt actually read through all of the thread, so forgive me if I am being ignorant of something already said.

I don't fully understand what the vet did or why it would be bad. The number of classes you have taken on something is not a good way to measure someone's knowledge or experience. I do agree though that vets are in a position that clients look up to. I have seen vets in the exam room pressure people into getting surgeries they cant afford, get vaccines that arent legally mandated, and get all kinds of treatments they might not have gotten otherwise. The vet doesnt need to directly say anything to pressure people. They can just subtly suggest with their tone or language that the owner is being irresponsible or somehow not doing what is "right". I think that vets should absolutely step back from influencing their clients decisions. It is their role to inform the client. It is very difficult to find the line between informing and pressuring, and I think more vets should try harder not to influence clients decisions. Many vets develop strong opinions on things like neuter/spay, vaccines, bla bla... It has been my experience that most vets have no problem forcing their opinions on their clients. I have also worked with many vets who are very respectful of their boundaries as client educators.

 

[TorchWorker]

You need the dog's weight and I'm sure the vet had a ton of other things to do and didn't want to spend another 20 minutes trying to positively reinforce the dog to walk up on the scale.
I'm not saying the vet did the right thing (esp if it was so brutal the dog got hurt), but I am saying that sometimes you just need to get that freakin weight and you have no more time to 'be nice.'

I do not want to come off as righteous, but this is totally wrong, especially from a vet. If a veterinarian does something purposefully violent that hurts an animal, they should be reported and get an animal abuse charge. Veterinarians are highly trained and experienced in dealing with animals. It is their job to lead a community in proper treatment and care of animals. If a person cannot learn in a career of veterinary medicine to deal correctly with a problem as simple as getting a weight on an unruly dog, they do not belong in the profession.

Animals can be extremely frustrating. There are often simple ways to get around behavioral problems, but it takes some perspective and a calm mind. If you are a doctor, and a dog is a dog, who should be commanding the situation? Who has more intelligence at their command? When an animal starts to piss you off, that is the best time to calm down and use your brain. Allowing yourself to act in anger and frustration is irresponsible, and any veterinarian should have gotten past that type of childish behavior before getting licensed. There was a vet in my town who eventually moved away after getting something like 15 counts of animal abuse and mistreatment. Alot of those types of things are fairly understandable, and most people can understand that sometimes animals are extremely hard to deal with, especially on a tight schedule. But the fact remains that if anyone in the world should be able to avoid abusing animals, it is a veterinarian.

 

[bunnity]

I didnt actually read through all of the thread, so forgive me if I am being ignorant of something already said.

I don't fully understand what the vet did or why it would be bad. The number of classes you have taken on something is not a good way to measure someone's knowledge or experience. I do agree though that vets are in a position that clients look up to. I have seen vets in the exam room pressure people into getting surgeries they cant afford, get vaccines that arent legally mandated, and get all kinds of treatments they might not have gotten otherwise. The vet doesnt need to directly say anything to pressure people. They can just subtly suggest with their tone or language that the owner is being irresponsible or somehow not doing what is "right". I think that vets should absolutely step back from influencing their clients decisions. It is their role to inform the client. It is very difficult to find the line between informing and pressuring, and I think more vets should try harder not to influence clients decisions. Many vets develop strong opinions on things like neuter/spay, vaccines, bla bla... It has been my experience that most vets have no problem forcing their opinions on their clients. I have also worked with many vets who are very respectful of their boundaries as client educators.

One problem with this is that the vet knows more, and better, than the client. It IS the vet's job to advise the client with what they think is best. That's why the vet went to school for eight years - so they would know what is best for the animal. I don't really care about opinions about vaccines. I care about facts. And the vet has dedicated years to studying facts, and should absolutely try to convey what is correct to the client, and to advocate for it. I have been to human doctors that have said, "I don't know, it's up to you" about how to treat a medical problem, and was very frustrated that they would not give me their educated opinion when I asked for it.

The other thing is that vets have seen the consequences of poor care. I have sat and watched too many unwanted animals die to be nonchalant about spay and neuter. You damn well better believe I have a strong opinion about it and that I will be very up front with the clients about how I feel. I will absolutely remind them of the millions of unwanted animals in shelters and how they will be contributing to that if they breed. It is every vet's responsibility to advocate for animal welfare, and that includes ALL animals - not just the one in the office. That's why we vaccinate and spay / neuter. For the good of more animals than just the one in front of us.

 

[PrimalMU]

I just have one question to ask. Isn't there something fundamentally wrong with anthropomorphizing dogs?

Human psychology ≠ dog psychology

I don't have much of an opinion regarding the issue at hand, mainly because I don't have experience in dog training and thus I don't want to argue for or against something of which I have no knowledge.

 

[marycatherine]

I just have one question to ask. Isn't there something fundamentally wrong with anthropomorphizing dogs?

Human psychology ≠ dog psychology

I don't have much of an opinion regarding the issue at hand, mainly because I don't have experience in dog training and thus I don't want to argue for or against something of which I have no knowledge.

In my opinion, yes people should not put human emotions onto animals. We say this at the shelter when people want to adopt one kitten and leave it's brother behind. Really, the one behind will be okay, we will probably just mix him in with another litter, and within a week he won't really remember the sibling that's been gone.

However there's a huge difference between knowing animals aren't humans and treating animals the correct way. Animals still should not be hurt by a veterinarian for something as easy as getting on a scale. (Of course I've been rough with some dogs and have plopped them on a scale or moved them quickly from one place to another, but never to the point of actually injuring them.)

 

[PrimalMU]

However there's a huge difference between knowing animals aren't humans and treating animals the correct way. Animals still should not be hurt by a veterinarian for something as easy as getting on a scale. (Of course I've been rough with some dogs and have plopped them on a scale or moved them quickly from one place to another, but never to the point of actually injuring them.)

I should have mentioned my comment was directed towards training. Regarding weighing animals, our large scales are out in our lobby (so that people can come in and weigh their animals whenever they want). Obviously we wouldn't be able to treat animals harshly just to get them on the scale (and we wouldn't treat them harshly if the large scales were in the back either). If an animal was that fractious, we'd probably just guestimate and/or use prior records for weights, as medically appropriate.

 

[TorchWorker]

One problem with this is that the vet knows more, and better, than the client. It IS the vet's job to advise the client with what they think is best. That's why the vet went to school for eight years - so they would know what is best for the animal. I don't really care about opinions about vaccines. I care about facts. And the vet has dedicated years to studying facts, and should absolutely try to convey what is correct to the client, and to advocate for it. I have been to human doctors that have said, "I don't know, it's up to you" about how to treat a medical problem, and was very frustrated that they would not give me their educated opinion when I asked for it.

The other thing is that vets have seen the consequences of poor care. I have sat and watched too many unwanted animals die to be nonchalant about spay and neuter. You damn well better believe I have a strong opinion about it and that I will be very up front with the clients about how I feel. I will absolutely remind them of the millions of unwanted animals in shelters and how they will be contributing to that if they breed. It is every vet's responsibility to advocate for animal welfare, and that includes ALL animals - not just the one in the office. That's why we vaccinate and spay / neuter. For the good of more animals than just the one in front of us.

Yes, of course. Facts are what a vet should convey. I think we agree on that.

A vets opinion is probably better than most other opinions, and I understand that. The fact is that when a vets personal opinion is pressuring an owner to spend money at their practice, a moral line needs to be considered. Facts can convince someone to do what is right. Opinions can only pressure, and when you are the vet, pressuring someone to give you their money isnt right. Making them feel like they are bad people for not paying up is bull****. Like I said, it is the vets job to educate, but there is a line that needs to be respected. If your opinion is a sound one, then you should be able to express it through facts alone. I have seen too many vets convince people to get surgeries they cant afford. While I do believe that people should take care of their animals, there is a line in spending too. I think we would all agree that a million bucks is too much to spend on FuFu. We might also agree that zero dollars is too little, and that having a pet means paying for its bills. But where is the line in between there? It is different for everyone, and you cant tell someone where that line is. That is really my point. I guess I should have used expensive surgery as an example instead of neuter/spay or vaccines.

Vets should educate, but let the owners decide without trying to make them feel small or looking down on them. Ultimately, the owners DO decide, but their decision should be based in facts and education, not emotional pressure. That is basically what is called "statutory abuse". Vets should be aware of this power, and use it carefully.

 

[EqSci]

Yes, of course. Facts are what a vet should convey. I think we agree on that.

A vets opinion is probably better than most other opinions, and I understand that. The fact is that when a vets personal opinion is pressuring an owner to spend money at their practice, a moral line needs to be considered. Facts can convince someone to do what is right. Opinions can only pressure, and when you are the vet, pressuring someone to give you their money isnt right. Making them feel like they are bad people for not paying up is bull****. Like I said, it is the vets job to educate, but there is a line that needs to be respected. If your opinion is a sound one, then you should be able to express it through facts alone. I have seen too many vets convince people to get surgeries they cant afford. While I do believe that people should take care of their animals, there is a line in spending too. I think we would all agree that a million bucks is too much to spend on FuFu. We might also agree that zero dollars is too little, and that having a pet means paying for its bills. But where is the line in between there? It is different for everyone, and you cant tell someone where that line is. That is really my point. I guess I should have used expensive surgery as an example instead of neuter/spay or vaccines.

Vets should educate, but let the owners decide without trying to make them feel small or looking down on them. Ultimately, the owners DO decide, but their decision should be based in facts and education, not emotional pressure. That is basically what is called "statutory abuse". Vets should be aware of this power, and use it carefully.

So because the best procedure for FuFu costs money the vet isn't supposed to recommend it??

If a vet is recommending a procedure that ISN'T best for the animal, but simply because it will give him a lot of money, then that is extremely unethical and will probably result in malpractice.

But a vet explaining to the owner that a $3,000 surgery would be what's best for the animal is our JOB. Any vet who just lays out the options without his opinion on what's best for the animal is not doing his job.

The money part is up to the owner. No one can force them to spend more than they want to. As vets, we have no idea what one person can afford and what one person can't. It's not up to us to determine that. It's up to us to focus on the patient, give the gold standard and any other options, give our recommendations, and then let the client decide.

These personal opinions you speak of are what our clients come to us for. We have the knowledge to back up our 'personal opinions'. It is not all black and white - when you go to your doctor, you are essentially asking him for his personal opinion on what may be wrong with you, and what tests he recommends, and his personal opinion on what the best course of treatment may be. That's what doctors do. He doesn't say, "oh well you can do this test, this test, and this test... you decide!"

You say you've seen too many vets convince people to do surgeries that they can't afford. It is the client's ultimate decision to go ahead with the surgery or not. If this expensive surgery was what's best for their animal, then it is the vet's responsibility to tell them that. It's not the vet's responsibility to look over the client's bank accounts and determine what would be best for the client. Some people spend their month's grocery budget on an animal without blinking, while others are making six digits a year and bulk at a $200 life-saving surgery. None of that is the vet's business. It's our business to focus on the patient.

 

[CookieBear]

Yes, of course. Facts are what a vet should convey. I think we agree on that.

A vets opinion is probably better than most other opinions, and I understand that. The fact is that when a vets personal opinion is pressuring an owner to spend money at their practice, a moral line needs to be considered. Facts can convince someone to do what is right. Opinions can only pressure, and when you are the vet, pressuring someone to give you their money isnt right. Making them feel like they are bad people for not paying up is bull****. Like I said, it is the vets job to educate, but there is a line that needs to be respected. If your opinion is a sound one, then you should be able to express it through facts alone. I have seen too many vets convince people to get surgeries they cant afford. While I do believe that people should take care of their animals, there is a line in spending too. I think we would all agree that a million bucks is too much to spend on FuFu. We might also agree that zero dollars is too little, and that having a pet means paying for its bills. But where is the line in between there? It is different for everyone, and you cant tell someone where that line is. That is really my point. I guess I should have used expensive surgery as an example instead of neuter/spay or vaccines.

Vets should educate, but let the owners decide without trying to make them feel small or looking down on them. Ultimately, the owners DO decide, but their decision should be based in facts and education, not emotional pressure. That is basically what is called "statutory abuse". Vets should be aware of this power, and use it carefully.

A professional's opinion is hopefully based on educated facts, and as bunnity said, that's what most people are wanting/expecting. Heck, I don't want my doctor to 'sit on the fence'. Give me the opinion. What I do with that is up to me. (That's what 2nd opinions are for? )

"A million bucks" might be what someone wants to spend on their beloved companion. Maybe it's someone who HAS that kind of money laying around. It's not up to me to decide that. Maybe they have $100, or $1,000 to spend. Not my job to determine what's in their wallet. It'll be my job to give them ALL their options and let them choose.

When people are willing to go into debt for their animals - that makes me uncomfortable. But I can't tell someone what to do with their credit card or home equity. I will offer as many options as I can, and will do my best to help my client reason/rationalize/weigh the advantages and disadvantages of each.

You make some very valid points. Sounds like you've had and seen some bad things go on, and that's a shame. But there's also alot of good being done out there, by alot of good people, both vets and the public.

Unfortunately, there's bad apples in EVERY profession and business. It's a shame that these bad apples contribute to impressions of an entire profession.

 

[TorchWorker]

I am not talking about recommendation. I am talking about making an owner feel like they are doing something wrong for not taking the recommended approach to treatment.

I understand these things you are all saying and I am not disagreeing with them. I am apparently making my point very badly if you still dont get what I am saying.

The owner should be informed and then be allowed to CHOOSE. I am saying that after informing, alot of vets pressure clients into options they would not have chosen if the vet had informed them of all the options and left the room.

Cookie: Yes, it is not our job to decide how much money they can spend. That is what I am saying. But vets are generally very intelligent people, and intelligent people are often extremely opinionated. Sometimes these opinions show through too strongly and make an owner feel small for not taking the "correct" course of action.

My point is that this is wrong, owners should be informed fully and allowed to choose. It is a fairly small and simple point, but I am slipping into redundancy. I dont want to appear argumentative, I just want to make sure my point was understood, but apparently I have portrayed it so poorly that it hasnt come off at all. People keep responding with things I agree with, or arguments that have already been addressed and I am confused about the logical progression of this disagreement.

 

[nyanko]

My point is that this is wrong, owners should be informed fully and allowed to choose.

In the majority of cases that I saw when I was a tech in private practice, the owner feels "pressured" of his or her own volition, not because the vet or tech said anything to cause it.

I mean, if an owner is presented an estimate for an MCL repair surgery and told that it is the best option for a torn MCL, that's full disclosure right? Well say the owner can't afford that, and opts to go with the much less expensive option of pain management and cage rest. Naturally if the owner cares about the animal, he/she probably feels bad about not being able to afford the best option, and these bad feelings may redirect onto the vet or tech who presented the first estimate. Thus the feelings that the vet is pushing/pressuring the owner into picking the more expensive option just by saying it's the best option.

 

[XCVIII]

Also, even if I go to my own doctor (whom with I have a doctor-patient relationship) and asked for advice about gastrointestinal upset, I would be pretty offended if he offered me advice on how to boost my sex life, for example.

#1: To advise, or not to advise; that is the question.

Honestly...the biggest problem with human doctors nowadays is that they DON'T investigate thoroughly. How many times have you had unnecessary tests scheduled because the doctor can't be bothered to talk to you? How many times have you had a doctor misdiagnose problems or throw ineffective medicine (often riddled with side effects) at you because you (to use your example) complained of GI issues and it was actually your sex life causing the problems?

If you find a doctor (or vet) who is willing to take a holistic view of your/your pet's treatment, they are worth their weight in gold.

Moreover, most people ONLY get their advice on animal care from a vet. Better there than nowhere, I say.

Kudos to the vet for discussing behavioral advice!!!

#2: Content of advice

If you disagree with some advice that your vet gave, maybe there was a reason he/she gave it. Ask. You might learn something.

You also stand a better chance of influencing his/her opinions by asking intelligent questions to intellectually challenge any preconceived notions...rather than barraging him/her with a littany of verbal attacks.

Perhaps you can both learn from each other.

If you don't think you can do this is in a mature, unheated way...don't. Keep your mouth shut. Otherwise, be prepared to lose yourself a job.

 

[sumstorm]

#1: To advise, or not to advise; that is the question.

Honestly...the biggest problem with human doctors nowadays is that they DON'T investigate thoroughly. How many times have you had unnecessary tests scheduled because the doctor can't be bothered to talk to you? How many times have you had a doctor misdiagnose problems or throw ineffective medicine (often riddled with side effects) at you because you (to use your example) complained of GI issues and it was actually your sex life causing the problems?

I think just as many doctors are doing all those tests due to malpractce lawsuits. I have had doctors tell me 'I don't really think you need X, but your insurance will require it before I can send you to the proper specialist.

And on throwing meds...part of that is because people want a solution now. I know last month I had GI issues from Crypto, and dehydration became an issue over X-mas, but diagnosing crypto required lab work. I don't blame the Dr for scripting Cipro based on the >1 wk symptoms, even though we discovered I am allergic (hives for days.)

 

[sofficat]

I do not want to come off as righteous, but this is totally wrong, especially from a vet. If a veterinarian does something purposefully violent that hurts an animal, they should be reported and get an animal abuse charge. Veterinarians are highly trained and experienced in dealing with animals. It is their job to lead a community in proper treatment and care of animals. If a person cannot learn in a career of veterinary medicine to deal correctly with a problem as simple as getting a weight on an unruly dog, they do not belong in the profession.
.

When did i ever condone violence? I even said the vet didn't do the right thing because she/he hurt the dog. What I'm saying is that we don't have time to train every dog via positive reinforcement to get on the scale. Lifting up dogs to place on scales to get their weight isn't a form of violence.

 

[Bearby]

#1: To advise, or not to advise; that is the question.

Honestly...the biggest problem with human doctors nowadays is that they DON'T investigate thoroughly. How many times have you had unnecessary tests scheduled because the doctor can't be bothered to talk to you? How many times have you had a doctor misdiagnose problems or throw ineffective medicine (often riddled with side effects) at you because you (to use your example) complained of GI issues and it was actually your sex life causing the problems?

I get the malpractice and insurance issues that sumstorm mentioned, but I have issues with going to a doctor for severe back pain and the doctor not even touching my spine and just sending me home with some muscle relaxants. Anyway kind of off topic but not completely.

 

[Graduatedly]

So I've been shadowing at an animal hospital and the vet who is the proprietor of the place own two cockatoos. They're held in separate cages and both have been mutilating themselves by ripping their feathers out from their chest. It's a really sad sight.

When I asked the exotic vet about it, she told me that it's due to hormones. I would believe it until after some observation realized that the birds don't receive any socialization or interaction. They're just left in their cages ... all day ... all night. Once in a while, someone will change their food and water. And they're kept in a room in the back, sqwuaking their heads off from time to time. The worst part of it all was that I first hand experienced the vet get angry that the bird was screaming so loud during our conversation that he took a cup full of cold water and threw the water at the bird. Then he said, "Let's hear you scream now." I don't understand why anyone would do this OR why you would even keep the animal if you didn't care for it. Yes, they were probably expensive, but goodness, why not just give it up to a rehab center where someone else can truly enjoy these birds?

I don't know - I've just been really bothered by all this. Sorry for the rant.

 

[PppermintTwist]

My SAR dogs, bot high energy, high drive dogs are trained to offer any leg the tech prefers for blood draws. They can also be naso-gastric tubed. All by R+ training in a very short period of time due to necessity. Guess what happens when someone tries to heavily restrain my shepherd for a blood draw? I get to see it regularly at vet clinics where they refuse to accept that a dog doesn't have to be held down. It takes an average of 5 people to hold her down. She doesn't bite, but she sure can buck. I could work on counter conditioning her to this, but I find it pretty insulting when people can't even be bothered to listen. It always amazes me when they come up and say 'oh, we will need to sedate her for this' and I say 'bring her here' and can do a draw by myself just my saying 'sit', 'lift', 'freeze.' And the other amazing thing.....their tech can do the exact same thing. And the entire hassle could be avoided if they would have listened and/or let me demonstrate as I offered before. There are extremly good reasons that SAR dogs shouldn't be very accepting of restraint....that criminal we are tracking down will not hesitate to grab a dog and injure or kill it. I advocate that my dog behave herself, but I also advocate that people respect her.

Amazingly, I recently went to a vet where I said 'if your really gentle about it and don't hold her tightly, she will be great'...and this vet and her staff, who is wonderful to her patients and clients and staff, did listen, and had 0 issues. Sometimes how one treats the animal is important (and I would love to see anyone alpha roll that dog...though she readily flops for those she trusts....just like wolves will do.)

I try to do less is more with patients that come into our veterinary office. You read them and what they are comfortable with. There are some dogs that require more restraint for their and the staffs safety but we try to start out with less and make friends. We had a 142lb great dane in the other day that the owners thought was terrified and so might bite someone so immediately told us to stay back ( I was just trying to give her a clipboard to write down her info on...) Owners like this could use some sort training advice. My advice was to be calm because they were so tense and scared themselves that they were freaking the poor dog out. Not sure how he did for blood draws the next day. But less is more worked great for him! He stood quietly for a physical exam ( away from the owners ) They were shocked when I brought him back to them without a muzzle ( they had insisted on putting one on him just in case ) I would never try to flip him over I think one kick to the face and I would have been done. People do need to get more advice from their vets or good trainers here and there. But...good advice.

What is this R+ training? Positive reinforcement?

My 2 cents on the techs not listening...they've heard lots of things not all of which are true, so they probably assumed you were exaggerating on your pets behaviors or maybe they are too stuck in their ways and just trying to do things the "fast way" that they are used to...