Forum Discussion
DownTheAvenue
May 07, 2016Explorer
I think Dr. Doug's perspective and 4x4Dodger's are interesting- one from the practitioner and one from the recipient. What is telling is the divide between the two and breaks down to this: are the decisions based on need or revenue. The recipient has walked away from an ongoing experience that did not end well with the feeling he received unneeded procedures just to generate revenue probably to pay for equipment used for those procedures. The practitioner asserts any decision about needed tests or procedures are solely for the benefit of the patient, not the practice.
I will tell one point that 4X4Dodger made that is almost universally false and that is many veterinarians perform tests to mitigate liability. In most states, a pet is considered personal property, and its emotional value is of no consequence. Therefore, a "wrongful death" of a 10 year old spayed or neutered mixed breed would be very little and liability would be determined how much a similar animal would cost in the "open market," or the cost to adopt such an animal at the local rescue groups or humane societies. Very little. You probably pay more for your automobile insurance than a vet pays for his malpractice insurance.
I will tell one point that 4X4Dodger made that is almost universally false and that is many veterinarians perform tests to mitigate liability. In most states, a pet is considered personal property, and its emotional value is of no consequence. Therefore, a "wrongful death" of a 10 year old spayed or neutered mixed breed would be very little and liability would be determined how much a similar animal would cost in the "open market," or the cost to adopt such an animal at the local rescue groups or humane societies. Very little. You probably pay more for your automobile insurance than a vet pays for his malpractice insurance.
About Pet Owners
2,081 PostsLatest Activity: May 05, 2025