Money Grabbing Vet!!!

superscaper

I'm not going to get into the whole tiresome insurance argument and the disgraceful sniping by many posters on all sides. There were two main points that concerned me and wondered what the vaildity of them was:

1. The pet was refused the emergency treatment even though there was money there to pay for it (the £60). Insurance is completely irrelevant on this single point. Was the animal actually refused this pain relief or did the OP leave before this could be offered separately without the followup surgery?

2. I am worried about the alleged statement by the Vet that the OP "set up a website" about this. First it's a plain exaggaration and secondly the fact that this chat forum is used in any way by someone in official proceedings against a poster.

SaraSeahorse

the_flip_side wrote: »

i think it is pertinent now to confirm that i was the vet involved with this case
and i would like to now make several points :

1. firstly i am pleased that daisy has made a good recovery
2. i also refute several of the accusations that smartsuit has made. i however do not see the point in itemising these as i feel it will achieve very little. the point is that the royal college reached their decision to close this case after reviewing statements from both parties. it amazes me that
my detractors were nieve enough to think that smartsuits interpretation would not be biase. it would be interesting to know what they think now.
3 regards pet insurance i think that it is irresponsible of an owner to only consider what they will do regards costs after their pet has sustained a serious injury. this is even more so in multi pet housholds. i advise every client to get it especially if they can not provide an alternative.
4. i am interested to generate healthy discussion about this. it would also be interesting to know what other vets think.
thanks again

I am not convinced this is posted by the vet concerned. To study veterinary science I believe you have to have good standard of education, top A level results and study is it 5 or 6 years - a course that is considered by many far tougher than Medicine. I also find it hard to believe a professional would get involved in this discussion and if they did would type in such a fashion and with spelling errors?

SaraSeahorse

superscaper wrote: »

1. The pet was refused the emergency treatment even though there was money there to pay for it (the £60). Insurance is completely irrelevant on this single point. Was the animal actually refused this pain relief or did the OP leave before this could be offered separately without the followup surgery?

I agree key thing here was pain relief offered or did the vet refuse to give pain medication regardless of discussions about ability to pay.

"the outcome was that the complaint was closed with no indication of serious professional misconduct"
The vet may have been cleared of serious professional misconduct however I suspect that all vets in these cases would have to ensure they understood what was expected of them and that their professional body would expect their members to abide by code.

andyrules

SaraSeahorse wrote: »

I am not convinced this is posted by the vet concerned. To study veterinary science I believe you have to have good standard of education, top A level results and study is it 5 or 6 years - a course that is considered by many far tougher than Medicine. I also find it hard to believe a professional would get involved in this discussion and if they did would type in such a fashion and with spelling errors?

I thought that too, Sarah, but let's assume they are typos, easily made by anyone in a hurry.

Superscaper, agree, agree, agree, the op has stated that the dog was not given pain relief and the 'vet' has not disputed this fact. I asked in post 110 if he could confirm if that is true.

Lavendyr

SaraSeahorse wrote: »

I am not convinced this is posted by the vet concerned. To study veterinary science I believe you have to have good standard of education, top A level results and study is it 5 or 6 years - a course that is considered by many far tougher than Medicine. I also find it hard to believe a professional would get involved in this discussion and if they did would type in such a fashion and with spelling errors?

To get onto a veterinary science course in the UK, you have to have top-notch GCSEs and A levels, in the right subjects, and even then you are not guaranteed a place - there are only 6 universities in the UK that offer a vet science course, and you can only apply to 4 of them. In order to be considered for a place, you also have to take an additional exam, not to mention the interviews. You then study for 5 years in most universities, 6 years in Cambridge (of which the last two are clinical), are examined every year and risk being dropped from the course if your scores are not consistently high enough. So you are correct, it is one of the most, possibly *the* most, gruelling degree course to complete.

Of course, the vet may have trained overseas. I don't know the laws about vets working in the UK who have obtained their qualifications outside the UK I'm afraid.

I too am not convinced. I would have expected a vet to have a better command of basic English grammar and punctuation, for starters. :P

the_flip_side

some interesting points have been made and i hope this will offer some clarity :
1. at NO stage did i refuse to treat daisy
2. people who do not have pet insurance are not irresponsible providing they have alternative means of paying for care.
3. i am a veterinarian, not an IT expert, i use the term website lightly but is this not a website, being referred to as a money grabbing vet in a public forum hurts though
4. i work alot with the RSPCA in treating sick or injuried animals where the owner is not known.
5. i graduated in 1990, i am a member of the royal college of veterinary surgeons
cheers

superscaper

the_flip_side wrote: »

1. at NO stage did i refuse to treat daisy
3. i am a veterinarian, not an IT expert, i use the term website lightly but is this not a website, being referred to as a money grabbing vet in a public forum hurts though

1. So did the OP refuse to let her be treated then? Was the option given for emergency treatment only?

3. There's a big difference between saying someone "created a website" to "someone wrote on a chat forum/website". For this specific website you've essentially said the OP is Martin Lewis. That's the difference. I can understand how it hurts to have such claims made in a chat forum but I'm surprised you still made any kind of official reference to it as neither the OP's name is given nor is yours. The OP only wrote this to vent their own frustration (which is the point of this board). I really can't see how it is at all relevant to the case you went through. If you felt it was libellous then it can be reported to the website abuse team and maybe take it to court but that is altogether a separate matter which is why I thought it worrying that it is used in a disciplinary case.

andyrules

Flipside -

Did you let the dog go with or without pain relief?

Thank you

superscaper

andyrules wrote: »

Flipside -

Did you let the dog go with or without pain relief?

Thank you

I'm quite prepared to believe this was all down to poor communication on both sides at the time, maybe the vet not making clear that they could offer the emergency treatment separately and the OP in their distress maybe misinterpreting that it was an all or nothing payment for all treatment. But it is still quite unclear what happened around this crucial bit of the emergency/pain relief treatment that apparently could have been paid up front.

Lavendyr

the_flip_side wrote: »

some interesting points have been made and i hope this will offer some clarity :
1. at NO stage did i refuse to treat daisy
2. people who do not have pet insurance are not irresponsible providing they have alternative means of paying for care.
3. i am a veterinarian, not an IT expert, i use the term website lightly but is this not a website, being referred to as a money grabbing vet in a public forum hurts though
4. i work alot with the RSPCA in treating sick or injuried animals where the owner is not known.
5. i graduated in 1990, i am a member of the royal college of veterinary surgeons
cheers

That doesn't clarify anything - you've still not confirmed whether or not you offered pain relief to the dog, nor have you explained why, when the OP said she had the £60 fee for emergency treatment, the dog was not given any emergency treatment (unless it was given emergency treatment, and OP is not telling the truth).

Edit to add: when the_flip_side said "created a website" I guess he/she meant "created a thread", not being au fait with internet terms as they explained above.