Not being able to afford potentially huge vet bills
Options
Comments
-
It's a very hard decision OP and one that none of us want to make but remember that PTS is never a cruel thing to do - the animal goes peacefully and with no knowledge. However, the guilt for me, even when PTS was the only kind option is very hard to live with.
I have run up horrendous credit card bills to treat an animal and while I don't regret it I don't know that I would do it again. I currently have a dog with a chronic condition and diagnosing it cost thousands (yes, he is insured I do learn from my mistakes). I did have to say to the vet after we had spent £3.5k on testing that I couldn't carry on at this rate and was there any cheaper alternatives. There were luckily but if I hadn't asked I could easily spent the same again and would have maxed out the insurance 3 months into the year.
I'm also not a believer in treating all diseases -bone cancer is one that I would and have had at dog PTS on diagnosis and old horses in my care do not have surgery for anything - everything is about quality not quantity of life for my animals.
I do wish people would realise that not everyone can or will make the same sacrifices for their animals that they would. As long as the dog doesn't suffer there is no right or wrong answer. I personally have less time for those who put their animals through pointless ops just for a little bit of extra time with them but no hope of a cure...0 -
Absolutely true, we had to have our 8 year old GS PTS years ago because of this. Our vet is a lovely man who tells it how it is and doesnt take advantage of £££ signs. All we could do was manage his pain, and one morning he just gave us this look and didnt even want to get up, we knew it was time.It's a very hard decision OP and one that none of us want to make but remember that PTS is never a cruel thing to do - the animal goes peacefully and with no knowledge. However, the guilt for me, even when PTS was the only kind option is very hard to live with.
I have run up horrendous credit card bills to treat an animal and while I don't regret it I don't know that I would do it again. I currently have a dog with a chronic condition and diagnosing it cost thousands (yes, he is insured I do learn from my mistakes). I did have to say to the vet after we had spent £3.5k on testing that I couldn't carry on at this rate and was there any cheaper alternatives. There were luckily but if I hadn't asked I could easily spent the same again and would have maxed out the insurance 3 months into the year.
I'm also not a believer in treating all diseases -bone cancer is one that I would and have had at dog PTS on diagnosis and old horses in my care do not have surgery for anything - everything is about quality not quantity of life for my animals.
I do wish people would realise that not everyone can or will make the same sacrifices for their animals that they would. As long as the dog doesn't suffer there is no right or wrong answer. I personally have less time for those who put their animals through pointless ops just for a little bit of extra time with them but no hope of a cure...
Bone Cancer is the most absolutely awful thing!
:( ,Fully paid up member of the ignore button club.If it walks like a Duck, quacks like a Duck, it's a Duck.0 -
It is not an easy decision and one no owner or vet relishes. Vets are in the business to help animals not kill them.
My vet told me the worst thing for him was when he had to euthanase an animal because the owner could not/would not pay for treatment.
If it does come down to euthanasia then please lake sure that you are the one to cuddle him and talk to him when the deed is done.0 -
The worrying thing about this is that the unknown may go on for a long time and the bills are rocketing up. Also vets have to stay in business too! You dog may not necessarily be in pain but it will be distressed because it knows its unable to perform the normal fun Fiona of behaving as a dog would
How long are you prepared to let that carry on for?
Even if it is,t necessarilyin pain, it will be in mental distress.0 -
Red-Squirrel wrote: »Not as many as I thought, sadly.
Its not an iPhone or a car, its a living, breathing, feeling animal that they willing took on responsibility for, that will be deeply bonded to its owners, is entirely dependent on them for all its needs and its very life, and deserves to get the medical treatment it needs.
Money saving shouldn't always come first, some things are more important, and yes I have taken on loads of debt to get my dog the care he needs, lots of dog owners do!
You need to face reality. Not everybody has thousands of pounds to spend on an animal. I know a lot of people get very attached to their fur baby (you should see the empty-nesters out on a walk here, nattering to each other about their pet as though it's their child!) but as I say if you're not on benefits, or earning a good wage, budgetting for vets bills can be tricky.Signature Removed by Forum Team ..thanks to somebody reporting a witty and decades-old Kenny Everett quote as 'offensive'!!0 -
How's your dog doing today OP - any improvement/x-ray results?
There are such a large number of potential causes of ataxia in dogs. Obviously quality of life and keeping the dog pain free should be the priority. It's not just about the money; investigation and treatment can be traumatic and painful for the animal. Euthanasia is not a welfare issue, although it is terribly sad and a difficult decision to have to make.0 -
A question to my mind is how likely the dog is to have a good quality of life after treatment. It isn't a matter of paying £2k and guaranteed back to full health, it might be a case of paying thousands for a few weeks in the cone of shame and PTS anyway. We don't know the likelihood of these outcomes, but I think it does need to be taken into account and discussed with the vet. I know humans who have turned down treatments, doing so on behalf of another being is not automatically bad, even with finances taken out of consideration.
I also struggle with the attitude that only people who will provide the very best of conditions should get animals. I understand that there are far more animals in shelters needing homes than there are ideal owners - what should happen to them?But a banker, engaged at enormous expense,Had the whole of their cash in his care.
Lewis Carroll0 -
I can see both sides of this. I'm in the fortunate position that I could spend virtually anything on my dogs, but in each case as the time has come I've made the decision that it can be kinder to let them go. I think we often get consumed by guilt, or wanting to keep life going at all costs.
For two of my last three dogs, I could have spent loads (and the insurance would have covered it), but the quality of life the dog would have had afterwards was too poor. And even though I desparately wanted to spand one more day/month/year with the dogs, I made the decision in their best interest, not mine.
And that's not harsh or callous. Even now, two years after my last dog was put down, I'm in tears writing this. But I know that it was the right thing to do, and I was with her to the end.
If faced with the dilemma the OP has, I'd be trying painkillers and cage rest first - and asking the vet just how much pain the dog is in. Even if it has the MRI, there's no guarantee that it'll some something that can be treated anyway.0 -
theoretica wrote: »
I also struggle with the attitude that only people who will provide the very best of conditions should get animals. I understand that there are far more animals in shelters needing homes than there are ideal owners - what should happen to them?
I don't actually think that at all. I am a strong supporter of homeless people being able to keep their animals, or people fleeing abuse etc. I really believe in the PDSA and Blue Cross supporting people on low incomes to have the benefits of pet ownership, I regularly contribute to rescues that crowdfund for vet treatment.
What I have a problem with is when people could afford decent insurance but choose not to pay for it, then when a big vet bill comes along they could put it on a credit card but don't want to.
I have no issue with the genuine 'can'ts', I will support them all day long, but the 'won'ts' really do boil my blood, as you can probably tell! :rotfl:
Anyway, I do genuinely hope that the OP's dog is doing better, and that now they've had some time to think they realise that killing the dog just because of the cost is not an option. If PTS is truly needed for compassionate quality of life reasons then my heart goes out to them and I hope the dog has a peaceful journey with them.0 -
theoretica wrote: »A question to my mind is how likely the dog is to have a good quality of life after treatment. It isn't a matter of paying £2k and guaranteed back to full health, it might be a case of paying thousands for a few weeks in the cone of shame and PTS anyway. We don't know the likelihood of these outcomes, but I think it does need to be taken into account and discussed with the vet. I know humans who have turned down treatments, doing so on behalf of another being is not automatically bad, even with finances taken out of consideration.
I also struggle with the attitude that only people who will provide the very best of conditions should get animals. I understand that there are far more animals in shelters needing homes than there are ideal owners - what should happen to them?
Which is better
1) life in a shelter
2) being PTS because there is no home for you
30 BEING PTS because your owner can't or won't pay for necessary vet treatment?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards