Panorama-It shouldnt happen at a Vets...

I'm not really surprised what goes on tbh at some vets - especially I think these big chain ones. It's a money making business that's all.

I did work experience at a vets once and I didn't see anything that would amount to abuse as such but a few things that I found upsetting such as 'forgetting' a rabbit that was in a box on the side - he was left there from when the owner bought him before work until after lunch time. Also I remember a rat that someone bought in - they were horrid about him and weren't careful at all with anaesthetic etc. OK he wasn't everyone's choice of a pet but what upset me was that he was obviously the owners' pride and joy as he was bought in in a special travel house and they tearfully called up all through the day to check how he was. I took charge of him after that as I thought they deserved for him to be treated better.

I know there are some fab vets and I would think most are - the hospital my mare went to was fabulous and I trusted them completely.

I think a lot of small animal owners are taken the mickey out of especially when they are not knowledgable - I can't believe a woman I know has been told her dog needs harmless lumps removed etc he is ancient and has started messing in the house - he needs to be pts. Luckily she is sensible and is taking on board what we are all saying.

There was an article from a vet in a newspaper not so long ago saying he didn't want to continue practising anymore as he was constantly being told to push the owners to have things done to their animals when they were at the end of the road. Very worrying.

Anyway I probably digress - is this more about abuse that is happening? I have only seen flashes of adverts about it. Will def watch it.
 
from my time spent in vets sometimes things don't go that well. iirc trainee vet nurses (ie being trained via NVQs in house would do catherterisation reasonably early on. As a regular work experience (as in weekly) student I certainly did plenty of restraining and raising of veins for the nurses but I think if my handling was ever in question someone else would take over. IMO that vid was just poor handling.

I have seen some distressing moments with animals, but always as far as I can remember with animals that were agressive and I think they were always dealt with as best as could be while getting the procedure done in the safest way for everyone. I can remember a couple of GSDs who were just poorly trained/socialised and when put under pressure for necessary treatment needed very careful handling which I observed but was obviously never involved in. I think cats were often the most difficult when they can become all claws and very wriggly!

I will watch it with interest I think.
 
Nash2 said:
There was an article from a vet in a newspaper not so long ago saying he didn't want to continue practising anymore as he was constantly being told to push the owners to have things done to their animals when they were at the end of the road. Very worrying
Click to expand...

You are probably referring to Matthew Watkinson......utter kn@b. I bought his book after reading the snippets in the newspaper and I really wouldn't listen to anything he says. I was concerned since I am going to vet school in September and wanted to know what I am getting into.

Luckily his book is actually a self-righteous load of tosh so it didn't put me off.

I will be watching this on iplayer on the weekend. There has been alot of discussion amongst vet students etc about this programme. I'm sure most people will see the programme for what it is and recognise that not ALL vet surgeries are like this........but unfortunately there will be a few who don't which will make life difficult for all the good vets.
 
MontyandZoom said:
You are probably referring to Matthew Watkinson......utter kn@b. I bought his book after reading the snippets in the newspaper and I really wouldn't listen to anything he says. I was concerned since I am going to vet school in September and wanted to know what I am getting into.

Luckily his book is actually a self-righteous load of tosh so it didn't put me off.

I will be watching this on iplayer on the weekend. There has been alot of discussion amongst vet students etc about this programme. I'm sure most people will see the programme for what it is and recognise that not ALL vet surgeries are like this........but unfortunately there will be a few who don't which will make life difficult for all the good vets.
Click to expand...

Well he might well be but I agreed with his article in the paper. I see it happening - I myself was pressured towards having my 13 year old arthritic dog opened up even though they grudgingly admitted there was probably nothing they could do for him. My friend cried for weeks with guilt as it was suggested that her TB that was well into his 20's was travelled to a vet hospital even though he was non weight bareing - she sensibly decided to let him go at the yard where he felt safe to minimise his distress. 'Is he insured' is the first question you are always asked - I was when my youngster fractured his pedal bone - so he had loads more x-rays then he probably would have had he not been - this is fine, they have to make a living somehow - it's when they put animals through unneccesary treatment I worry - I did have to start being firm about turning my boy out or they would have had him on box rest till he turned 10.

I don't think people are as ignorant as to think ALL vets are bad and people will always need their animals looking after so hopefully the only people that will suffer are the s****y ones that are shown tonight. I think we all need to watch and see what we think.
 
Nash2 said:
'Is he insured' is the first question you are always asked - I was when my youngster fractured his pedal bone - so he had loads more x-rays then he probably would have had he not been - this is fine, they have to make a living somehow - it's when they put animals through unneccesary treatment I worry - I did have to start being firm about turning my boy out or they would have had him on box rest till he turned 10.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with putting animals through too much. My boy was 29 when he was PTS in February with leukaemia.....I'm sure some vets would have pushed for treatment but my vet is excellent. Once a newly qualified vet suggested my friend's 36 year old mare be put in for colic surgery. Madness!!

However, alot of people on here comment that 'is he insured' is the first question....but IMO it absolutely should be. Monty was NOT covered by insurance which meant that we couldn't just throw everything at him in a hope of discovering what was wrong with him, we had to do things more slowly since, unfortunately the reality is that I could only spend £1k.

Many vets will not see these things as 'unnecessary' but will simply be trying to chuck every resource they have at the problem. I think alot of people would be suprised by how little vets earn.

Not trying to get on the defensive too much.....just trying to show it from the other perspective.
 
However, alot of people on here comment that 'is he insured' is the first question....but IMO it absolutely should be.
Click to expand...

I agree - it's not always a ploy to get more money out of you, simply a way of establishing that there are enough funds to really get to the bottom / treat a problem.

As intelligent human beings - we should be able to discern wether or not a treatment is necessary or not.....
 
I think it is absolutely sensible for the vet to ask whether the animal is insured or not. IME with small animals it often makes the difference on the number of diagnostics done or whether they will take a guess and treat conservatively based on that guess in the hope they are right. I think it has become even more difficult since the number of possible diagnostics that most first opinion practices can do has become much more.
 
amymay said:
I agree - it's not always a ploy to get more money out of you, simply a way of establishing that there are enough funds to really get to the bottom / treat a problem.

As intelligent human beings - we should be able to discern wether or not a treatment is necessary or not.....
Click to expand...

unfortunately, not everyone is. a lot of people are so in awe of their vet and thinks that all they do is in the pets best interest. If they say they need an op then that's what happens. I have the utmost confidence in my equine vet, they are totally ethical and one of teh best equipped and staffed in the country. Not had to leave my dog with pet vet but would be less keen to do so. I did with the ortho specialists when she had her cruciates done but they seemed so caring and profesional that I trusted them.
My pet vet is a national (companion care). They seem fine though.

I am not sure whether I should watch tonight. I know I should but i feel it will be just too upsetting. I am recording it so i can fast forward where necessary
 
chestnuttymare said:
unfortunately, not everyone is. a lot of people are so in awe of their vet and thinks that all they do is in the pets best interest. If they say they need an op then that's what happens. I have the utmost confidence in my equine vet, they are totally ethical and one of teh best equipped and staffed in the country. Not had to leave my dog with pet vet but would be less keen to do so. I did with the ortho specialists when she had her cruciates done but they seemed so caring and profesional that I trusted them.
My pet vet is a national (companion care). They seem fine though.

I am not sure whether I should watch tonight. I know I should but i feel it will be just too upsetting. I am recording it so i can fast forward where necessary
Click to expand...

Agreed - I would say a vast majority of people are not able to tell when a treatment is necessary especially when it involves a loved pet - of course the they take the vets advise why wouldn't they? - that's why you go to a trained professional.

I also never said animal should not be insured - however, I feel people are very naive if hey think that (some) vets don't rub there hands together when they can use the insurance money - fair enough - my boy would have got better if he had had x rays or not - it could have been done very cheaply there was not much that could be done other than rest - I'm making the point that it is sometimes used as an excuse to put animals though inappropriate procedures.
 
Nash2 said:
I also never said animal should not be insured - however, I feel people are very naive if hey think that (some) vets don't rub there hands together when they can use the insurance money
Click to expand...

I'm sure that, sadly, sometimes this is the case. I have a good friend who qualified last year and is under immense pressure to make money, not for herself, but for the practice partners.

This is a difficult position that alot of newly qualified vets find themselves in. They are often very naive and find themselves unable to question the ethics of their employers.

This is the reason that I find it so odd that doing Vet Med as a graduate (I am 26 years old and will be 30 when I graduate) is so prohibitively expensive. 5 out of the 7 vet schools charge £19k+ PER YEAR for people who already hold an undergraduate degree. This on top of the fact that the government will not give you a loan or grant for the degree makes it damn near impossible to do.

This to me is MADNESS. Not blowing my own trumpet, but I am that little bit older and wiser having already studied and worked for 3 years supporting myself. I think alot of these problems could be eradicated if, like medicine, there was a bigger incentive for mature students to go into VetMed.

Sorry went off on a tangent!!!
 
Those magic words "is it insured?" Yes, we want the best for our animals and I doubt if there was any intentional "abuse" of animals at the vets. Abuse of the owner's purse is another matter.

My horse had every diagnosis available when he was injured (after all, he was insured and I might not be able to have that leg covered again) but in the end the treatment was exactly the same as if he hadn't those tests. I am pleased to say he returned to work and is as good as ever.

I think a lot of horse people are a bit more pragmatic when it comes to treatment, when some small animal owners are very emotionally involved with their animals and will be ready and willing to spend whatever it takes to make their pet better. And with the advent of more and more people having pet insurance, well the vets are on to a good thing. Hence the well equipped hospitals, the staff, the nice surroundings.
 
I think it does work both ways though, I was careful to ensure our small animal vet (small one woman practice) knew that our yard cat was not insured and therefore minimum number of x rays would be good, as it was he was easy to diagnose (heart disease) though is costing a bit to treat.

MandZ , thing is they are protecting the numbers in their profession, whereas we do actually need more medics I suppose.
 
ester said:
MandZ , thing is they are protecting the numbers in their profession, whereas we do actually need more medics I suppose.
Click to expand...

I can see the logic and the limit on numbers is fine. I just hate to see so many amazing graduates be put off when they would make super vets. Perhaps, if there was a higher proportion of graduates entering vet school we would end up with a stronger body of vets.

My personal experience is that graduates tend to have their personal ethic pretty well developed upon entering the course whereas those going into uni at 18 are more easily swayed by the ethics of others. Not always the case I'm sure.

I'm ok.....I'm one of the few that actually got in! :D
 
I'll be watching with a box of tissues.

When my bitch was ill at Christmas the first thing the vet asked "is she insured?". I replied "yes". New vet in the partnership, a small company of partners we have used for years and always held an account with.
When it became apparent that she probably would need surgery the vet asked me again, pointing out that I do not have my cats insured. I assured him my bitch was insured, but that it was a new insurance policy, as she was just a pup.
It transpired that she did not need surgery, but the vet said she NEEDED to stay in for another few days. I asked to visit her, and he begrudgingly agreed, so I went down armed with her comforters etc.

I walked into the back room (I'd never been round there before) and it was filthy. A young lad greeted me, wearing just jeans and a football t shirt (that's right - no shoes!) and my pup was bouncing round her cage with excitement. Hardly a dog needing to stay in the vets?
I asked to take her home and was told I could (again, if they thought she needed to stay in then why agree for me to take her home), so I picked her up and made for the front desk. My OH at the time commented that she seemed perky enough, at which point the vet came round to the desk and said "you're not leaving until you've paid the bill". The receptionist said "it's okay, they have an account..." (it was new year, and a £500 bill....) and he repeated in a loud voice "No. NOT taking the dog until the bill is settled". We're talking 8pm, new years day, waiting room with other clients in there, and the prat's refusing us our 12 week old puppy! I'd got one child in tears by this point, neither of us had a credit or debit card, and the cash point wouldn't let us take any more than £250 at any one time. In the end I paid half of it by riushing to the cash point and withdrawing £250, just so we could have our dog back, and we left after my OH told the vet what he thought of him. The bill was settled in full the next morning.

I won't use them again! The bill, incidently, charged us £14.99 for 'food'. She was in for three days with a blocked tummy, and didn't eat until the third day.

Funnily enough, the same vet partnership involved in the stamford horses....
 
amymay said:
I'm not sure that is the aim of the programme at all. Just highlighting the fact that our animals may not be handled in the professional and compassionate manner we would expect - by fully trained staff........

I use two practices - equine and small animals. Both are just wonderful.
Click to expand...

I did say that bad practace needs to be outlined, but they dont allways give a fair angle on these things and panorama do have a habit of scaremongering, i wasnt generalising the whole programme i think that it is a step in the right direction and that care should be taken when choosing a practace, but i take pride in the care i give to our clients pets and go out of my way to ensure that they recive the treatment that i would want for my own pets :) so i just hope that they dont put all trainee nurses in the same boat
 
MontyandZoom said:
I can see the logic and the limit on numbers is fine. I just hate to see so many amazing graduates be put off when they would make super vets. Perhaps, if there was a higher proportion of graduates entering vet school we would end up with a stronger body of vets.

My personal experience is that graduates tend to have their personal ethic pretty well developed upon entering the course whereas those going into uni at 18 are more easily swayed by the ethics of others. Not always the case I'm sure.

I'm ok.....I'm one of the few that actually got in! :D
Click to expand...

*includes self as 'amazing graduate' ;) * and still wishing you loads of luck :)
 
happyhack said:
Medivet have already started making excuses
http://www.medivet.co.uk/news_view.asp?id=112

Speaks volumes IMO
Click to expand...

My partner knows someone employed by Medivet, and they were well aware of this programme coming out, as it says on the medivet website in December, and so were we. Panorama is well known and has been critised before for heavily editing footage and interviews to make a better programme. I don't condone any bad treatment of animals or overcharging customers etc, but for such a large company there is always going to be a few bad apples, that you would hope the company would sort out. I will watch the programme tonight and will make my own decisions, but knowing Panorama, it will look real BAD. I once did work experience in a vets and it made me change my mind about becoming a veterinary nurse, as I did not like the way animals were treated, not so much cruel, but there was no real kindness and the main thing seemed to be about making money, very sad.
 
Laura1234 said:
I don't condone any bad treatment of animals or overcharging customers etc, but for such a large company there is always going to be a few bad apples, that you would hope the company would sort out.
Click to expand...


I agree and my experience of Medivet includes a couple of bad apples. They tend to employ a lot of foreign vets who come over for the experience and then go off to other climes. The last one, however was there for the whole duration of my last cat's illness - having been put off by the bad apples, I wouldn't have known his existence if she had not already been under his care when I took her on. I was quite happy with his care of her. He did leave at the start of this year, but I was told a permanent vet had landed in his place, so I tried them out one last time with my new oldie cat. Happily, she's proved so far to be a very good apple and we talk through his treatment together (he needs ongoing treatment for inner ear polyps). There's certainly been no money grabbing from her. How different from the appalling excuses for vets who treated my other cat earlier last year. From cruelty (shaking the carrier to get him out when he had a severe head injury) to downright money grabbing (wanting to do X-rays straight away when he injured his knee and wanted to keep him overnight when I lived 100m down the road - I refused both).
 
As someone who is applying to study VetMed at Uni I see this as essential viewing... does sound like it could also be quite distressing to watch though. As I think someone mentioned earlier, I hope that people don't infer too much about independent vets & practices from the programme, MediVet is just one company and this can surely only provide a snapshot of what goes on in the profession!
 
I've never heard anything good about medivet, even from a previous vet nurse - I'd personally always seek a second opinion!
 
tobey said:
I'm going to watch it but I don't think it will make enjoyable viewing... maybe I've naive but it never occurred to me that this kind of thing could happen at a vets practice. :(
Click to expand...

Exactly why it needs to be shown IMO.
Not all vets are what they should be :( I count myself very lucky to have an extremly good one I feel I can trust completly.
 
I'm staggered at the response to the original question. The film hasn't been shown yet. When it is shown, then offer your thoughts.

One word of warning. ALL film makers and TV companies will make the lost of any situation. I would bet that any correct or sympathetic handling will have been edited out.

Alec.
 
itsme123 said:
I'll be watching with a box of tissues.

When my bitch was ill at Christmas the first thing the vet asked "is she insured?". I replied "yes". New vet in the partnership, a small company of partners we have used for years and always held an account with.
When it became apparent that she probably would need surgery the vet asked me again, pointing out that I do not have my cats insured. I assured him my bitch was insured, but that it was a new insurance policy, as she was just a pup.
It transpired that she did not need surgery, but the vet said she NEEDED to stay in for another few days. I asked to visit her, and he begrudgingly agreed, so I went down armed with her comforters etc.

I walked into the back room (I'd never been round there before) and it was filthy. A young lad greeted me, wearing just jeans and a football t shirt (that's right - no shoes!) and my pup was bouncing round her cage with excitement. Hardly a dog needing to stay in the vets?
I asked to take her home and was told I could (again, if they thought she needed to stay in then why agree for me to take her home), so I picked her up and made for the front desk. My OH at the time commented that she seemed perky enough, at which point the vet came round to the desk and said "you're not leaving until you've paid the bill". The receptionist said "it's okay, they have an account..." (it was new year, and a £500 bill....) and he repeated in a loud voice "No. NOT taking the dog until the bill is settled". We're talking 8pm, new years day, waiting room with other clients in there, and the prat's refusing us our 12 week old puppy! I'd got one child in tears by this point, neither of us had a credit or debit card, and the cash point wouldn't let us take any more than £250 at any one time. In the end I paid half of it by riushing to the cash point and withdrawing £250, just so we could have our dog back, and we left after my OH told the vet what he thought of him. The bill was settled in full the next morning.

I won't use them again! The bill, incidently, charged us £14.99 for 'food'. She was in for three days with a blocked tummy, and didn't eat until the third day.

Funnily enough, the same vet partnership involved in the stamford horses....
Click to expand...

Absolutely disgraceful of your vet to treat you this way. In my last practice we would often with hold (non urgent) medication until the next day when the owner could pay but it is actually illegal in the eyes of the RVC to with hold an animal from the owner. They can't keep your dog because you haven't paid, they can withold medicine and refuse to treat further (unless emergency treatment) until you pay but they can not by law keep your dog.
 
OOps I re-posted.

But all I did say is I dont see the issue with scruffing a cat. They are so quick and bloody vicious in most cases and as a vets nurse I bet its bloody tiresome being torn to bits. So scruff the animal. It doesn't do it any harm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top