The Brooke animal hospital causes suffering to animals

[PolarSkye]

Originally Posted by honetpot
Can I ask what you wanted the vet to do?
If as I understand it the animal was seriously injured and the owner did not want it PTS with limited resources what do you do? Clean it up, give it pain relief and wait and see?
Does the vet have to stand over it to see its condition? Do you want him to give IV fluilds, anti-biotics, do a full blood count, when its like as not going to die. Then when it trys to stand up, do you get your self kicked trying to do what?
If it had been my horse I would want it PTS but the owner would be more concerned about how he was going to make a living and feed his family and probabely if it had been a child and the family could not afford treatment the care might not be construed as being much better.
We give money to these charities and we are sold an image, you see lots of ads on TV which appeal to our 'arh' side, Oxfam, Save the children,NSPC RSPCA I do not think this is right but I am not naive enough to beleave the ads,money is limited and hard choices have to be made and I think 'Animal Hospital',has a lot to answer for. Not every kitten will live folks.
Things happen overhere we do not approve of,
http://horsegossip.proboards.com/ind...=125433&page=1
and thats on our doorstep

I'm afraid this about sums up how I feel about this (and goodness it took me ages to read through all of this nonsense) . . . I am prepared to accept and believe that the OP saw what she saw . . . but I am also realistic enough to understand that these vets work with next to nothing and in a very different culture . . . making that horse comfortable, in a challenging environment, is probably all that was possible . . . and it's likely not an isolated incident either.

Hard choices indeed.

P

 

[Mithras]

Good idea

However, The Brooke have addressed the complaint on here, and if the OP is not satisfied they have a readily available complaints procedure which I have highlighted a number of times. The OP refuses to make clear whether she is serious in following a complaint through instead of merely making a fuss on anonymous internet forums.

And I have repeatedly pointed out that there is a clear conflict of interest in the body complained about investigating the complaint, and that the regulatory regime encourages openness and accountability by charities, and that the OP is within her every right to do as she has done.

It would be far worse for equines in the long run if people who see wrongdoing felt they should remain silent than a rich charity losing a few donations (and quite frankly, the charity itself is responsible by its own actions for its own donations).

In many respects, as a member of the public who was on holiday at the time, the OP is powerless. I think by raising awareness of this issue, she has done all that could be expected of her, and achieved something. Which is certainly 100% more than any of her detractors have achieved.

 

[Patterdale]

I'm not suggesting they are secret, just that various members have referenced emails between them and the Brooke discussing said incident. One has been posted, others haven't.

But tbh I'm getting past being bothered now, its just the same questions and answers over and over.

I'm satisfied by what I've read and the responses from the Brooke, I know what I think and it's certainly no less of the charity.

But think it has been a good discussion!

 

[Mithras]

Originally Posted by honetpot
Can I ask what you wanted the vet to do?
If as I understand it the animal was seriously injured and the owner did not want it PTS with limited resources what do you do? Clean it up, give it pain relief and wait and see?
Does the vet have to stand over it to see its condition? Do you want him to give IV fluilds, anti-biotics, do a full blood count, when its like as not going to die. Then when it trys to stand up, do you get your self kicked trying to do what?
If it had been my horse I would want it PTS but the owner would be more concerned about how he was going to make a living and feed his family and probabely if it had been a child and the family could not afford treatment the care might not be construed as being much better.
We give money to these charities and we are sold an image, you see lots of ads on TV which appeal to our 'arh' side, Oxfam, Save the children,NSPC RSPCA I do not think this is right but I am not naive enough to beleave the ads,money is limited and hard choices have to be made and I think 'Animal Hospital',has a lot to answer for. Not every kitten will live folks.
Things happen overhere we do not approve of,
http://horsegossip.proboards.com/ind...=125433&page=1
and thats on our doorstep

I'm afraid this about sums up how I feel about this (and goodness it took me ages to read through all of this nonsense) . . . I am prepared to accept and believe that the OP saw what she saw . . . but I am also realistic enough to understand that these vets work with next to nothing and in a very different culture . . . making that horse comfortable, in a challenging environment, is probably all that was possible . . . and it's likely not an isolated incident either.

Hard choices indeed.

P

I believe one of the main points is that millions of pounds in donations is not "next to nothing". And that providing luxurious air conditioned offices for staff does not sit well with being unable to provide fly free, sterile environments in one of Egypt's main cities.

 

[rhino]

I don't understand the constant demands for secrecy, for silencing the OP, and now further references to secret, private messges by the charity, when in public all they have said has been very general and of little use.

And I don't understand why someone continues to imply a deliberate attempt at keeping any perceived wrongdoing secret.

The Brooke has answered questions put to it directly on here, and has repeatedly asked if anyone has any questions to contact them. I think it faintly ridiculous they are supposed to be continually reading this thread and trying to work out what is a genuine question and what isn't. Isn't it a waste of their resources to be scanning internet forums?

OP has made herself easily identifiable with what she has posted on this thread, and I have doubts as to the veracity of what has been written.

 

[Patterdale]

A BLEEDING HORSE IN THE DESERT IS GOING TO HAVE FLIES ON IT.

They cannot provide air conditioned stabling as previously stated because they need fresh air flow. Obviously you are aware that air conditioning works best in enclosed areas? Eg offices??

Ridiculous. Getting a bit silly now. Of COURSE it had flies on it. I cant keep my non-bloody horses fly-free in a British summer, with all fly paraphernalia at my disposal. Give them a break.

 

[AmyMay]

A BLEEDING HORSE IN THE DESERT IS GOING TO HAVE FLIES ON IT.

They cannot provide air conditioned stabling as previously stated because they need fresh air flow. Obviously you are aware that air conditioning works best in enclosed areas? Eg offices??

Ridiculous. Getting a bit silly now. Of COURSE it had flies on it. I cant keep my non-bloody horses fly-free in a British summer, with all fly paraphernalia at my disposal. Give them a break.

The only reasons I mentioned flies was that I suppose I had assumed that a wound may have been covered with something like a towel or gauze just to give it some slight protection from the annoyance of flies.

 

[rhino]

The only reasons I mentioned flies was that I suppose I had assumed that a wound may have been covered with something like a towel or gauze just to give it some slight protection from the annoyance of flies.

A horse coming round from heavy sedation or anaesthetic will not always be easy, or safe to keep covered like this. Likewise pulling stitches out is very common under these circumstances, even in fully padded drop down boxes.

From the petition earlier

If a complainant is dissatisfied with the outcome of a Charity's own internal complaints procedure their only remaining option is the legal system. With legal aid being cut drastically this is beyond the reach of the majority of people.

So OP would have to follow the charity's complaints policy first. Sounds reasonable

 

[Mithras]

And I don't understand why someone continues to imply a deliberate attempt at keeping any perceived wrongdoing secret.

I don't understand how someone can continually fail to understand the concept of conflict of interest.

Nor support the orthodox regulatory regime in favour of charities between open and accountable.

The Brooke has answered questions put to it directly on here, and has repeatedly asked if anyone has any questions to contact them. I think it faintly ridiculous they are supposed to be continually reading this thread and trying to work out what is a genuine question and what isn't. Isn't it a waste of their resources to be scanning internet forums?

The Brooke's comments have been so general as to be of little relevance. I for one, would like to have seen more familiarity with the case in question and direct answering of the questions. I think long enough has passed now for this to have been done.

I tell you what would put me off dontating, if I were a supporter, would be continual vague references to secrecy, secret messages, urgings that people should keep quiet, things should not be said in public, etc.. Sometimes the less said, the better. And the OP is not the one reliant on donations...

OP has made herself easily identifiable with what she has posted on this thread, and I have doubts as to the veracity of what has been written.

Really? You're not just making that bit up? Because you're doing that thing of giving just a little bit of detail, enough to make those who support your repeated criticisms of the OP fire...

Anyway, I'm using my instinct, including my professional instinct, along with previous similar evidence I've been aware of, which dovetails exactly with the OP's story, and I believe the OP's points are valid.

 

[AmyMay]

A horse coming round from heavy sedation or anaesthetic will not always be easy, or safe to keep covered like this.

I don't think the horse will have come to much harm with a simple cotton covering over the wounds.

Likewise pulling stitches out is very common under these circumstances, even in fully padded drop down boxes.

I know.

 

[rhino]

continual vague references to secrecy, secret messages, urgings that people should keep quiet, things should not be said in public,

Really? You're not just making that bit up? Because you're doing that thing of giving just a little bit of detail, enough to make those who support your repeated criticisms of the OP fire...

Anyway, I'm using my instinct, including my professional instinct.

Yes really. Forum rules prevent naming posters.

I'm using instinct too, funny that.

And your imagined 'secrecy' nonsense is getting rather tedious.. We obviously disagree about the morals of posting inflammatory comments on the internet, but discussing morals with lawyers is always entertaining

 

[Mithras]

A horse coming round from heavy sedation or anaesthetic will not always be easy, or safe to keep covered like this. Likewise pulling stitches out is very common under these circumstances, even in fully padded drop down boxes.

I would have thought it pretty obvious that the relevant clinical question would have been whether the horse should have been a candidate for stitching in the first place. Bearing in mind the nature of the wounds, the paucity of post-operative care available and the lack of suitable sterile recovery facilities.

I believe, although I do not presume to speak for her, that the OP wondered why palliative care or euthanasia were not given. On the latter point, the Brooke does not appear to have answered whether or not the owner was contacted and whether he/she prevented euthanasia.

So OP would have to follow the charity's complaints policy first. Sounds reasonable

The OP doesn't "have" to do anything. She is perfectly entitled to speak out in public should she choose to do so. She does not have to make a report to the Ombudsman if she chooses not to take that course of action.

(its not "from the petition" by the way. No-one has petitioned anyone).

You seem to be very prescriptive, and pro-active in telling others what they should be doing. Do you find this approach works for you, or does it tend to alienate those who simply do not believe you have any authority?

 

[Patterdale]

There are no 'vague references to secret messages' - merely the acknowledgement that messages have been replied to by the Brooke to private emails. There is no law against this and I certainly dont think it suspicious.

If people choose not to share private emails with you, it does not make them 'secret messages'

 

[rhino]

On the latter point, the Brooke does not appear to have answered whether or not the owner was contacted and whether he/she prevented euthanasia.

It has stated its policy on euthanasia in Egypt



(its not "from the petition" by the way. No-one has petitioned anyone).

Except the petition which was linked a few post ago

ETA this one

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/645

This is a petition for an ombudsman for charities who havnt addressed complaints.

And I would rather keep to the topic than answer inane questions about myself. If you are that interested in 'my approach' please feel free to pm me Or would that be keeping secrets?

 

[Mithras]

And I would rather keep to the topic than answer inane questions about myself. If you are that interested in 'my approach' please feel free to pm me Or would that be keeping secrets?

Yes, it would. I'm not pm-ing anyone, and I haven't recieved any pm's about this thread either (and am therefore not going to hint and provide half information about anything that is not said in public).

What are your thoughts on the clinical issues I mention above and why do you think the Brooke has not addressed these? (or perhaps it has, who knows if its been done privately).

You are also confused about the purpose of the petition to which you refer, as you appear to think it prescribes action that the OP should take, when in fact it is a petition to create a public office which might be able to deal with the OP's issue, should it be set up at some future date...)

 

[rhino]

What are your thoughts on the clinical issues I mention above and why do you think the Brooke has not addressed these? (or perhaps it has, who knows if its been done privately).

My thoughts are I'm not a vet and nothing that the Brooke have said regarding their treatment would worry me unduly. It's not necessarily the way I would want my horse treated, but we are not in Egypt.

ETA it's not me who is confused, I thought the petition to set up a Charity Ombudsman was a good idea and noted that in that according to its ethos the individual charity should deal with the complaint first. Much as I've been suggesting all along. Hypothetically, obviously as it is a petition which we were being asked to sign.

 

[Patterdale]

Mithras your posts are getting more ridiculous. I'm really sorry to say that but that's how I see it.
So now you are questioning whether the horse hit by a bus should even have been stitched?? Words fail me.

And what do you think the OP or any other tourist would have thought then, if they hadn't even tried to stitch?

Whatever will you say next? Should the charity have consulted s team of medics, and then stuffed and mounted the horse on a plinth for inspection?

 

[Mithras]

Yes really. Forum rules prevent naming posters.

I'm using instinct too, funny that.

And your imagined 'secrecy' nonsense is getting rather tedious.. We obviously disagree about the morals of posting inflammatory comments on the internet, but discussing morals with lawyers is always entertaining

I have to say that I am accustomed to a far more rigorous response than that provided by the Brooke. It is so general as to be utterly meaningless. Theres no attention to detail, nothing useful said other than plactory comments. Its nowhere near approaching an even mildly satisfactory response in my book.

 

[Rosehip]

Have been thinking about this thread quite a bit, and hope that the Brooke are able to respond accordingly.

Out of interest though, do the vets out there need an owners permission to euthanise a horse? I just can't help thinking that if permission is required then the owners might rather the horse take its chances than get put down anyway as it will mean they have to find a replacement?

Sorry if this hass been answered further on - I have only havd time to read to page 7 of 38!
Anyway, I believe that due to religious beliefs out in Chiro/Luxor/Egypt, euthanasia is not generally an option and owners have to be firmly pursuaded to accept that nothing can be done for their animals.

Perhaps the vet had done all that he was authorised to do regarding the horse, had sedated it and left it to pass away?

I will look forward to catching up on the rest of the thread when I get back from my neds.

 

[Mithras]

Mithras your posts are getting more ridiculous. I'm really sorry to say that but that's how I see it.
So now you are questioning whether the horse hit by a bus should even have been stitched?? Words fail me.

And what do you think the OP or any other tourist would have thought then, if they hadn't even tried to stitch?

Whatever will you say next? Should the charity have consulted s team of medics, and then stuffed and mounted the horse on a plinth for inspection?

I would have thought that a horse bleeding heavily from large gaping wounds after being hit by a bus should have been put down at the scene, or if not possible, when the vet attended it in the clinic.

Since the Brooke have not yet commented specifically on the true extent of the injuries, the reasons why the horse was not euthanised and the chances of survival, it is impossible to say whether or not their staff acted correctly.

Certainly I have dealt with a horse hit by a car (not a bus) which suffered a large gaping wound.

 

[Mithras]

Sorry if this hass been answered further on - I have only havd time to read to page 7 of 38!
Anyway, I believe that due to religious beliefs out in Chiro/Luxor/Egypt, euthanasia is not generally an option and owners have to be firmly pursuaded to accept that nothing can be done for their animals.

That may well be the case, but the Brooke hasn't actually provided that answer, have they?

And it also begs the question why the Brooke is not doing more to improve practices when it has been in the locus for so long.

 

[Patterdale]

They. Don't. Put. Them. Down. Over. There.

Unless the owner was TOTALLY different from his peers, THIS would be the reason.

Also, as previously stated, the horse did not die from it's visible injuries but from suspected internal injuries.
So the owner was probably letting it 'take it's chance.' Not unusual, even among farm animals over here.

The Brooke had to say SUSPECTED internal injuries as no PM was performed. However if a horse in an RTA dies after being hit but not from visible extreme trauma, it is a fairly safe assumption. Ask any vet.

 

[rhino]

Thank you to everyone who has commented on the incident that occurred at the Brooke’s Luxor clinic. We appreciate your concern for working equines in the developing world and we were very concerned by this report. Please be assured we take these situations very seriously and
an internal investigation has been undertaken.

Our General Manager in Egypt has now sent over a report and our records show that on Saturday 14th April a grey mare was indeed admitted to the Brooke's clinic in Luxor after a car accident. A thorough clinical examination was carried out which revealed lacerated wounds to the right front leg and right hind leg.

The mare was sedated, then the wounded area was shaved and cleaned with antiseptic before an anti-tetanus serum was given. The mare was moved to one of the clinic’s large boxes and anesthetised to help her lie down on a large mattress, so the vet could begin stitching the wounds. The vet’s assessment concluded that the best way to know if this animal could make a recovery was to allow it the time to do so.

Unfortunately in this case the mare died on the same day, from suspected internal organ damage as a result of the car accident, and not from fractured bone or external bleeding. Although she was thoroughly examined on arrival, it was impossible for us to know the extent of the damage at an early stage and our priority was to give the horse an opportunity to respond to the initial treatment.
It is truly sad when any animal dies, despite all our efforts, but in this case we feel we did all we could to help this poor horse and we are sure she would not have been suffering in these final hours.

I would like to reassure you all that our vets in Egypt are very dedicated and hard working professionals who care passionately for the animals in their care. I sincerely hope this statement helps clarify some of your concerns.

We do respect the fact that other organisations have a different approach to us but our mission is to do what is best for the welfare of the largest number of working equine animals. With over 75 years experience, we aim to help communities to look after their own horses and donkeys and so help prevent disease and injury, visiting animals at home in their villages and treating them in a way that meets good clinical standards in addition to the work of our clinics.

Please note that we will be unable to comment on any posts raised on this forum until after the weekend. In order for us to respond appropriately, if anybody does have any questions, please do contact us directly via info@thebrooke.org. and we will get in touch with you as soon as possible. Thank you.

Message from the Chief Executive, Petra Ingram

I would like to begin by thanking those contributors who have shown support to the Brooke over the past weekend. It is a difficult time for any charity when someone makes a complaint on a public forum without seeking an explanation from the charity first.

Just to recap, last week a complaint was made on this forum, which was subsequently notified to us. It is very sad that this involved a working horse in Luxor which had been involved in a road traffic accident and died while at the Brooke's clinic. Unfortunately this type of accident is not uncommon in a busy city where horses work alongside cars and buses. In Cairo and Delhi they are banned from the town centre, but not in Luxor.

When this mare was admitted to the Luxor clinic, there were no clinical signs to justify euthanasia – she had walked in on foot and showed no sign of fractures. An examination carried out by the vet showed lacerated wounds on her right front leg and right hind limb as a result of the accident. The vet in charge is extremely experienced and provided pain relief and stitched the wounds. Unfortunately the mare died shortly afterwards, we believe from internal injuries.

The Brooke has a clearly defined animal welfare policy and it is a condition of funding that all our overseas projects comply with these standards. We employ highly trained veterinary staff and regularly review and update clinical practice, implementing lessons learned in daily working. We do not have luxurious clinics or offices, equally we don't invest in X-ray machines as these are expensive and we believe the money can be better used helping more animals. We do whatever is necessary to reach 250,000 equine animals across the country out of an estimated total population of around 1.2 million, and these are some of the difficult decisions that have to be made.

In accordance with our euthanasia policy, we will not put a horse to sleep without the owner’s permission. As this forum has already highlighted, this is sometimes difficult to get, due to religious beliefs or when there is a hope the animal might recover, an animal vital to providing income to a poor family. Our priority is to relieve pain and to provide the most appropriate treatment according to the situation. We believe the vet concerned followed the most appropriate course of action.

The Brooke takes its responsibilities as the custodian of supporters’ money for the benefit of working equine animals overseas very seriously and we always investigate complaints. In this case, we only wish there had been more discussion with the vet at the time to ensure a better understanding of our approach. If you would like me to answer any individual questions, please email me, Petra Ingram, at info@thebrooke.org.

Requoting the Brooke posts as for the people who have not read them

 

[JFTDWS]

And it also begs the question why the Brooke is not doing more to improve practices when it has been in the locus for so long.

Perhaps I misunderstand this comment - are you actually suggesting that a charity commited to providing veterinary care to equines should be diversifying into attempting to alter the prevalent religious beliefs in a region?

I'm not sure there aren't ethical issues with that, before you consider the logistical improbability of success

 

[Mithras]

They. Don't. Put. Them. Down. Over. There.

Unless the owner was TOTALLY different from his peers, THIS would be the reason.

Also, as previously stated, the horse did not die from it's visible injuries but from suspected internal injuries.
So the owner was probably letting it 'take it's chance.' Not unusual, even among farm animals over here.

The Brooke had to say SUSPECTED internal injuries as no PM was performed. However if a horse in an RTA dies after being hit but not from visible extreme trauma, it is a fairly safe assumption. Ask any vet.

To be pedantic, we don't know what the owner said or wanted, or whether or not they were present. The whole thing remains mysterious.

Why on earth are the Brooke not able to encourage euthanasia, after all the time they have spent in the region, in cases such as this? Or indeed, to administer euthanasia and attribute it to natural causes, as a mercy?

And what kind of vet cannot make an attempt at diagnosing internal injuries from a RTA?

Furthermore, this description does not tally with the OP's description of the injuries.

 

[AmyMay]

And what kind of vet cannot make an attempt at diagnosing internal injuries from a RTA?

Got to agree with you on this point.

 

[Mithras]

Perhaps I misunderstand this comment - are you actually suggesting that a charity commited to providing veterinary care to equines should be diversifying into attempting to alter the prevalent religious beliefs in a region?

I'm not sure there aren't ethical issues with that, before you consider the logistical improbability of success

No. Nice attempt at being deliberately inflammatory though.

Although I do think we are getting near the crux of the matter.

Where do you draw the dividing line between caring for people and caring for animals? Between placating animal's owners and providing mercy? Its not at all unreasonable to expect a charity such as the Brooke to go some way towards changing mindsets as to humane treatment of animals. You are talking about one very rigid interpretation of one tent of one religion in that region. (which is probably to be expected from a "right on" HHOer, but nevertheless...).

At what point does a charity become so emeshed in the local culture that it ceases to bring about improvements? Obviously the standard of animal care is not so high in Egypt as it is in the UK. That does not mean the charity has to adopt those standards.

Other charities in the region do more, while remaining sensitive to local customs and beliefs, and there are constant reports concerning the Brooke over this type of allegation. Being sensitive to local beliefs does not entail adopting them.

 

[AMH]

Mithras, I'm afraid I have to start to question your motives here. You have stated somewhere (and I'm not trawling through the back and forth posts to find it but I'm pretty sure I've read it) that you have reasons for not donating to the Brooke.

So I have to question how disinterested your arguments. Most of those who are expressing concerns about allegations made agains the Brooke have stated that they are not supporters of the Brooke but are merely concerned with the soundness of the basis of the allegations made.

I REALLY object to your comments regarding suppression of information. I have no interest in trying to suppress evidence of mismanagement or neglect on the part of this or any other member of the Brooke's staff. But I fail to see why I should be expected to take the OP's comments as gospel.

I'm not interested whether you have professional experience of this kind of thing or not. I'm entitled to question the validity of the OP's comments without being told I'm involved in a cover-up!

 

[Patterdale]

One without x-ray vision? Or a crystal ball...? If your vet can see and diagnose the innards of a horse with just his eyes he must be a hell of a chap.

Suggesting that they go against religious beliefs and destroy the horse anyway is....seriously misguided IMO.
A culture difference such as this is not one you can simply talk someone out of.
And if word got out that any charity was going against cultural/religious wishes like this then what do you think would happen? A lot more horses would die by the roadside WITHOUT pain relief as no one would trust the charities.

Mithras, you remind me of a lawyer. Desperately trying to find someone to blame.
Personally I think the bus driver needs to take his share....

 

[JFTDWS]

No. Nice attempt at being deliberately inflammatory though.

Although I do think we are getting near the crux of the matter.

Where do you draw the dividing line between caring for people and caring for animals? Between placating animal's owners and providing mercy? Its not at all unreasonable to expect a charity such as the Brooke to go some way towards changing mindsets as to humane treatment of animals. You are talking about one very rigid interpretation of one tent of one religion in that region. (which is probably to be expected from a "right on" HHOer, but nevertheless...).

At what point does a charity become so emeshed in the local culture that it ceases to bring about improvements? Obviously the standard of animal care is not so high in Egypt as it is in the UK. That does not mean the charity has to adopt those standards.

Other charities in the region do more, while remaining sensitive to local customs and beliefs, and there are constant reports concerning the Brooke over this type of allegation. Being sensitive to local beliefs does not entail adopting them.

Mithras, I'm not attempting to be deliberately inflammatory - I was (and remain) genuinely shocked by your statements. I don't know quite what you mean to imply by calling me a "right on" HHOer either

However, I don't think that it is the place of the Brooke, or any other charity of its kind, to actively attempt to interfere in the religious beliefs of another culture. There is certainly an argument for education on veterinary grounds, allowing the owner to make an informed decision, but ultimately I don't think that it is politically wise, or ethically sound for them to "push" the owners into euthanasia. I also don't agree that allowing owners to make that decision is the same as the Brooke themselves adopting those beliefs

FWIW, I think there would be far greater outcry if the Brooke were to clandestinely attempt to euthanise horses, attribute death to natural causes and hoodwink their owners in the manner you suggest.