WWYD? Vet and botched euthanasia

I remember the thread and felt desperately sorry for the op.
I think there is a problem with vets not charging and saying sorry as they are then admitting liability and their insurance will not allow this as people may then make a claim for their distress.
I would be still be taking it further and trying to find out if this has happened before with this vet.
 
carthorse said:
I remember the thread and felt desperately sorry for the op.
I think there is a problem with vets not charging and saying sorry as they are then admitting liability and their insurance will not allow this as people may then make a claim for their distress.
I would be still be taking it further and trying to find out if this has happened before with this vet.
Click to expand...

They can waive / reduce payment without accepting any liability , if OP wishes to she just needs to stand her ground refuse to pay they may take her to the small claims court she could then tell her story to the magistrates and see what happens , the local press cover sittings this could prove interesting for the vets .
It not so much a question of liability as the service given was not of the quality OP has the right to expect in other areas you do not have to pay for services you are not happy with I fail to see why a vet is any different.
Trading standards will explain to OP where she stands on this.
 
ChristmasPTrees said:
I'm sorry Nudibranch but I am with Amymay on this. Your situation was horrific, but it does not necessarily mean that the vet was incompetent. My vets do not carry a gun to routine PTS appointments. Some horses do not react as planned to the injection. I recall your vet told you he could not give her anything else for fear of making things even worse?

Even if there was incompetence, I don't see any chance that you will prove it, and all you will do is spend lots of money and be in an even worse situation.

Please try to put it behind you and enjoy Christmas and look ahead to a better New Year.

So sorry :(
Click to expand...

OP, so sorry for your loss, however have to say I agree with this. Unfortunately, in this litigation culture, waiving fees is seen as admission of guilt, hence why most practices will not do this, as it leaves you open to being sued. Perhaps if people were not so quick to jump on the 'omg, you should complain to the RCVS/get a lawyer etc' bandwagon (not aimed at you OP, I understand why you are upset) then we would still be in an era where a vet could honestly admit to being sorry, which is often all the owner wants to hear, and drop the bill. I understand that the relationship between you and the practice has probably been damaged beyond repair now, however if you felt the letter response was not enough you could always request a chat with one of the partners.

The RCVS will only be interested in professional misconduct, which this is not, which leaves claiming via courts for negligence as the only option. Again, I would doubt you could prove negligence - which basically comes down to doing something that other vets would think is unreasonable. While it may not have been handled as well as possible, from your description I don't think I would be prepared to call it negligence myself. It sounds more like a serious of unfortunate errors that made an already stressful time even more traumatic. For the horse to have stayed standing I would wonder whether the vein was missed, however needles can move from being in place, or else the drugs were off (which can and does happen with somulose) - neither of these should have happened, however both are genuine mistakes, and I don't think you could prove negligence. It was unfortunate that more drugs weren't available, but the vet may have already done another PTS that day and not had chance to stock up again.
Personally, I would not have left the horse, and arranged for either another vet to come or at that point the knackerman to bring a gun, and I think you are right to be upset about the delay this caused. However I suspect the vet by this point was probably flustered and not thinking clearly, and on reflection I'm sure they realise they didn't handle things well. While I'm sure the vet in question will have already discussed the case with the more experienced vets, your letter will have alerted the partners to what happened, and hopefully resulted in all the vets having a sit down and a chat about how to handle such a stressful situation to avoid anyone else going through what you went through. If, god forbid, similar problems have arisen with this vet then I would sincerely hope that the practice will either be organising more training or looking for a new employee. Certainly I think my bosses would be sympathetic to one such case, however repeat occurrences would not be tolerated.

As an aside, it is not routine nowadays for vets to carry guns, and if you asked for PTS when calling the practice, I, and most other vets, would assume you wanted injection. In cases where the horse will not suffer for a brief wait, and especially if cost is an issue, I will offer the option to call our excellent knackerman/woman if that is the owners preferred method. Neither I nor any of the assistant (ie non-partner) vets at my practice have a gun license, and I have never heard of the senior equine partners using a gun either although I guess they may have licenses.
 
Murphy88 I am asuming you are a vet? If you are I would be interested to know what you think cilents should do when they believe the service they required was not up to the standard they could reasonably expect , while I am fully prepared to accept that this is not a case of professional misconduct I fail to see why OP should just pay up without question if she is not happy.
I have done so in the past said to vet no you where treating the wrong thing and therefore I am not paying for those drugs I would do that to a plumber or for any other sub standard service I recieved , I am not being argumentative just extremly curious what you think owners have has a sanction against poor service from vets.
 
Firstly what does the RCVS guidelines say on their website? Have the vets broken any of them?

Write a letter either pointing out the above, or write a non emotional account of what you think went wrong. Also send with it cheque to cover the call out charge and one of the methods of putting to sleep, and state you expect a reply within x days.
 
Goldenstar - the OP has approached this in the right way really, writing a letter explaining her grievances. In a case like this, as an owner, I would expect to pay the call out fee and for drugs. The area where there might be room for leeway would be in the 'euthanasia fee' (assuming the practice OP uses charges this separately to drugs as my practice does). This fee accounts for the time and expertise in both doing the procedure, and in the sensitive communication required of the situation. Now, if I ran a practice I might consider waiving this fee in this case, but I would doubt my bosses would agree, and TBH if I ran a practice and charged the way I often want to now then I would likely bankrupt myself very quickly.

This situation is a bit different from a lot of owner complaints in that, IIRC, only the one vet attended and obviously due to the circumstances there was no repeat visits etc. It is a little more clear cut in cases where a second vet has to attend to assist, or where a second surgery is required for example following small animal neutering (as long as the owner has followed all advised precautions to ensure no complications). In these cases, I would suggest owners request only to pay what should have been the cost (i.e. for one vet to attend, or for one surgery) and in my practice this would normally be the case.

In terms of paying for treatment for misdiagnosed things, if the vet had made a reasonable diagnosis based on the clinical signs and diagnostic tests available to them at that time, even if that diagnosis was later found to be wrong then I would still expect the owner to pay. We are not mind readers, all too often vets are accused of money grabbing for suggesting doing diagnostic tests initially, but then if we try to save the client some money by not jumping straight to these tests we are accused of missing things if our original diagnosis is wrong.
If the vet has misdiagnosed because, for example, they misread an x-ray or wrongly interpreted blood results, then there might be a case for not paying for treatment.
 
Just caught up on your other post, so very sorry.
Fight it all the way, as stated it's not about the money it's about preventing your dreadfull experience happening again to some other much loved horse, really hope you get somewhere with this, best of luck.
 
Murphy88 Thankyou for replying so thoughtfully and fully , this an area that interests me greatly my BF is a vet so I see these things from both sides.
Personally I always raise things I am not happy with the vet I am not one to suffer in silence but I am not one to be forever refusing to pay bills I just don't do bad service .
And I know BF would be mortified if OPs experiance had happened in her practise.
 
i would definatley write a strong worded letter to the practice, to say you are not happy with the way it was done and mention in there that you will take things further it this is not resolve satifacturally! im currently in a simular situation but with a vetting, i found in previous letters if i didnt make it strong enough they just tried to brush it away which is why i went in hard this time! good luck i hope you get something back from what sounds like a horrible cock up on their part!
 
Goldenstar said:
Murphy88 Thankyou for replying so thoughtfully and fully , this an area that interests me greatly my BF is a vet so I see these things from both sides.
Personally I always raise things I am not happy with the vet I am not one to suffer in silence but I am not one to be forever refusing to pay bills I just don't do bad service .
And I know BF would be mortified if OPs experiance had happened in her practise.
Click to expand...

Thanks Murphy good to have the "other sides" input.

I'll always raise issues (nothing can change or be explained if not) but also admit to having refused to pay bills in the past. In my case I (or rather my dad) was charged for a holding, operation and cremation of an animal which never made it to the op and was buried in my back garden. Didn't pay op and cremation and would like to have said it was a one off, but after we left practice found a number of similar complaints :( Even found one where a horse owner was being bullied into having horse immediately pts as horse had broken leg (very rude vet by all comments of the day), thankfully someone on yard called out their vet for 2nd opinion (which apparently didn't go down well) other vet disagreed and horse turned out to be laminitic. If people didn't complain when things were unsatisfactory then there would be no reason to uphold standards - medically or in terms of attitude.

I'd always rather talk with my feet if I wasn't happy with service or response though.
 
fburton said:
One vet who I have discussed this with at length, who has used both methods (and for whom I signed a firearms licence form for renewal this very morning), has told me that there is no way a horse can avoid the effects of an overdose of barbiturate anaesthetic unless the injection was done incorrectly (e.g. missing the vein), the drug was 'off' (highly unlikely, but possible if it isn't kept refrigerated), and/or the wrong dose was given. Yet horror stories of horses 'fighting the injection' abound. It is this vet's opinion that in most cases it is the movements of the horse's limbs after the horse was effectively unconscious that are interpreted as 'fighting' or 'struggling', but that this really shouldn't happen if the vet has discussed the possibility of such movements with the client beforehand.
Click to expand...

My old guy was injected, and he went up, came down and fell (The vet had warned me he may go up, he was a chronic rearer). He died quite quickly (stopped breathing, you could see in his eye he was gone), but his heart didn't stop for a long time, and the vet had to use the extra she had in her pocket, then go back to her car for more. It was horrific for me, but typical of Jake, stubborn beast he was. I've never received a bill (18months ago)
 
Murphy88 said:
all too often vets are accused of money grabbing for suggesting doing diagnostic tests initially, but then if we try to save the client some money by not jumping straight to these tests we are accused of missing things if our original diagnosis is wrong.
Click to expand...

I can think of some vets that are money grabbers, and seem hell-bent on getting as much out of the insurance as possible...
 
wench said:
I can think of some vets that are money grabbers, and seem hell-bent on getting as much out of the insurance as possible...
Click to expand...

On the other side I know lots who charge below what they should if not on insurance and insurance tops up. And not standard rates, lots of charges are forgotten about.
 
Just to clarify for some posters as I think the original facts may be unclear.

I requested the horse be shot however the vet was very persuasive about the injection. He did later apologise for persuading me as I had specifically said I was worried about the injection failing, however obviously it was too late by then. It is easy to say "I would always use the gun" - that is what I have always said and done, and have advised people on here to do as well. But he was the professional and I trusted his judgement. My horse of 28 years was dying and that makes you pretty vulnerable.

The horse did not go down at all for over an hour and a quarter. She was not even particularly sedated or dozy until the final 10-15 minutes. From cannula in to bullet was an hour and a half.

The practice is a 30 mile round trip mainly on small, single track roads. We also had snow.

The vet did not clip the area before inserting the cannula, and this is what I suspect led to failure of the cannulation. He did not have cordless clippers and I offered to take her the 30 metres to the house to clip her myself but he said he could manage fine with scissors. Again it is easy to say with hindsight "well I would have insisted on clipping her myself" but he is the professional. I trusted his judgement.

Half a full, new bottle (not sure exact size) of Somulose was administered and his deliberate choice was not to administer any more as he thought this would make things worse. I still do not know why this is. Presumably it would have missed the vein again.

I asked if a sedative would be given first and he said no. Again I do not know whether this should or should not have been done when using Somulose, but he is the vet so I trusted him. When he left to get the gun I asked him to sedate her as she was highly conscious and distressed, but he said he would not as it "might make things worse". I feel that whatever sedative is present in Somulose had not worked, presumably through being injected into the muscle, and I am not sure why giving a separate sedative at this point would have made the situation worse than it already was. Perhaps someone could shed light?

I have since read that incorrect administration of Somulose can cause, amongst other things, pain. (I believe this is in the Somulose guidance notes.) The practice maintains she would not have been in any pain. She was definitely in distress.

Anyway... I don't want to sue and I don't want to withhold the bill particularly. (Waiving part of it would be a gesture of decency though.) However I do feel the practice should apologise and I do think they should review their policies instead of claiming everything was done correctly. OH is a doctor, not a vet admittedly but he does know medicine! He is not at all happy about the way it has been dealt with. He agrees cannulation can easily go wrong but if it does then there have to be ways of correcting the issue.
 
Last edited:
Op my heart actually breaks for you, no one should go through this. I'd not known it was possible and think a gun should always be carried for this reason alone. There is no excuse to screw this up and as I know tbh even an apology and waive of fee won't make it right. Take comfort in the fact your lovely horse is forever free from pain now and hold on to that xx
 
OP your post me me feel so sad as its the last thing you want when you are having to go through with PTS and I hope your vet shows some compassion and gets back to you with an appology at least. Just to say we had our little mare PTS a few years ago now and our vet was fantastic, he warned of the problems with the injection and advised that she was sedated first which she was and when the final injection went in she just laid down slowly as if she was going to have a roll and lay out and she was gone. It doesn't have to be and should never be traumatic for the horse or the owner.
 
OP, I'm really sorry about your mare.

I've had a similar experience with vets bills being waived- a young vet made a serious misjudgement in the treatment of my mare, I was not present- the loaner was but due to us using the same vet and is not having an agreement as we had been friends before then, she called the vet in my name. I got the bill- I spoke to the young vet the next day who was dismissive and downright rude- I was changing her care to another vet totally and the young vet was moving practices that week- he really didn't give a damn. What he did to her had a major part in the decision to have her PTS the week after. The bill remained unpaid as I was so gutted to have lost her that I couldn't face having 'that' discussion with the partners and making payment on a bill that I felt contributed on a large part to the resulting £1500 bill for the next weeks treatment and for losing her. When I did speak to them, the receptionist put the senior partner straight on- he apologised unreservedly, waived the bill and refunded a partial payment I had made that day and forwarded on a report to the new practice of the young vet. He agreed with me that the young vet was wrong in his judgment, and even asked who the new practice was for my horses so he could send on history to them as he assumed that I no longer wanted their services. I haven't used them since however do think better of the partners now than I would have.

I can't imagine that catheterising would be that easy to get wrong, I have seen it done many times, it's a routine procedure and surely that would have checked blood was backing up into the needle? I don't think there's any excuse for your mare having her last hour and a half in a state when It should have been peaceful.

The mare above was sedated, bought out to grass and went down still chewing within 30 seconds to a minute with careful handling from my current vet. He does rely on the injection and does not carry a firearm either, it seems to be the regular thing now with vets.

Best of luck with them OP x
 
OP - I'm so sorry about what happened to your horse. Do you think it would be worth asking your qs in the vet forum on here? Or setting up a new thread asking for a vet's thoughts in the title. An impartial vet may be able to answer your qs more sufficiently.
 
Nudibranch, I'm so sorry for your loss and the dreadful circumstances. In your shoes I would be demanding a full explanation from a practice partner. In my own experience I have seen two go by injection, the first via cannula, the second via needle straight into the vein, after a sedative was delivered. The second definitely went quicker than the first. Others have also remarked that this can be the case. When I have discussed a similar case going wrong with my vet he stated very strongly that the one thing a vet should be able to do is end an animal's life as quickly and humanely as possible. You need to be able to move on from this, I imagine only a full explaination will go some way to helping with that :(
 
he missed the vein, that is pure and simple what happened from the sound of it-there was no reason not to sedate as this can be given in the vein or in the muscle (although would have taken 20-30min to take effect). Clipping should not have made a big differece as any vet should be able to locate a vein. Did he try the other side at all? Did he suggest you try the clippers? What is his current excuse for it not working?
we all make mistakes, it's the fact he is trying to avoid telling you the truth that is getting me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top