economics v sentimentality

[higgins 75]

just read a topic whereby someone has incurred a huge vets bill,and although people have suggessted put the animal down,they have declined.My question is would you only go throughb the expensive option of having surgery if you had the money or if you was attached to the animal(close bond) and you had no money would you still opt for expensive treatment?

HBiggins

[mattydski 560]

For me it always depends on the quality of life that the animal will have after the treatment.

If it only prolonging the inevitable, then, No. No matter how much I care for the animal, I wont just prolong an 'existence'

However, for a young healthy animal, that will retain its quality of life, yes, I will fund the treatment, and have done in the past.

 

Also, it depends on whether the animal is put through a lot of pain, as whether I believe treatment is a for the animals benefit...or our own.

 

Matty

[scothunter 12,609]

the animals best interest would be my 1st concern,but i would also judge it on my finances at that time.i certainly wouldnt run up a huge bill on an operation if it was going to put me in difficulty financially for months or years to come.it be a tough decision but i would have to realisticaly look at my situation first.when i raced greyhounds ive had some huge bills from the vets so i know the kinda figures possibly involved.

[poacher3161 1,766]

The big problem these days is trusting a vet as most i have come across will just string you along for the money and not have your finances or the animals best intrest at heart.atb dell

[scothunter 12,609]

The big problem these days is trusting a vet as most i have come across will just string you along for the money and not have your finances or the animals best intrest at heart.atb dell

 

[FightTheBan 1,147]

When I was about 16 year old, I had a vet bill of 2 grand for my springer bitch...

She was my first dog and I havent regretted doing it once. I had to work like feck to get the money together, you may as well have called me Clint, but it was worth it.

 

Now, on the other hand, if I had a dog where the treatment would outweigh the cost of buying and rearing a pup to that standard I dont know if I would do it.

 

If the dog gets an injury out working, I think it's your duty to get it sorted. If spending a little money will get it working again then it's worth it. A lot of the things vets do, you can do yourself if you do a bit of reading and it saves you money in the long run.

If, for instance its a lurcher with a broken leg or a terrier with broken jaw - PTS. Not being aloud to work must be torture for a grafting dog thats used to it.

 

FTB

[MuttleMcTuttle 21]

I don't have a problem trusting my vet, but he's been visiting the farm for over 30 years now and I trust his judgement.

Ultimately it does depend on the animal's age, general health, and how much it means to you. I have spent far more on vet bills for horses than their material worth, and had to make some tough decisions over the years.

I agree that it's the quality of life for the animal that should be of prime consideration, and it annoys me to see how some "animal lovers" keep sick and decrepit animals ticking along because they cannot bring themselves to make the decision to say goodbye to the thing... if you really cannot afford to have the animal treated, or there is only a very slim chance of the treatment actually curing the condition, then you should do the decent thing and have the animal put down.

 

There is never an excuse for leaving an injured dog in a field somewhere or turning a horse out and forgetting about it in the hope that "nature will take its course"...

 

Insurance is often not an option if you have several animals, but an alternative is to set up a bank account for the animals and save as much as you can whenever you have a bit of spare cash, and vow not to touch the money for anything else.