Have you seen an itemized list of services offered at a human hospital? I have, I looked at the itemized charges they billed to my insurance. Luckily, I didn’t have to pay all of it. But I know that many of the things were pricy, and were charged at a comparable, or higher rate that the veterinary clinics I had studied, shadowed, or be associated with (for similar things, for example, an IV line with saline).
Since you don’t pay close attention to itemized health care for your own procedures (if you have insurance), you don’t realize that it is costly, and forget that it will cost similar to obtain similar treatment for your (uninsured) pet. And yes, many of the current diagnostic technologies, procedures, machines, equipment, and services offered by veterinarians, particularly in newer facilities, have the same cost as the human counterparts. In fact, sometimes they are the same.
Sure, there are many “low key”/ “low cost” options available, and in some cases, particularly if money is a concern, those are the treatments available. But part of veterinary medicine, just like in human medicine, is to progress, not to stagnate with old (and unreliable, less safe, less effective, more invasive, more painful) procedures just because they’re cheap.
BTW, the above is in reply to griffin. I do agree with CrazyCatLady and SeaDragonTattoo, that it was most likely intended as a charge for the extra services offered during euthanasia.
Actually I think the US health care system has a lot of the same problems as the veterinary industry, and it is also unnecessarily expensive. Both do huge amounts on unnecessary procedures, and will often choose new expensive procedure over the cheaper, old one, even when there no evidence of the new one being more effective.
Though there is one very important aspect where it is different. The fact is if you only offer the new expensive procedure, and the client can’t afford it, then the end result is the patient gets put to sleep. Even if the older cheaper procedure isn’t as effective, it is still better than the animal being euthanized because their owner can’t afford the newer procedure.
But all of this is a side track to the OP. The fact is either the person in the OP was charged simply to be in the room when their pet was put to sleep (which is morally unacceptable IMO), or they were TOLD that is what they were being charged for, but actually being charged for unnecessary procedures to make the euthanasia LOOK more appealing (which legally unacceptable AFAIK).
But there is plenty of evidence, believe it or not, that many more current procedures are better than the old ones. One should, in general, have established a relationship with the veterinarian and trust that she or he is up to date in current protocols, their efficacy, and that their practice can provide those services if needed. Veterinarians and veterinary personnel are required to attend continuing education to keep their licenses (even non-practicing ones, like me). If you suspect that a procedure is unnecessary, and this is a non-emergency situation, you could/should always ask for a second opinion.
No, if “gold standard”, peer-reviewed and accepted best procedure is not possible, many veterinarians will gradually scale down to other procedures, and see if they fit with the owner’s budget/lifestyle. I don’t know of any that go from “If you don’t do top-notch, we euthanize”. Now, the owners may elect this, but if the owner wants the animal treated, many vets will try to find a way to treat the animal.
I’m still not sure I understand your point about unnecessary procedures. I don’t see the procedures mentioned by others (IV line, sedation) listed as illegal, and in fact, at the end of the article, they are mentioned as recommended. They may be unnecessary to you, but for many other owners and veterinarians, including the most important veterinary association in this country, they are not that way.
Granted, if the practice really did tell them that’s the reason they were charging (because they were present), either orally or verbally, then whoever said that was extremely callous, and if that’s how it was itemized, that also reflects poorly on the practice.
I do think it is more likely they charged extra for the things outlined before, and being an emergency clinic, probably charged more than regular clinics. Also, it can also be debatable that this should be included in the euthanasia charge in general instead of added separately. Again, this may be one of the cases where different “treatment options” are provided. The owner requested to be present, therefore they’re charging for use of materials that they wouldn’t have used (and wouldn’t have to had used) had the owner declined being present.
Many vets will waive the entire euthanasia fee if an animal has been receiving on-going treatment for a chronic condition at that clinic. As you say, those people have generally spent a fair bit of money there in the recent past. Getting a discount is markedly less likely the less often you’re a presence at the clinic–I’ve never seen anyone get one if the animal in question is one we only ever see for vaccines, say. And I never even bothered to ask if we’d never seen the pet/client before–which is the typical situation in an emergency clinic.
Besides, letting an animal get to the point where it’s yowling in pain and you can’t wait till your vet opens in the morning is infinitely more unkind than charging someone for services provided.
They are clearly unnessacary. If they were nessacary for the welfare of the pet then they would be required whether the owners were there or not. The fact it is they are a cosmentic thing to sanatize the procedure for the benefit of the owner. Which is fine if you want to offer that as a option but to say you HAVE to pay for this if you want to be present when your pet is put to sleep is just immoral gouging.
I’m pretty sure a good lawyer would find it alot more than “callous” and more along the lines of fraudulent busniess practices.
The last time I visited our local emergency vet (about 10 years ago, just to post a flyer on the bulletin board) it cost $50 for your animal to be seen. Other charges were added to that, but that was the minimum. I’m sure it is much higher now.
Many emergency vets do not have a regular patient base - they are not able to make their overhead from vaccines, flea products, heartworm preventative, etc. They have to charge more to stay in business - not to mention that most vets and support personnel are paid a bit more for working at night.
If that emergency vet did charge $50 for simply being in the room - not for additional services relating to the procedure being public - your daughter needs to find out. And never use them if that is the case.
That’s it in a nutshell. The priority should be minimizing the patient’s fear and pain. When I’ve had to put a cat down I couldn’t possibly have given less of a shit about whether or not it’s cheaper in Serbia.
My point was this has NOTHING to do with the animals fear and pain. If it was these procedures would be necessary whether or not the owners were present. It just a means of sanitizing the procedure (and possibly preventing complaints)
The Serbia reference was a general statement about how expensive veterinary care was in US, not euthanasia (and there IS something very wrong if it cost several orders of magnitude more to give a procedure to a dog in the US, than person in Serbia).
Of all the times to maximize profits, this is the shortest-sighted one, for a veterinary practice.
It’s not clear to me that the animal in A isn’t suffering more.
The last time I faced this situation, the vet administered a sedative to provide B, as standard procedure. It was a $50 total charge, as a house call. After overhead, he wasn’t making much of anything for the trip. This seemed like good business practice in context.
From a purely business point of view I can’t think of a better time to maximize profits.
This is not a regular customer. They’re here for a one time visit only
Their reason for patronizing my entire profession is now gone.
Now, even if this was their only pet they are likely to have another at some point but it’s not like emergency vets worry about choice. The next time they have a vet emergency it’s unlikely there is another option.
I just talked to my friend about this, she doesn’t know the exact wording on the invoice, but she did say they cathiderized (sp?) Annabelle and wondered if that might be what the extra $50 was for.
I have never had to have a cat euthanized, but plenty of dogs in my lifetime. My vet has always just injected the purple drug directly into a foreleg vein. The dogs have just passed quietly. I am wondering if it’s different with cats… do they fight it? Struggle?
I’m not a vet and luckily I have never had a bad experience when putting an animal down (I have volunteered with rescue for close to 20 years now and have attended more euthanizations than I care to think about plus I’m older and have owned many dogs and cats) but I think it’s equally likely for a dog or a cat to have a hard time at the end, with collapsing veins and low blood pressure and so on.
In my experience, a vet will warn the owner that there may be some “unpleasantless” at the end. Perhaps the animal will void bowels, or convulse, or resist, or something. Most vets I’ve gone to, I’ve known and have history with so they know I won’t get upset by that sort of thing.
I did want to share that the last animal I took to the rescue vet for euth was a horrifically abused and neglected young pit bull, maybe 30 lbs, about four months ago. The vet catheterized/sedated him before he got the blue solution. We spent time loving on him and feeding him treats before he went - possibly the only time in his life he’d ever really been treated kindly - and the bill was $53.00.
I’ve never had an animal euthanized at an emergency clinic, though. My county animal control will euth for $10, but the owner cannot be with the animal.
My cat Annie was humanely euthanized last fall. The vet clinic had a special room for the procedure–quiet, subdued decor, nice leather couches. Annie and I had as much time together as we wanted. When the time came, she quietly slipped away, while nestled in my arms. No struggle, no pain.
As I understand things from my veterinarian neighbour, it is not uncommon for the animal to get a sedative prior to the final procedure. This was probably why Annie was so quiet and cooperative. But she was alert enough to enjoy skritches, to purr, and even to manage a little play with my fingers. It was a nice last few minutes with her.
I should add that there was no extra charge for me to be with her at the end.
The thing is, I’m not at all convinced that the supposedly unnecessary procedures don’t in fact make it easier for the animal. If they appear to be in less distress, I’m going with it. At the very least, they’ll die with more dignity, and for that reason alone any price difference is utterly irrelevant to me.
Again I apologize for missing your point. I’ll rephrase: When I’m getting medical care for my cats I couldn’t possibly give less of a shit about whether or not it’s cheaper in Serbia, because I don’t live there. And for what it’s worth, I don’t think veterinary care is outrageously expensive. Expensive, yes, as well it should be. Outrageously so-- absolutely not.
No, but they’re often harder to get a good stick on. Cat veins are much smaller than dog veins, and cats are less amenable to restraint, so even on a good day with a healthy pet you’re trying to hit a tiny, often moving target. And the day you’re putting an animal down for medical issues is by definition not a good day with a healthy pet.
Animals being put down often have really low blood pressure due to organ failure (almost all cats over a certain age have some degree of kidney failure, even if that’s not what you’re putting them down for) or shock or some degree of dehydration. That shrinks the vein. On one of your setters, you’ll almost never get smaller than a normal cat vein no matter how bad it is. On a cat, though…you can get down to neonate size or smaller. It can also make the veins more friable and prone to blow, so even if you hit the vein, you can lose it well before the end of the injection. Which means the euthanasia solution goes under the skin, which burns, which means the animal starts to struggle and cry, which makes it even harder to hit the vein in the other leg to finish the injection and is horribly upsetting for everyone involved.
The other issue with the low blood pressure is that even if you get a good stick and get everything in the vein, it takes a loooonnnnnngggg time for it to circulate to the heart and brain and the animal to die. That alone is distressing enough, but you’re also more likely to get involuntary muscle spasms that result in paddling or vocalizations that make the owners think the animal is suffering.
As I said before, alone in the back room we’d just give them a little extra straight into the heart, but you just can’t do that in front of the owners.
I manage vet clinics and all of them have done this- a catheter charge is added for owner-present euthanasias. No office fee or additional charge besides the euthanasia, a minor medical waste fee (all injections get this), the catheter and whatever cremation arrangements the owner wants. We charge $26 for the catheter. My understanding is most emergency locations run 25%-30% extra on all services. Generally, ER staff has to be compensated more than run-of-the mill vet staff. So depending on what a catheter might run in that area, or whether they added a office call to the bill (reasonable IMHO) for the convenience of a late night, critical (due to the pet’s suffering) euthanasia, I don’t find that partiularly heartless. It does sound high for my area, but vet services vary from location to location in general cost.
I work at a vet clinic. For a cat euth, 95% of the time, we sedate with gas anesthetic first, even if the client isn’t there. Only on rare occasions will we sedate a dog - typically only if they are a known biter, hard to handle, etc. We explain in great detail what the owner might see and why: if they fight the mask, it’s because the gas smells funny; if they “gasp” or paddle once or twice, it’s just a reflex; they will most likely void urine, etc. We do still have some people get upset by the final twitching, but since we try to hard to make sure they know what’s coming, it’s pretty rare.
Our vet just doesn’t do catheters for euthanasia; she barely does catheters for anything.
in my lifetime. My vet has always just injected the purple drug directly into a foreleg vein. The dogs have just passed quietly. I am wondering if it’s different with cats… do they fight it? Struggle?