I had a hard time coming up with a succinct title for this question. I am not a mental health worker. When I interact with someone who is behaving “eccentrically”, I shrug it off and carry on as I was. My question: Is there a point where a I would be legally required to say, “Oh, (s)he is nuts*.”?
I have had several clients (I am a veterinarian) do/say things that, in retrospect, others have told me were sure signs of mental instability. But, as I’ve said, IANAMHW. An example would be a person bringing all of their animals in for euthanasia. This happens every so often. I do not routinely ask why, as I feel that would be intrusive. In one instance, the owner went home and ate a gun. A relative asked me why I didn’t recognize the person’s behaviour as meaningful. I explained that although I was sorry for their loss, IANAMHW, and I have seen people ask for that service before without suicidal intent.
In another situation, the neice of an elderly client felt that her aunt was “obviously crazy” when she spent thousands of dollars on her pets. I forwarded the letter to the aunt and she told me she was cutting her niece out of her will. The niece threatened me with legal action for taking advantage of someone who was “obviously crazy”.
So, my question. Does the legal system require that I recognize mental illness, assuming that IANAMHW?
*I realize that the term “nuts” is far from being PC, but I feel it emphasizes how strongly IANAMHW. Heck, I somehow even avoided a psych course undergrad!
Of course not. The guideline is what would an ordinary person know in a given situation, not what would a psychiatrist know. Even with a BS in psychology a person isn’t expected to recognize mental illness in general situations.
If a person comes in waving a gun and saying they’re going to shoot the place up, most people would recognize that as being mentall unstable. Beyond that, it’s just not something that a layperson is expected to recognize.
And the niece in your story? She’s obviously concerned that “aunt” is going to spend her inheritance - you don’t need to be a Dr. to recognize that.
With only the details I gave in the OP, yes, I agree. Further details include the fact that the woman had dozens of pets, and was “obsessive” as to their care. I was seeing her at least once a week, and each time a pet was ill, she would choose state of the art treatment. It was not unusual for her to spend an average of $800 a week on her pets during her final year of life.
I certainly don’t think you are under any legal obligation, but I must say your post does make me uneasy with the two examples you have cited. While you are a vet, you are also in a position that sees you interacting with vulnerable human beings daily, and thus I am curious as to why you wouldn’t enquire about the reasons for euthanasia (in otherwise healthy pets).
I also wonder why you passed on the letter to the aunt. And I will also admit that I would have concerns about someone spending $800 pw on (what sounds like fairly routine) vet care, AND the motivations of a vet who was willing to provide that care without question.
As far as I am concerned, the money is the aunt’s to do with as she pleases. She is under no obligation to leave her estate to her neice. When I worked for the local Humane Society, we had a lady leave a quite substantial estate to the H.S. It may very well have been that the pets provided the aunt with much more love and companionship than did her neice. As long as a person is doing no harm to others, what they do with their money is no one’s business but theirs.
A vet is in the profession of providing medical care for animals. If someone has a large number of animals the bills can add up. Why should vetbridge question someone who is taking care of their animals?
Unless someone has a dozen or more chronically ill animals, spending $800 a week on pets is pretty abnormal for anyone who isn’t a Hilton sister, IMHO.
Legal questions aside, If someone brings all of their animals in for euthanasia, isn’t it your job to ask why, and maybe suggest some alternative? Perhaps the person is having financial problems or health problems or is relocating overseas, or any number of other reasons. If you know the reason, you might help them find new homes for their pets. If you merely perform the no-questions-asked euthanasia, I’m glad you’re not my veterinarian.
If I answer, do I get free immunizations for my dog?
Yes, I’m kidding. We’re not even in Pennsylvania.
Which actually ties into one of the real reasons I can’t answer. IAAL, but not licensed there, and I don’t know the law. Interesting question, though. Maybe if I get some time later, I’ll wander back in and say a few general words about capacity to contract.
No quibble here in general terms. If she was going out singing and dancing/eating at 5 Star restaurants/paying a toyboy for ‘favours’, I’d have no problem with Auntie doing what she damnwell likes with her dough, and the niece would have to just suck it up. She could leave a massive bequest to the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Fungi for all I’d care.
But spending such huge amounts on what has been described as ‘routine’ vetcare would send warning bells ringing in my head. And why on earth would vetbridge pass on a letter from the niece?
Let me guess the aunt never married/had children and her pets are her surrogate children. Older people often look to animals as companions and the loss of one can be as devastating as the loss of a human familymember. And do you really euthanasise any animal brought in without question?
At one point, a psychologist told me that to the best of his knowledge I had ZERO civil or legal liability (in Ohio) as a layman, if someone informed me that they were suicidal and proceeded to off themselves in my presence.
Take a psychologist’s word on the law the same way you would a lawyer’s advice about cancer, but it’s a data point for you.
IANAL, but in every setting I’ve seen, a layman without specific training not only isn’t obligated to recognize mental instability but is presumed to not be competent to do so. The only real exception is when there is a direct “commonsense” risk of harm to the subject or another person. Even then, you are ONLY expected to recognize the risk of harm, with a very limited obligation to act on it; you are NOT obligated to attribute it to mental instability or aberrance, either temporary or permanent.
Of course, it’s a truism that plaintiffs can bring a lawsuit for almost any perceived loss, even with barely a pretense of legal validity or standing.
Reasonable concerns on your part. One reason I tend not to ask about the reason for euthanasia is that I offer several choices for the service. A client pays more if (s)he chooses to be in the room and have the animal examined prior to the injection. Some people choose (for economic reasons or other reasons) to just have the procedure done without being present. Also, killing your own animal in PA is legal, and I have had people decide to leave rather than discuss their reasons; saying they will shoot the pet at home.
Passing the letter on was, in retrospect, probably not the best idea. I was leaning toward asking the woman to find another veterinarian, however, and wanted her to understand my reasoning. Her pet treatment was not routine. She had a large number of older pets that all had problems, and given the choices of how those problems could be addressed she chose expensive options. Much of what she spent was paid to specialists, so I did not priofit as much as it may seem.
When the appointment is scheduled, the receptionist offers some level of counselling. Once they are in the room, they have demonstrated that they are not interested in alternative possibilities.
I don’t know why, but it seems mental instability and animal hoarding are somehow linked. In the case of my relatives, it was alcoholism and hoarding. But you hear it all the time when people find the crazy cat lady talking to herself while the animals take over the abode.
To respond to the OP, I don’t think you have a responsibility (as a human being) unless she’s harming herself or others (or the animals). I don’t think euthanasia and animal cruelty are the same thing, but man…that’d be hard to watch/do.
Well, the woman had at least 20 cats in her house. Those are cats with names/files/etc. She would, on top of that, grab any cat she saw outside and bring them in for care.
On a typical day, she might bring in a cat that she saw while driving to the grocery store. The cat is old and dying, having been hit by a car. Offered euthanasia on triage, she would press for treatment. 48 hours and $1500 dollars later she would take home a 19 year old cat in chronic renal failure, with a pin in one femur and a reconstucted stifle. My fees were always on the low end of the spectrum, and I always would be brutally frank with her.
To me, she was spending her money the way she wished.
The current term is animal collector and they are light years beyond what most people would imagine. I have been in homes where HazMat suited workers found dead animals under empty pizza boxes. Homes where animals routinely used the bed as a litter box. And the person living there insisted that they were doing a “good thing”.
I did not want any discussion to get mired down in talk of euthanasia policy, so I kinda glossed over the details. I think many of you do not realize how shitty your fellow man can be. I had a woman bring in a 14 week old Golden Retriever puppy for euthanasia. The dog was not allowed in her apartment lease and she was caught. When offered numbers of shelters that would take the dog in a heartbeat, she said that she paid $600 for the dog and she refused to give it away for free. She had placed a “for sale” ad in a paper and had no calls.
I had a guy bring in his two cats for euthanasia. He did not care to discuss his situation. He told me later that the cats were originally gifts from his ex. He sent her the reciept.
If you are ever in Western Pennsylvania, look me up. Seriously. My little brother lives in New Jersey. Probably 3/4 of our visits involve him bringing the family dog in for treatment.
These situations are terrible, but I’m glad vetbridge offers the service anyway. People like this might kill the animal themselves if he didn’t, and in a much more painful way than a painless shot.
That said, I’m glad as hell I didn’t decide to become a vet. I can’t imagine having to do that.
