Pet Vet Bills Give Paws For Thought

[Inka3095]

My best friend's cat has lymphoma and has received two courses of chemo. I wouldn't say he 'enjoyed' it but he was fine (a lot more fine than the majority of humans getting chemo). He is now in remission again and despite the 'C' word that hangs over my friend's head daily, it's granted her years she wouldn't have had with her boy. Those two have the closest bond I have EVER seen between a pet and human and she'd be lost without him.

She had PetPlan and they've paid for everything, so many thousands of dollars she wouldn't have been able to afford otherwise. She is currently talking me into getting pet insurance as she is a complete convert, but I'm pretty fond of the idea of putting money aside every month and just hoping it will be enough if something big happens. I already pay insurance for my car, my contents, my health etc etc lol. So much dead money if nothing happens... ah but that's the gamble isn't it :/

[asal]

trouble is although as a breeder I would sign people up but trouble is those who dont keep it going if their pup ends up at the vets then its amazing how as the breeder you are asked to chip in if it turns out the pup has developed anything the vet deems heridatory, for example, patella as it grows even though there was no sign of such in it during its first 3 months. in many cases as in the pup i gave away two of three vets did not consider it needed surgery. that pup is only 7 months old the two vets who say no surgery is necessary also point out that surgery at such a young age precludes the very real possiblity of the problem resolving with maturity anyway.

ive had two people whose vets have operated on pups before they were 10 months old and expected me to pay because they did not keep their insurance current.

none of the ancesters of the three pups I speak of have had any form of patella, in every case they passed all vet checks until after 7 months, yet as the breeder expect to be held responsible for the bills and blame. Ive met one breeder who apparently decided it was less stressful to pay the full first years insurance herself. but that does not remove the guilt of the owners asking you why did u sell me a crippled pup. its no use saying I can only go by what the vet tells me, its a little weird you cop the blame not the vet and subsequent vets who find no fault until the pup matures, they bear no responsibility the buck stops with the fool who bred it. no one else.

the reason I am no longer a breeder its not worth the stress.

no one wants to hear that you put the best to the best and hope for the best.

if you cannot give an ironclad guarantee you are unethical.

as any parent can tell you they cant give their unborn child one, yet a puppy buyer expects one?

check this story on aging DNA.

so even if the parents are clear they can still pass on mutations they dont have themselves anyway

http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/241162-the-pitfalls-of-breeding-with-the-older-generation/

Edited September 4, 2012 by asal

[asal]

Is it true that animal welfare groups who rehome are not expected to pay for any later problems that come to the fore as the dogs/cats mature?

I know they didnt breed them, but they did sell them. Isnt that the same thing ?

A breeder tends to have had to start somewhere yet the breeder of the dogs they bought is not the next on the list for "please explain"

[tdierikx]

Animal Welfare groups can't account for the ancestral background of the animals they adopt out - basically they are "as-is", and all that sort of thing is usually explained to the adopter. With unknown parentage, no-one can give any sort of guarantee... but it is assumed that registered breeders will have a much better idea of what may be in their lines.

I'm not saying that blaming a breeder for issues that arise several months or years down the track is right in any way, shape, or form - but there are many Average Joe's who will look to try and find someone else at fault before they look to their own practices - especially if it involves large sums of money to "fix"...

T.

[Chris the Rebel Wolf]

I am a 'put money aside' as opposed to a insurance person. I could just be cynical but the way I look at it is that insurance is just another business, if the majority of people were better off (saving more than they paid) then the insurance companies would not be there at all. That's not to say that some people have and do benefit greatly from pet insurance.

Out of personal interest I'd love to know the stats on how much money the majority of people with pet insurance are making. I tend to think if my budget were not quite so rigid and I had more "throw away" money I wouldn't think twice about $60 a month on pet insurance. But maybe that's easy to say from the outside :p

[melzawelza]

I am a 'put money aside' as opposed to a insurance person. I could just be cynical but the way I look at it is that insurance is just another business, if the majority of people were better off (saving more than they paid) then the insurance companies would not be there at all. That's not to say that some people have and do benefit greatly from pet insurance.

Out of personal interest I'd love to know the stats on how much money the majority of people with pet insurance are making. I tend to think if my budget were not quite so rigid and I had more "throw away" money I wouldn't think twice about $60 a month on pet insurance. But maybe that's easy to say from the outside :p

I'm the opposite. When I was earning well but only paying rent and had heaps of spare cash I didn't have any pet insurance as I knew if something cropped up I'd be able to afford it.

Now I'm earning the same money but paying a big mortgage and I know that if one of my pets needed thousands of dollars worth of treatment it would be nigh on impossible for me to pull the money together. I don't ever, ever want to have to be in that position, so now they have insurance.

[mymatejack]

Personally i think too many people put their pets through medical procedures for their own benifit rather than their pets. Is it better to enjoy the time you have and end their sufferring sooner rather than put them through endless procedures and who knows what pain to give you a few extra days/weeks/months?

[sandgrubber]

I am a 'put money aside' as opposed to a insurance person. I could just be cynical but the way I look at it is that insurance is just another business, if the majority of people were better off (saving more than they paid) then the insurance companies would not be there at all. That's not to say that some people have and do benefit greatly from pet insurance.

Out of personal interest I'd love to know the stats on how much money the majority of people with pet insurance are making. I tend to think if my budget were not quite so rigid and I had more "throw away" money I wouldn't think twice about $60 a month on pet insurance. But maybe that's easy to say from the outside :p

I'm also in the put-money-aside camp.

What I'd like to see i what fraction of the $ spent on pet insurance actually goes to paying for vet care, and what fraction goes to paying salaries, expenses, and dividends to stockholders in the insurance company. My guess is it's something like 80% to paying claims, 20% to the business. If that's a good guess, then, all and all, vet bills are inflated by 20% by people going the insurance route.

But it's worse than that. Buying insurance is essentially a bet that your dog is less healthy than average and you are unskilled in selecting vets who give quality service for reasonable prices. If you select dogs from healthy stock, feed them well, and follow guidelines re exercise, etc., you should come out ahead of the curve. Especially if you are sensible about not prolonging life into the stage of rapid degeneration, low quality of life, and big vet bills.

Worse still, more and more vet practices who are managed by a business administration type instead of a vet. Ie, they are keen on getting you to do as many expensive procedures as possible, they spend money on making their offices 'attractive', and they get big on 'reminders' about vaccinations that aren't necessary. Such practices LOVE pet insurance. The insured client has, in effect, already paid for vet care, and thus will not question extra tests, etc., and will gladly go the extra and unnecessary mile.

[Guest lavendergirl]

Waits patiently for the vet industry brigade to show up - they will won't they? Do every time I comment about vet fees - even mildly :p

[nawnim]

Edited September 6, 2012 by padraic

[Stitch]

Well then, this should bring them out!! LOL

Why is it that a pet brought in when the practice is 'pet emergency' ie out of normal hours, and that pet is hospitalised, charges THREE TIMES the cost for hospitalisation when compared to the pet brought in during normal working hours??

I recently did both, the dog was brought in to pet emergency at 9pm stayed 2 days in hospital, discharged, relapsed and brought back during normal working hours, admitted for a further 2 days and then discharged again.

I know that emergency vets are usually a totally different company however sometimes the 'totally different company' is owned by one of the partners in the normal working hours practice. I also realise that getting vets that are prepared to work overnight would be difficult and I presume more expensive but three times the amount seems incredible!

[asal]

I think owners really need to shop around and dont hesitate to get a second even third opinion.

for goodness sake how can any vet justify $99 for a second or third vaccination?

we all know places where $40 to $60 is the norm so if you dont call and check first you can discover a heap of difference.

recently one had what her owner thought was bladder infection. so choofs off when antibiotics didnt work a ultrasound discovered stones in the bladder. the quote for the op? $600 as owner couldnt afford it she was given back to me, phoned my vet, n quote for same op plus desexing? $400.

to his credit the other vet nearly fainted when learned what she was getting her done for and returned half the charge for the ultrasound. makes u wonder doesnt it. same vet who quoted $1600 for patela op on a pup no other vet agreed needed one. so you really do need to ask others before you pay out so much money that quite possibly is not in the best intrests of the pup at all.

so beware, as one vet said to me, most of these patella ops are done because they need a next months payment for the new car.

I have seen many dogs live long and happy lives with patella without ever needing an op. particuarly in the small breeds like chihuahuas. well remember one lady her first and last litter of 5 pups all with the worst and loosest grade of patella. none had any op and all were still running around at 17 even if they looked like bowlegged jockies

once the cartlidge is removed no it dont pop out any more because a groove is cut into it, but arthritis is a given (cut out the cartlidge and so go the growth plates in it) soon as bone begins rubbing on bone. humans get artifical knees. dont see that yet in dogs

[megan_]

Why is it that a pet brought in when the practice is 'pet emergency' ie out of normal hours, and that pet is hospitalised, charges THREE TIMES the cost for hospitalisation when compared to the pet brought in during normal working hours??

I don't work in the vet industry (I work in IT). However, I imagine that it would cost a lot to set up a proper emergency center. You need more than just extra staff available, the place that I use has a blood pathology place on site operating 24/7 (in an emergency, you can't wait 24 hours to get your blood test results back), an MRI etc. This equipment costs a lot in initial outlay and ongoing costs. They also have a vet onsite 24/7 and a few vet nurses. Most normal vets leave pets unattended overnight, which saves you money, but if something goes wrong no one is around to help your pet.

People need to remember that they have a choice. They need to discuss options and consequences with their vet. I'm glad that the top-of-the-range treatments are available because I can then decide whether or not I want to use them (assuming they don't prolong pain for my dog, of course). We also need to remember that an op by a specialist will cost more than your average vet (eg patellas by a specialist).

My vet costs a bit more than standard ($60 per consult) but he is very well known for his work with dogs that do sport, so I'm willing to pay extra for someone who understand the requirements of my dog.

[Steph M]

But it's worse than that. Buying insurance is essentially a bet that your dog is less healthy than average and you are unskilled in selecting vets who give quality service for reasonable prices. If you select dogs from healthy stock, feed them well, and follow guidelines re exercise, etc., you should come out ahead of the curve. Especially if you are sensible about not prolonging life into the stage of rapid degeneration, low quality of life, and big vet bills.

Worse still, more and more vet practices who are managed by a business administration type instead of a vet. Ie, they are keen on getting you to do as many expensive procedures as possible, they spend money on making their offices 'attractive', and they get big on 'reminders' about vaccinations that aren't necessary. Such practices LOVE pet insurance. The insured client has, in effect, already paid for vet care, and thus will not question extra tests, etc., and will gladly go the extra and unnecessary mile.

I don't so much agree, I think you can have the healthiest, most well bred pet but in the end, things happen. They could be a year old and be bitten by a snake, fall from the couch, get a really nasty, resilient infection or just be plum unlucky, some breeds are just prone to things you can't see coming, and could by no means prevent. Things happen and I like to think if one of my critters was stuck I would be able to think a bit clearer and make the right decision for them if I knew I had the funds at hand and assume that would alleviate at least some of the pressure.

Like I said, I work in insurance, and know for a fact it's a great business structure. As is I work in warranty claims for appliances etc, and it's highly profitable, if an 600 dollar fridge isn't repairable we offer a same same replacement, but get it substantially cheaper, and they usually insure that one too, but if it were my full fridge at Christmas I wouldn't be too phased of the semantics etc, I'd just be pleased all my Christmas Dinner wasn't ruined. I kinda feel like it's the same deal, when it comes to it, I doubt i'd be resenting anyone much or thinking how they did it, I'd just be pleased the option for treatment was available.

You're right in the vet sense too though, I find it really disconcerting walking into a vet and finding they only have one or two types of food on the shelf and are wearing their logo etc, it's very hard to take them for impartial when they likely have a quota to fill.

[bianca.a]

But it's worse than that. Buying insurance is essentially a bet that your dog is less healthy than average and you are unskilled in selecting vets who give quality service for reasonable prices. If you select dogs from healthy stock, feed them well, and follow guidelines re exercise, etc., you should come out ahead of the curve. Especially if you are sensible about not prolonging life into the stage of rapid degeneration, low quality of life, and big vet bills.

Worse still, more and more vet practices who are managed by a business administration type instead of a vet. Ie, they are keen on getting you to do as many expensive procedures as possible, they spend money on making their offices 'attractive', and they get big on 'reminders' about vaccinations that aren't necessary. Such practices LOVE pet insurance. The insured client has, in effect, already paid for vet care, and thus will not question extra tests, etc., and will gladly go the extra and unnecessary mile.

I don't so much agree, I think you can have the healthiest, most well bred pet but in the end, things happen. They could be a year old and be bitten by a snake, fall from the couch, get a really nasty, resilient infection or just be plum unlucky, some breeds are just prone to things you can't see coming, and could by no means prevent. Things happen and I like to think if one of my critters was stuck I would be able to think a bit clearer and make the right decision for them if I knew I had the funds at hand and assume that would alleviate at least some of the pressure.

Like I said, I work in insurance, and know for a fact it's a great business structure. As is I work in warranty claims for appliances etc, and it's highly profitable, if an 600 dollar fridge isn't repairable we offer a same same replacement, but get it substantially cheaper, and they usually insure that one too, but if it were my full fridge at Christmas I wouldn't be too phased of the semantics etc, I'd just be pleased all my Christmas Dinner wasn't ruined. I kinda feel like it's the same deal, when it comes to it, I doubt i'd be resenting anyone much or thinking how they did it, I'd just be pleased the option for treatment was available.

You're right in the vet sense too though, I find it really disconcerting walking into a vet and finding they only have one or two types of food on the shelf and are wearing their logo etc, it's very hard to take them for impartial when they likely have a quota to fill.

I agree, things just happen I have both my dogs insured thank dog. Cooper my 10 month old comes from a great breeder, hips and elbows scored, zero history of bad hips but I have just found out that he has severe hip dysplasia. Estimated cost for both hips to be totally replaced is $13000. I will still have to fork out some of that but at least I will recoup some of the cost.

[skelp2]

Personally i think too many people put their pets through medical procedures for their own benifit rather than their pets. Is it better to enjoy the time you have and end their sufferring sooner rather than put them through endless procedures and who knows what pain to give you a few extra days/weeks/months?

A cousin of mine did just that. Her old Rottweiler was kept alive far longer than he should of been. I considered it bordering on cruelty, but she was adamant about keeping him alive, even though by the end he had to be lifted up and helped outside just to go to the toilet. Dogs can't verbally tell you that they are suffering and have little or no quality of life, as a human can. We have the ability to end suffering painlessly. I may try certain medical procedures with a younger dog, but old dogs deserve a peaceful and pain free end if they have serious medical problems and we, as humans, should put aside our own need to keep the dog with us.

[sandgrubber]

But it's worse than that. Buying insurance is essentially a bet that your dog is less healthy than average and you are unskilled in selecting vets who give quality service for reasonable prices. If you select dogs from healthy stock, feed them well, and follow guidelines re exercise, etc., you should come out ahead of the curve. Especially if you are sensible about not prolonging life into the stage of rapid degeneration, low quality of life, and big vet bills.

I don't so much agree, I think you can have the healthiest, most well bred pet but in the end, things happen. . . .

I was speaking about probability. Of course, some individuals with dogs from healthy stock whose owners did everything right will have serious health problems. But odds are, that their pet health bills will come out to be less than their insurance fees in the long run. If it were otherwise, the insurance companies would go broke!

[sandgrubber]

I think owners really need to shop around and dont hesitate to get a second even third opinion.

for goodness sake how can any vet justify $99 for a second or third vaccination?

we all know places where $40 to $60 is the norm so if you dont call and check first you can discover a heap of difference.

recently one had what her owner thought was bladder infection. so choofs off when antibiotics didnt work a ultrasound discovered stones in the bladder. the quote for the op? $600 as owner couldnt afford it she was given back to me, phoned my vet, n quote for same op plus desexing? $400.

to his credit the other vet nearly fainted when learned what she was getting her done for and returned half the charge for the ultrasound. makes u wonder doesnt it. same vet who quoted $1600 for patela op on a pup no other vet agreed needed one. so you really do need to ask others before you pay out so much money that quite possibly is not in the best intrests of the pup at all.

so beware, as one vet said to me, most of these patella ops are done because they need a next months payment for the new car.

I have seen many dogs live long and happy lives with patella without ever needing an op. particuarly in the small breeds like chihuahuas. well remember one lady her first and last litter of 5 pups all with the worst and loosest grade of patella. none had any op and all were still running around at 17 even if they looked like bowlegged jockies

once the cartlidge is removed no it dont pop out any more because a groove is cut into it, but arthritis is a given (cut out the cartlidge and so go the growth plates in it) soon as bone begins rubbing on bone. humans get artifical knees. dont see that yet in dogs

Why bother shopping for a second opinion if the insurance will pay for it?

And if you have insurance, be aware that you're paying for people who don't bother to get a second opinion.

[melzawelza]

^^ what about rescues?

[JulesP]

But it's worse than that. Buying insurance is essentially a bet that your dog is less healthy than average and you are unskilled in selecting vets who give quality service for reasonable prices. If you select dogs from healthy stock, feed them well, and follow guidelines re exercise, etc., you should come out ahead of the curve. Especially if you are sensible about not prolonging life into the stage of rapid degeneration, low quality of life, and big vet bills.

I don't so much agree, I think you can have the healthiest, most well bred pet but in the end, things happen. . . .

I was speaking about probability. Of course, some individuals with dogs from healthy stock whose owners did everything right will have serious health problems. But odds are, that their pet health bills will come out to be less than their insurance fees in the long run. If it were otherwise, the insurance companies would go broke!

In a year I have managed to have 2 pets get 'rare' unusual conditions. Sometimes shit just happens. Prior to this I had 20 years of only going to the vet for yearly injections.