|
||||||||
Inability to Afford the Vet |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 21,977
|
Quote:
So get some decent pet insurance and you won't have to worry!
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
How many here could honestly pay a £1,000+ vets bill right now if it cropped up and be able to aford it, possibly even further treatment as well?
So anyone who does not have several £1,000 in savings just in case the pet falls ill should not have one? I think as long as you can afford the regular costs, suh as vaccinations, food, any other regular expenses then the rest cannot be planned for. Plus vets vary a lot. In the summer we were told that both of our cats needed dental treatment costing around £400. At the time we could not afford it and they were in no obvious pain from it, so we left it a while. taking them elsewhere a month or so later we were told that they were fine, given a course of antibiotics each at £20 and to see how they went. Some vets are just after money in some cases. |
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Pictland
Posts: 16,437
|
Quote:
From reading a few threads here, I've noticed that there are a lot of animal lovers, and I am one of them
![]() However, I've picked up on a bit of animosity when people say things like "I cant afford to pay the vet's bill". I've even seen people respond "I would go without food in order to pay my vet bill, as long as my cat/dog/whatever is healthy and happy". On the other side of the coin, I've seen posters say "Its only an animal, I love my pet but if I cant afford the vet bill then tough". What side are you on? What would you say to someone who has had to have their pet put to sleep because they were unable to afford a particular operation or course of treatment? |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,734
|
Quote:
It's not just a financial question, though. A human who's completely immobile can still use their brain and have at least some quality of life (cf Christopher Reeve), whereas an animal in the same situation would be completely miserable, and it really would be cruel to prolong its life, even if you could afford to. As I said before, though, I'm completely with you on the question of people who can't even afford basic veterinary care for their animals (for example, perhaps a special diet). To have an animal put down because you can't afford a diet that would save its life and enable it to live normally is definitely wrong.
We always assume that the prolongation of life for a human irrespective of circumstances is always a good thing and almost inevitably decide that the prolongation of life for other animals even in cases of fairly limited suffering/lameless/disability is always a bad thing. Race horses for example are shot when they break their legs. I don't necessarily agree with prolonging any life human or non human if it is only a case of putting off the inevitable and causing more suffering. It sounds like I am contradicting myself here. It's one of those difficult ethical dilemmas and what may seem to be the answer in one case may not be the answer in another. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,695
|
Quote:
They probably can't afford the insurance either!! The sort that covers recurring illness, which is what I should have had, is about £20 a month, I think. Assuming that your animal will hopefully only get ill a couple of times in its lifetime, a lot of people take the chance, then find they don't have the money up front when disaster strikes, unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 21,977
|
Quote:
Some vets are just after money in some cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,734
|
I think PDSA do cheap or free treatment if you are on benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 21,977
|
Quote:
How do we know that another animals would be miserable and how would we know that all humans in a similar situation would be happy?
We always assume that the prolongation of life for a human irrespective of circumstances is always a good thing and almost inevitably decide that the prolongation of life for other animals even in cases of fairly limited suffering/lameless/disability is always a bad thing. Race horses for example are shot when they break their legs. I don't necessarily agree with prolonging any life human or non human if it is only a case of putting off the inevitable and causing more suffering. It sounds like I am contradicting myself here. It's one of those difficult ethical dilemmas and what may seem to be the answer in one case may not be the answer in another. Anyway, that doesn't really solve the problem of people not being able to afford veterinary bills, but IMO, pets should be insured, and people should be able to provide basic veterinary care out of their own pockets if they want to keep a pet. Doesn't seem too much to ask! |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,695
|
Quote:
That's obviously true, and I've often thought that we're more humane towards animals than humans in the matter of euthanasia. Biologically speaking, though, in animals the higher centres of the brain (the ones that humans use for creative thought, reasoning, etc.) are relatively undeveloped. Animals obviously do form relationships with their humans, but this may simply be learned self-interest - less so with dogs, I suspect, than with cats. In its daily life, though, an animal operates largely by instinct. It's designed to do a certain "job", and if it can't do that job, I personally feel that it's cruel to prolong its life, although others will feel differently.
Anyway, that doesn't really solve the problem of people not being able to afford veterinary bills, but IMO, pets should be insured, and people should be able to provide basic veterinary care out of their own pockets if they want to keep a pet. Doesn't seem too much to ask!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Areas Of Zombie Infestation
Posts: 11,916
|
Every circumstance is different. To make blanket statements of what people should or shouldn't do is, IMO, a blinkered view.
When my dog had his accident, we didn't have him insured. Please don't jump to the conclusion that we were in some way irresponsible or couldn't afford it; it was due to circumstances at the time, personal to us. We were given the option to have our dog put to sleep or spend a lot of money to help him have the best chance possible. We chose to do the latter; as a result our dog is probably one of the most expensive dogs in christendom. We went into debt, and I don't care; it was a choice we made, and one we deal with. Other people I'm sure would say we were stupid, it's only a dog, have him put to sleep, you should have had insurance, whatever; thats fine, they are free to think what they like (I don't particularly appreciate it when they voice that opinion, but hey ho, again it's something we deal with). I believe that as long as the best interests of the animal we have chosen to bring into our lives and care for (and thereby taking ultimate responsibity for them) are paramount in our minds when making these decisons, then others shouldn't judge, especially if they are unaware of all the circumstances. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,734
|
Quote:
That's obviously true, and I've often thought that we're more humane towards animals than humans in the matter of euthanasia. Biologically speaking, though, in animals the higher centres of the brain (the ones that humans use for creative thought, reasoning, etc.) are relatively undeveloped. Animals obviously do form relationships with their humans, but this may simply be learned self-interest - less so with dogs, I suspect, than with cats. In its daily life, though, an animal operates largely by instinct. It's designed to do a certain "job", and if it can't do that job, I personally feel that it's cruel to prolong its life, although others will feel differently.
Anyway, that doesn't really solve the problem of people not being able to afford veterinary bills, but IMO, pets should be insured, and people should be able to provide basic veterinary care out of their own pockets if they want to keep a pet. Doesn't seem too much to ask! ![]() As you said though, all of the above is not really relevant to the discussion and I agree with you about the vet bills!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nr Glasgow
Posts: 12,757
|
Well I have 2 small yorkies, and we have them insured for unexpected illnesses. We always keep a little cushion of money though in the event of an accident or emergency.
A couple of months ago the oldest one snapped his dew claw climbing out of the car, we didn't see it until he started furiously licking it later that day. Took him straight to the vet, he clipped it off (bless him) and bandaged it up for a few days and gave him Anti Biotics to prevent infection. All in alll it was about £30, worth it IMO so he isn't in pain. We knew the potential costs before we took on the dogs. We also considered the size of dog to get, as I am the one in with them during the day and I am not always in great health. So we got smaller dogs that don't require as much excersize as say a Lab or Staffy for example, who need a couple of miles walk a day. I know there are still people that just get a dog 'cos they want one', infact my o/h brother has just done it. It pisses me off, as its not the dogs fault, it depends on you to get it right and give it what it needs. |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nr Glasgow
Posts: 12,757
|
Quote:
Every circumstance is different. To make blanket statements of what people should or shouldn't do is, IMO, a blinkered view.
When my dog had his accident, we didn't have him insured. Please don't jump to the conclusion that we were in some way irresponsible or couldn't afford it; it was due to circumstances at the time, personal to us. We were given the option to have our dog put to sleep or spend a lot of money to help him have the best chance possible. We chose to do the latter; as a result our dog is probably one of the most expensive dogs in christendom. We went into debt, and I don't care; it was a choice we made, and one we deal with. Other people I'm sure would say we were stupid, it's only a dog, have him put to sleep, you should have had insurance, whatever; thats fine, they are free to think what they like (I don't particularly appreciate it when they voice that opinion, but hey ho, again it's something we deal with). I believe that as long as the best interests of the animal we have chosen to bring into our lives and care for (and thereby taking ultimate responsibity for them) are paramount in our minds when making these decisons, then others shouldn't judge, especially if they are unaware of all the circumstances. Well insurance doesn't cover everything. I think I would have done exactly the same thing in your position. Our oldest dog had a distended testy when he was born and we did not have him for the first 6 months of his life. The vet wanted to give his testy a chance to drop but didn't want to wait too long incase it turned into a tumor. I just wanted to get it done, the insurance didnt cover it and we paid out £200 for the op as they needed to do an Ex Lap to find the missing testy. He has been so content and happy ever since and like you said we chose him to come into our life. |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nr Glasgow
Posts: 12,757
|
Quote:
I pay £18 a month for unlimited cover for two kittens - they weren't neutered or injected at the time I took up the policy either, so when the policy is up for renewal, the premium will go down. If you can't afford £5 a week for pet insurance, then you shouldn't have a pet.
We pay £44 per month for the 2 dogs. And thats not even the maximum cover. |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nr Glasgow
Posts: 12,757
|
Quote:
They probably can't afford the insurance either!! The sort that covers recurring illness, which is what I should have had, is about £20 a month, I think. Assuming that your animal will hopefully only get ill a couple of times in its lifetime, a lot of people take the chance, then find they don't have the money up front when disaster strikes, unfortunately.
Insurance is a good idea, but people should not rely on it to cover everything. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 909
|
Quote:
I think PDSA do cheap or free treatment if you are on benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,155
|
If you can't afford the vets bill, don't get a pet. Why should Rover have to suffer because his owner is a bit on the poor side?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 909
|
Quote:
If you can't afford the vets bill, don't get a pet. Why should Rover have to suffer because his owner is a bit on the poor side?
![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,201
|
My dog had quite a lot of health problems throughout his life. Initially we had him insured with Petplan, but when his leg problems first became apparent at around 4 months they got arsey about paying towards any treatment.
They believed it was something we should have been aware of before we got him (he had a growth problem which affected the bones in his back legs, they ended up bending in at the knees then splaying back out again) despite the fact even regular vet check ups had never uncovered any problems until obviously he'd grown quite a bit. His condition was always a source of great fascination for the vets that he saw throughout his life, so it was obviously quite uncommon. We ended up cancelling the insurance and saving frantically for the operation we were told he'd probably need in the next couple of years. In the end he saw a specialist vet in Fife who felt an operation would be painful and pointless. Luckily that left us with plenty of money saved (which we added to monthly) because over the next few years he slipped a disc in his spine, was diagnosed with a severe heart murmur and then hip dysplasia and several other problems. In the long run he cost me a fortune in medication, tests, x-rays etc. but I don't begrudge it.. he was worth every penny. Last month his legs just suddenly stopped working and we made the heartbreaking decision to get him put to sleep. It was nothing to do with finance, I'd have paid whatever it took to make him well again, but he was in pain and miserable and the vet felt nothing more could be done. Pet insurance does seem to have improved over the past few years, so if we get another dog I plan to insure, although I am a bit wary. Anyone have any companies they'd recommend? |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,640
|
My FIL won't even pay for flea treatment for his 2 cats as he can't afford it
makes me so angry, he really shouldn't have pets as he's not a responsible pet owner.One of my cats is inherited from SIL, she moved to Australia. She broke her leg as a kitten and SIL paid £600 for treatment. I know when she gets older her leg is going to cost us money that the insurance policy we have for her and our other cat won't cover .................. and I will find a way to pay it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in my bubble of light!
Posts: 11,201
|
Quote:
From reading a few threads here, I've noticed that there are a lot of animal lovers, and I am one of them
![]() However, I've picked up on a bit of animosity when people say things like "I cant afford to pay the vet's bill". I've even seen people respond "I would go without food in order to pay my vet bill, as long as my cat/dog/whatever is healthy and happy". On the other side of the coin, I've seen posters say "Its only an animal, I love my pet but if I cant afford the vet bill then tough". What side are you on? What would you say to someone who has had to have their pet put to sleep because they were unable to afford a particular operation or course of treatment? ![]() molly xxx |
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In The Tardis
Posts: 2,579
|
People can easily say "don't get a pet in the first place", but sometimes money troubles can hit very unexpectedly. You don't always know if you're going to get made redundant from your job or encounter a really nasty fee that you haven't planned for. It's too easy to judge and criticise other peole when it comes to this type of thing. Before people speak when it comes to this issue, try and think a little bit first. It does not mean people don't love their pets or don't way to pay, or that they are not responcibile. It can just mean that sometimes really bad luck happens to us all and has a way of sneaking up on you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 909
|
Quote:
People can easily say "don't get a pet in the first place", but sometimes money troubles can hit very unexpectedly. You don't always know if you're going to get made redundant from your job or encounter a really nasty fee that you haven't planned for. It's too easy to judge and criticise other peole when it comes to this type of thing. Before people speak when it comes to this issue, try and think a little bit first. It does not mean people don't love their pets or don't way to pay, or that they are not responcibile. It can just mean that sometimes really bad luck happens to us all and has a way of sneaking up on you.
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Retford
Posts: 20,450
|
What about the situation where a pet is left behind by another owner, and considering that owner would be cruel enough to dump a pet on someone? They, of course are now forced to take on the bills through no fault of their own. The alternative is abandoning the pet, rehousing them or worse.
I think this "if you can't afford a pet, don't own one" tough love argument is an easy way out of this debate, when there can be more circumstances outside of a persons control. |
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,575
|
I have pet insurance, but use the local RSPCA clinic aswell. I pay a nominial amount for a consultation (about £10) and then for any treatment. (Which is cheaper than the local rip-off vet - who are useless, but that's another story) Anyway - the clinic is run by Vet students at Cambridge uni. If the treatment needed is more than they can offer, you can take the pet to their animal hospital. (Thankfully, not needed that in a while!)
It's a shame not everyone can access such brilliant facilites. However, I'm afraid I agree that if you can't afford pet insurance, then you probably shouldn't have a pet. (I had a cat when I was poorer than the local church mouse. And it has been insured since I've had it) |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:00.






makes me so angry, he really shouldn't have pets as he's not a responsible pet owner.
