Who is liable for vet bill.

iamtony

Hi all I'm just looking for opinions, preferably from someone in the trade, but all opinions are welcome.

I'll try keep this short.

Dog dislocated him hip last Sunday, brought him straight to the emergency vet. Took him in and did there thing and we got him back the next day in a cast to secure the leg in place and told to keep him in a cage and come back in a week.

2 days later we noticed the leg was swollen and starting to smell like rotten flesh. We brought him back in the next morning and they had to keep him in and then rang to say the are working to keep his leg as the circulation had been cut off from the cast.
we got him back the next day with the cast off and all his toes were black and a section of his leg was also black.
They are trying to imply he was pulling at it and made it tighter and that's why circulation was cut off but that's bull **** as it was wrapped in that solid bandage material like what a person would get on a broken bone and you just can't make it any tighter.
This morning we had to bring him back in as he had removed all the dead flesh himself(dispite wearing an elizibethian collar)and a few dead toes and his tendons were visable so he is kept in for surgury and they are hoping they can save the leg.

Anyway the vet we were dealing with today (nice chap) mentionion cost of the whole thing and I am saying this is your fault so you should pay and they are trying to blame the dog. Anyway I didn't argue I just told him to speak to the boss and tell them we won't be paying.

Anyway what do you think?

I think the poor dog went in for a dislocated hip and he is now loosing part, if not all of his leg. They should of told us at the start to watch out for any swelling as the cast is tight and to bring him straight back if any problems.
If it was a baby we were talking about the doctor would most likely loose his licence to practice. All we want is for the dog to be OK and have the costs covered. An apology would also be nice and an acceptance of blame.

tk123

Poor dog

Complications happen so I'd say you're liable unfortunately. With my vet it's bring them back in x amount of days or sooner if something is wrong. My dog had operations on his legs and had the same kind of "cast" and it can move/slip even if they're crated. When he had the second operation he got very stressed out the day I went back to work and stood most of the day - the cast shifted and had to be taken off and replaced that evening so they can move/get snagged etc etc

iamtony

I get what your saying but the cast definitely didn't slip. The dog is tiny and wouldn't of had the strength to move it if nothing else.
But besides that isnt really my main complaint. I argue I should have been told of things to watch out for like swelling any other complications but we were just sent on our way and told to rest him and bring him back in a week.

waterfaerie

I'm so sorry to hear about your poor dog. I hope they save his leg and he makes a speedy recovery.

I don't really know who is technically liable as I have no veterinary or legal knowledge, but I do know that if it was my pet I would not accept it.

Yes, complications can happen but in my opinion it's really a case of either

a) they did not do a good enough job putting on the cast

or

b) they did as good a job as any vet could but casts can move/slip/tighten or whatever they are saying, in which case, you should have been warned about the possibility and told what to watch for.

I'm probably one of those nightmare customers who doesn't take any nonsense (not with vets but in general). In my experience, if you really believe you are right, stand your ground and kick up enough of a fuss you usually get your way.

You are right in that if it was a baby, they would not get away with it. Also, if it was your baby you wouldn't let it go and I don't think anyone would.

If I were you I would focus on getting your dog well first and then dispute the bill.

Statesbound

I worked in a clinic with a similar case in Australia. A cruciate repair was carried out on the dog and a nurse bandaged the leg after surgery. I did not have any dealings with this case but heard the details on the grape vine.

The bandage was applied too tight (could not be proven but was implied ) and the dogs toes became red and eventually black and necrotic. Nurses are careful when placing a bandage but emphasise on tightness so the the bandage doesn't fall off. Toes must always be out so that any abnormalities can be seen. With this case, We brought in a specialist surgeon who had to amputate the toes and after daily visits to monitor and dress the toes for a good 10-14days, the dog made a full recovery and loss of toes didn't bother him!

The owner paid the initial cruciate repair bill (approx $2000-2500) but was not charged for any other procedures (amputations), wound dressings or follow up consults. I guess it's up to the discretion of vet in the end. You could fight your case. I feel like you followed the vets advice on aftercare and it's very sad your puppy has to go through this. Hope he/she will be ok. Best of luck.

iamtony

Thanks for the input. Its a tough one to call but that story above from someone in the trade is exactly how I would expect this to be handled.
Anyway the vet called, I've to pick up the dog at 3:30. They couldn't close up the wound on the side of his leg where you could see the tendon sticking out so they applied some gel and bandaged it up. The dead flesh has been removed and a piece of his bone has been removed from where his toe used to be and is now stitched up.
I've to go back Wednesday to get the bandages changed and the boss will be in so we will discuss the bill then.

volchitsa

The poor poor dog he must have been in agony. We had a cat got caught in a trap once, set by some gurriers we never did find out who. Poor thing was out all night and we didn't know where she was, some neighbour children heard her crying next day when they were coming home from school and came and told us, but it was a big job to get her free and she lost most of her paw.

Terrible to think that a vet can end up doing the same damage! I definitely think they should at the very least accept some degree of responsibility.

(Still, a happy ending for us really, she recovered really well, was still able to climb trees and chase dogs out of the garden - she was quite a fierce cat with dogs, hated them! Though she was as gentle as anything with us, even during the treatments she had for the paw, we had to bring her in every few days for him to scrape off the dead flesh before he could finally operate, and he said how sweet tempered she was.)

iamtony

Only seen that last message now for some reason.

Just an update from my last message.

The vet on duty for out last visit charged about 80 euro and said he didn't charge for the operation and everything and to talk to the boss on our next visit which was today.
So today we met the boss and she was lovely and said any treatment from here on in will be free of charge and she apologised for what happened and also shed a tear.
The dog is doing great and back to his self dispite having the elizibethian collar and a big bandage on his leg. Only problem he is having is being cage bound. Now he is not in so much pain he is dying to get out and get back to normal.
Anyway due to the nature of the wound we have to go back for dressing every 2\3 days but he is getting used to it so no biggie.
I'm just happy they manned up and accepted responsibility and of course that it looks like our dog will not have to loose his whole leg.

kathleen37

So glad your pup is doing ok, and really pleased they have fessed up and are covering the costs. Hopefully they won't put someone else's animal through the same.

tk123

kathleen37 wrote: »

So glad your pup is doing ok, and really pleased they have fessed up and are covering the costs. Hopefully they won't put someone else's animal through the same.

+1 I really thought the OP would be expected to pay what a mistake for them to make. Poor dog

volchitsa

I'm delighted to hear he's doing well and won't lose the whole leg, it makes such a difference to them to have all four legs.

Like I said, our cat did amazingly well after her op, we'd see her favoring the sore leg at times so it did still bother her, but she had a great life and only died a couple of years ago, at 19. And while she'd been very much an old lady for some time before that, she did still very occasionally go up the tree outside the living room window after a particularly tempting bird! She was such a great cat.

I'm sure you'll feel the same about your dog, I think when you've nursed them back to health after something serious you feel even closer to them, or maybe them to you.

iamtony

Yes that's the main thing is once he is OK, but I won't lie it is nice not to have to worry about the cost. It had already started to mount up.

He has lost all his toes and had to have some bone removed and has to go back every 2 or 3 days to have the dressing changed on his open wound and needs to be sedated so it would be expensive for every visit. Not totally out of the woods though, there's a chance of infection and if that happens the leg would have to go so fingers crossed he will be OK.

volchitsa

Oh the poor thing, and all that for a dislocated hip.

The injury seems to be like our cat but much more serious, because it was higher up I suppose.

In our case it was the front half of her paw that was trapped, so she lost that and initially they can't tell how far the necrosis will go, with the fear of infection as you say, but in the end they were able to keep a part of the pad plus one toe, so it meant she had a normal length of leg and a bit of claw to give her some grip.

Your little man will be more affected than that - but they really do adapt, it's amazing.

What sort of dog is he, and what age? Maybe you said but I didn't see.

iamtony

http://share.photobucket.com/shareprofile/indexshare.php?id=NTUyMjQ=
Hopefully that link works. He's the chihuahua on the left, and that was us all going camping last year where we discovered he had an amazing ability to climb rocks that the other dog could only dream of, he is one year old. I don't have a photo of him with his bandages and collar as he is today.

iamtony

http://share.photobucket.com/shareprofile/indexshare.php?id=NTUyMjY=

volchitsa

iamtony wrote: »

http://share.photobucket.com/shareprofile/indexshare.php?id=NTUyMjQ=
Hopefully that link works. He's the chihuahua on the left, and that was us all going camping last year where we discovered he had an amazing ability to climb rocks that the other dog could only dream of, he is one year old. I don't have a photo of him with his bandages and collar as he is today.

Link doesn't work unfortunately, but that's terrible if he loved climbing and he's so young!

Our dog loves climbing too, she's a mixed breed but half Cao da Serra d'Aires, which are from a mountainous part of Portugal, so we weren't surprised to see how good she is on rocks. But I didn't think Chihuahuas would be climbers!

Though thinking about it, maybe that will help him adapt, a bit like constantly walking/running on uneven terrain?

(I meant to say too, it's great that you don't have the stress of the bill coming for that - but it's only fair really. The vet, or the nurse, made a minor intervention into a life changing situation for the dog.)

volchitsa

Link works btw, sorry for that. Maybe I did something wrong earlier, gorgeous little dog!

volchitsa

Here it is without having to open the link :



(Obviously I'll take it down if you deliberately didn't post it that way yourself!)

iamtony

I had trouble opening it myself sorry I'm on my phone and it wasn't giving me many options.
Yes he has amazing climbing abilities he usually walks around the back edge of the sofa and half sits on your shoulder and on the chair. He also learned to pee while doing a handstand since this happened as he just didn't grasp he could cock his other leg to go:-) He's a funny little thing he is going mad being couped up in the cage at the moment. We stick the other dog in for a while everyday as they normally sleep cuddled up together but its not so easy with the collar on at the moment. I think its going to be about a month before he is able to come out full time unfortunately.

iamtony

Oh great perfect thanks for putting the pic up.

tk123

My boy was on crate rest twice - it does get easier as you go along. Have you got kongs you can feed him from and other chews to use to keep him busy and help tire him out? There's loads of tricks you can teach him too to tire him - nose targeting, crossing his paws, leave it/take it, 'guilty' (where they lay their head down and look guilty lol) etc etc.

childsplay

Is that just a bit unfair? There are always risks attached to surgeries and with the best will in the world, things can go wrong. I doubt that the vet intended for any of this to happen. That said, where they are directly responsible for harm done, then yes they absolutely should be held to account. Seems to have been the case here.

I do agree that all professionals should be accountable for their actions and should have to face the consequences for bad and reckless practices. I think we both hold similar views on that.

iamtony

tk123 wrote: »

My boy was on crate rest twice - it does get easier as you go along. Have you got kongs you can feed him from and other chews to use to keep him busy and help tire him out? There's loads of tricks you can teach him too to tire him - nose targeting, crossing his paws, leave it/take it, 'guilty' (where they lay their head down and look guilty lol) etc etc.

Yes great idea I do have a Kong or two around but I don't know if he could get at it properly with the cone on but I'll give it a go, good thinking thanks. He could also do with a few new tricks in repertoire!

volchitsa

childsplay wrote: »

Is that just a bit unfair? There are always risks attached to surgeries and with the best will in the world, things can go wrong. I doubt that the vet intended for any of this to happen. That said, where they are directly responsible for harm done, then yes they absolutely should be held to account. Seems to have been the case here.

I do agree that all professionals should be accountable for their actions and should have to face the consequences for bad and reckless practices. I think we both hold similar views on that.

You don't quote who you're replying to, but if you mean my last comment then yes I probably did express it a bit harshly, but it's still a fact that they didn't make it clear what signs to look out for if anything did go wrong.

If you want to add a sentence in your mind to my last post to soften it a little, then by all means do! But remember the OP posted having been told initially thqt he would have to pay - some little old lady on her own with nobody to stand up for her would have paid up.

So that's worth remembering when feeling sorry for the vet practice. They weren't entirely upfront at the beginning, only when they saw that they had someone who wasn't going to be intimidated. That's a shame IMO. Makes them look like chancers.

iamtony

You were quoted in that post but it disappeared for some reason.

iamtony

In fairness to the vet who we initially complained to the boss did say they didn't have the authority to make a decision on the matter an apologized about that.
But we had spoke to the boss on the phone before we complained and they definitely weren't accepting responsibility for it at that point and were very careful with their wording about what had happened, so yes you are correct that if we didn't speak up we would be getting charged for everything.

childsplay

Sorry, l thought l had quoted your post. Dont know where it went to :-? I think we are both reaching the same conclusion just via different routes. I agree that poor and careless practitioners need to be held to account and consumers absolutely should not pay for poor and harmful practice.

My point is that I genuinely don't think that the vet meant harm to the op's dog. I am a healthcare worker myself and have seen many cases of bad practice, some with harmful outcomes to patients. But, l don't believe that l have ever came across anyone who intended to harm anyone. The harm was an unintended event. We are all human and can make errors. I have also seen people who are incompetent and ignorant of their lack of skill or knowledge. They cause harm but again l wouldn't describe it as intentional as they didn't know better.

Then there are simply times when despite everyones best efforts thing still go wrong. In these cases, any harm caused is definitely unintentional.

I am not sure which of these happened in the op's case but I am heartened to hear the the vet took responsibility and owned it.

I would also agree that if this hadn't happened, I would see them as chances too.

Sorry to be so longwinded. Not very elegant with words I'm afraid.

iamtony

Poor dogs hip popped out overnight back in this morning and probably going to need an operation. The vet on duty mentioned we will probably have to pay for it ourselves.
I didnt argue and said sure we will see what were up against.
I think they should at least offer a discount after what happened to his leg but I wont push it.

volchitsa

iamtony wrote: »

Poor dogs hip popped out overnight back in this morning and probably going to need an operation. The vet on duty mentioned we will probably have to pay for it ourselves.
I didnt argue and said sure we will see what were up against.
I think they should at least offer a discount after what happened to his leg but I wont push it.

Oh no, poor thing again, after all that, to have to go through surgery as well!

Agreed that it would have been a nice gesture if they'd offered - and possibly a little mercenary of them to be so hasty in letting you know that there won't be (for instance they could have waited to see if there were further complications before making the decision about fees) but at this stage my priority would really be whether they're giving him the best care possible. No point in getting 10% or even 25% off from one vet practice if another one could do a better job and fix the problem.

However I've no way of judging that, so I'm not saying they aren't, just that even independent of the leg issue, I think now's the time to check around that this vet is the best possible choice for your dog. Just because the hip issue is back, and you don't want it to become a chronic problem.

iamtony

volchitsa wrote: »

Oh no, poor thing again, after all that, to have to go through surgery as well!

Agreed that it would have been a nice gesture if they'd offered - and possibly a little mercenary of them to be so hasty in letting you know that there won't be (for instance they could have waited to see if there were further complications before making the decision about fees) but at this stage my priority would really be whether they're giving him the best care possible. No point in getting 10% or even 25% off from one vet practice if another one could do a better job and fix the problem.

However I've no way of judging that, so I'm not saying they aren't, just that even independent of the leg issue, I think now's the time to check around that this vet is the best possible choice for your dog. Just because the hip issue is back, and you don't want it to become a chronic problem.

I know poor thing has been through the mill.
Im confident he is in good hands to be fair and i think they did the right thing with the leg issue so I respect them for that so I will leave him in their care.
Regarding costs I do think the fact that his leg wasnt tied up due to the foot problem to keep it in place could be a factor but im grasping at straws and wouldnt bring that to them as an argument.
I just know if it was me in their position I would definitely do the surgery at cost price at the very least as a good will gesture after everything thats happened.

iamtony

http://sundayworld.upickem.net/engine/Details.aspx?p=V&c=288987&s=84984916

Vote for scrappy! I could really do with winning the cash at this stage.

He's gone in for the hip operation this morning but he's in great form considering his hip is out of the socket.