Should you be able to sue your vet?

[Pam]

I was just watching a story on Good Morning America that literally brought tears to my eyes. It was about a young man who took his dog (a sheltie) to the vet for a routine tooth extraction. Long story short the vet's office kept "putting the people off" when they called as to when they could pick their dog up. By the time they got to see the dog he was found to be gravely ill. They rushed him to an emergency vet and after 15 hours of horrible suffering the dog died. The first vet felt there was a pre-existing condition and had contacted the emergency vets on the phone to tell them this while the young man was enroute with the dog.

The question came up regarding lawsuits against veterinarians. I am not a fan of frivolous laws suits and there have been a glut of them in the media in the past (remember the woman who sued McDonald's because she spilled hot coffee on herself?) This I feel is different. For those who may not be aware, a pet is considered chattel (a possession) and not on par with the companion that those of us feel they are. The young man said his sheltie was every bit a family member and felt the pain and suffering just as any living breathing human would feel.

I have to say I agree totally. I had a VERY bad experience years ago with one of my poodles after a routine spaying. Her front teeth were sheered off, supposedly by her own doing on the bars of the cage after she came out of the anesthesia (and I am not questioning the vet here). The problem I had was that this was not told to me when I went to pick her up and I discovered the missing teeth when I got home. When I called him right away to question this, he said he did see blood coming out of her mouth but assumed she bit her tongue! He never investigated where the blood was coming from! We had gone as far as seeking and finding a dentist that would do the necessary dental work to restore her teeth and contacted a lawyer to sue for damages. That's when I realized they are considered "chattel."

I truly think that vets should be held equally accountable when it comes to the animals they are treating. If pets are family members then shouldn't they be treated as such if something goes wrong with their care?

[moosmom]

Pam,

I think that vets should be held accountable for medical malpractice the same way doctors are. It's basically the same principle.

A friend of mine who worked very briefly at a veterinary hospital told me horror stories that go on behind closed door that would make your hair curl. I won't go into detail, but I will tell you that vets and their staff do WHATEVER THEY HAVE TO DO TO to your pet to get the job done and bring in the money.

So my vote is yes.

[Pam]

Donna they said on GMA that they are conducting a poll on this and you can vote on line. I didn't take down the URL and can't seem to find it by doing a search (I am not the best at searching). If anyone can find the link could you please post it. I have a feeling that the people here at Pet Talk NEED to vote on this. This really needs to change.

[Pam]

Here's the link:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/Living/GMA030822Suing_vets.html

[sasvermont]

Hi -

I voted no. Not because I think you should not sue, but because it would create a huge increase in fees and therefore animals and their care would not be affordable.

I think in the long run, the buyer beware situation comes to mind. I just switched vets when Graemer and Gabe died. I think my former vets were too slow to diagnose both cats and thought I was a bit histerical at best.

I do believe you could go to small claims court with a suit over an animal, but I could be wrong about that. People do sue vets, just not many people.

Could you imagine the line up of people waiting to sue to get money. This is the USA. People would make a living out of it.

I am not making light of this really. No one could have been more upset and could have spent much more money in such a short period of time as I did with Gabe and Grammy, with such bad results to boot. I just don't think our society here in the USA could handle it.


That is what I think. It doesn't make me right!


:eek:

[Pam]

Originally posted by sasvermont
it would create a huge increase in fees and therefore animals and their care would not be affordable.

Sallyanne I really do appreciate your input, and this is exactly what my husband said. It will be us, the pet owners, who ultimately fund their malpractice insurance by paying the increased fees. :(

[Logan]

Sallyanne, you bring up some good points. So do you, Pam.

I'm torn. I'm not a fan of all the frivoulous lawsuits either. Can't help but wonder how I would feel if it were my pet, though.

I voted.........just don't know if it truly reflected my feelings.

Logan

I lost my beloved cat Sydney because his previous vet had never listened to his heart. We changed vets because we were not really happy with this first one. The new one immediately heard that Sydney had a serious heart murmur....
But, can we sue the first one for this??

Then, after several tests, a vet specialised in cat-heartdieases decided that Sydney was not ready for medicine; she decided we had to wait another 6 months. But... 4 months later, poor Sydney died of a heart-attack....:( Can we sue her for this??

I don't think so.... . Nothing will ever bring my sweetheart back!

[Sudilar]

I don't know what to vote. I almost lost Killian because of one vet dismissing symptoms I was reporting on a popular drug used in vet medicine (metronidazole). If I had listened to that certain vet, Killian would not be here with me right now.
I also have a lot of questions on a vet my parents took one of their dogs to who ended up dying at the young age of 5 after having undergone ACL rupture x-rays. I think (my personal opinion) he was overdosed on anesthetic. Great Pyrs have a slow metabolism and large weight, if that is not understood by the vet or tech, disaster could happen. I think it did.
In those cases, I'd like to sue, but won't. Why? Because of the added cost it would bring to vet care. Killian's vet bill is large, very large as it is. How many people could afford to go the extra mile if vet costs rise?
I'm torn here. Damned if you do/damned if you don't.

[tatsxxx11]

I agree with Donna, 100%. As a nurse, I am compelled to carry a minimum five million dollar malpractice insurance policy. Unlike Drs., I cannont "raise my fees" to cover the added financial burden I must incur. Drs of course need to carry far more; then again, they earn on average a minimum $1,000 for every $1.00 I make. Still, I carry no resentment for this added financial strain. I feel much safer practicing my profession being "covered."

Sadly, I know too well the horrifying scenarios that can result from medical errors made "innocently" not to mention those arising from total negligence or incompetence. I feel these victimized patients/families are MORE than entitled to fair compensation for medical negligence, the sometimes unimaginable losses, the literal "pain and suffering." The practictioner as well, needs to be held accountable for his/her actions.

Twice I have been "named" in medical malpractice suits against surgeons/hospitals merely because I was standing in the operating room/recovery room when the "mistake" occurred. I understand fully the hesitation to sue; the concerns over the possible rise in the cost of medical/veterinary care for us all. And sadly, some people do sue without just cause or frivilously.

But sadly, and ironically, often the ONLY way to rid the medical/veterinary profession of incompetent, negligent, unqualified personnel is to sue. That is the only way to prevent them from doing further harm. The medical profession does NOT police themselves. Peer review boards, internal reviews often result in nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

Insurance companies will only cover the pay out for one or two "successful" major law suits before they will deny coverage all together. A practitioner without insurance cannot practice! I don't mean to get into a huge discussion about insurance co.'s and their practices, but.....actually, as reported recently in U.S. News and World Report, only 10% of medical malpractice suits filed are ajudicated in favor of the complainant. That means 90% of the time, the insurance co. and the dr., "wins." As well, the major reason for the high cost of insurance premiums is not the result of thousands of laws suits filed frivolously and won. It is the result of poor investment strategies on the parts of the insurance companies, (they are investing OUR money) resulting in huge losses and the passing on of that loss to us through increased rates.

I have pet insurance and that has cut the total cost of my vet bills enormously. Just about ALL of my "well visits" are completely covered and up to 2,000 of surgery per animal per year. Having 5-6 animals at any one time, and after doing a lot of researching, I found that the only way to go. Plus my vet gives me 10% professional courtesty discount and 10% discount for having 4 or more pets under his care.

I really feel passionately about incompetent practictioners being removed from the profession or at a minimum, having their actions severly scrutinized and reviewed. If "suing" is not an option, I would hope that anyone suffering at the hands of a nurse, dr., dentist, vet, whatever, minimally, report the incident to a peer review board, A.M.A A.V.A., etc. Word of mouth works wonders as well. Reputation is just about everything.

[Randi]

I'm torn too. I think it's ridiculous with the frivoulous lawsuits I've heard of. The best way would be to boycot these vets and they'd be out of business. I realise, it can take some time. :(

We once boarded Fister with a vet, we chose him BECAUSE he was a vet, he was very nice and understanding when we explained about Fisters problems (UTI), this was before he had the operation. A week later when we came back to get him, we were amazed that the vet had already got him in the box. - It turned out to be a completely different cat and he didn't have a clue where Fister was. :mad: We found him eventually under a sofa in the outdoor run and we had no change of getting him in the box. The vet then caught him in a net, sedated him and off we went. We were of course furious!! :mad:

When we came home, we found out that he had lost about 1/2 kg., had a cold and had been scratched near his eye.

The vet by mistake charged a lot less than the week actually cost, but we never paid him the remaining fee.

About a year later, the vet sent us a reminder to get him vaccinated - NO WAY!!

We have told everybody we know about this and I hope this vet is no longer in business!!

[cubby31682]

I voted yes. I do not agree with a bunch of law suits but, my Mom filed one agaist the doctor that killed my father and I believe and I always will that it needed to be done. I have never had a BAD problem at a vets office except when I took Cubby in to get fixed and they told me he was a very mean cat. They gave him his sleepy shot (thats what I told Cubby it was) and he needed to get the booster shots done. Well they wating until he fell asleep and they woke him up with a needle in his neck and in his butt. I'm sorry but if someone woke me up with a needle in my butt or my neck if I couldn't hit or kick that person I would bite too. They told me that next time I take him in they will muzzle him because he is a very AGGRESSIVE cat! Of course my response was WTF? He doesn't bite for no reason which then they had to tell me the full story and I switched vets.

If a vet is licensed and everything then they are responsible for their own actions if they hurt or kill the animal in their care we should be able to sue them. They were the ones at fault and it needs to be taken care of. No amont of money would ever bring your animal back, but I have found out as long as they admit they are at fault they can keep every dime they make. As long as they DO NOT do it to another animal again.

Just my 2 cents.

Katie

[moosmom]

After reading all the posts, I feel compelled to tell you WHY I feel the way I do.

11 years ago, my daughter suffered from headaches and vomiting. Having a medical background, I thought it might be something neurologically wrong. I took her to a specialist who diagnosed her (after many tests) with a "sinus infection". I never questioned him because, afterall, he was an M.D. and I was only a paramedic. It was right around X-Mas time and she was driving to Florida with her father and stepmother for two weeks. He told me to bring her back when she returns from Florida and he'd do a CT scan of her sinuses. He said that the infection would probably clear up while she was isn Florida because of the warm air.

Christmas eve day, she began going into mini-seizures. She was rushed to the hospital and had an emergency CT scan done. They found a lemon-sized tumor on the stem of her brain. :eek: Talk about devastation. I immediately flew down there to be with her.

She had brain surgery which took 9 hours. They couldn't do a biopsy on the table so they sent the tumor to Duke University. It took them 2 weeks to find out it was Pineal Blastoma, the worst kind of malignancy because it metastisizes (it grows and attaches itself). They removed 75% of it through surgery and the other 25% with chemotherapy and radiation.

My point is, I blame the damn specialist. My daughter was a vibrant, beautiful young girl in the prime of her life with long, curly locks and a great personality. His screw up changed all that and I will never, EVER forgive him. After her surgery, she was paralyzed on her right side, had to learn to do everything all over again...walk, talk, feed, clothe and bathe herself. She lost her beautiful hair which never grew back, so she has to wear wigs. She has double vision, corrected by prisims in her glasses, has no emotion whatsoever (can't cry, get mad, etc.). She is a totally different person. She lost a year of school, all of her friends stopped coming around (she was quite popular in high school) yet she never complained. She was so much stronger than I ever was during the whole ordeal. Her positive attitude amazed me.

The quack that screwed up her life never once called to see how she was doing or apologized. To add insult to injury, he's still in practice!!! :mad: :mad:

I was as a paralegal at the time and consulted one of the attorneys I was working for. He told me that unless I could prove that from the time she was misdiagnosed to the time she collapsed that the outcome COULD'VE been different, it would a very difficult case. In other words, the "good old boys", both doctors as well as attorneys, stick together. It would be impossible for me to find a doctor to testify that one of his colleagues screwed up.

I had a vet test my 9 week old kitten for feline leukemia and aids which came back positive. She immediately wanted to put Marina down, saying "So, when do you want to euthanize her??" instead of taking blood and sending it out to do a involved test (she did the easy "snap" test which takes 10 minutes)

I'm sorry I rambled on like this, but I do not trust doctors OR vets anymore. Before I have anything done to either myself or my pets, I do my own research. And I still stand by my vote that YES vets SHOULD be sued if they screw up.

There are some very good points both pro and con regarding the increase in fees. But the bottom line is, these are LIVES they are responsible for. And if they mess up, they should be held accountable.

Thanks for listening to me guys. It's kind of a very sore subject with me. The good news is Amy has been in remission for over 10 years!!!! :D :D

[Sudilar]

OMG, Donna! Hugs to you and your daughter. I had no idea!

[NoahsMommy]

Donna, I couldn't agree more!!! I'm so sorry your daughter has to deal with all that. :(

I'd been sick for over five freaking years before I actually found a doctor that thought I could have crohn's. How come it took all that time, countless (around 40) visits to doctors-INCLUDING UCLA specialists, to finally diagnose me? Crohn's is NOT rare and my symptoms are text book...

I have VERY little faith in doctors and vets as well. How come I can basically CURE my Micah by feeding him the raw diet when all these vets want to cut him open and give him powerful drugs that wont fix him, but make him sicker???

Explain those two things to me. I'm bitter too....

I basically feel (and have learned through all this...see?? There's ALWAYS a lesson learned!!) that you need to be a huge part of your own medical care, as well as, if not especially, the care of animals and children.

Doctors and vets ARE just people. We've been raised to think they can do anything, and they can't. I guess I wouldn't totally blaim a doctor or vet, as long as I was an active patient.

I did vote "yes", there are always idiot people that shouldn't be practicing ANYTHING!!

[Fox-Gal]

I don't like it but I had to vote yes.

There was a woman here in town that took her dog in to get his ears cliped. Well the vet cliped them alright......cliped them off. He said he was sorry and didn't charge her....and that was it. Now is this dog going to have problems down the road from this and if so who's paying the vet bills?

I don't like law suits much, My lawyer told me about a woman he had that wanted to sue because the people next door, wind chimes where to loud. WHAT.....that just carring a law suits to far.

But then theres me, I got run over by a semi-truck years ago. They wanted to give me $3000 for my car and pay my medical bills. OK the car was worth more then that and I now have back problems for the rest of my life. I didn't want a lot just a car back, the same kind, no better no worse and any bills that come up with my back paid. No pain and suffering $$$, just make sure I don't have to pay for my Dr. bills when my back gives me problems and get me a car. Thats all .....it was aaccident, they happen in life. People care things way to far sometime, we need to be able to find a happy middle ground.

But if a vet/dr or anyone knows that he/she can't be sued that just gives them an opening to take advange. What a mess that could turn out to be. It be nice if we could trust people to do the right thing but it's not always going to happen.

Its almost like a world without laws would be, we need some sort of control and saftey factors involved.

[KYS]

Donna, that is horrible and tramatic experience that
happened to you and your family.
Hugs to your daughter and you. (VERY SCARY, and I
also tend to trust doctors to much.)

I watched a Judge Wapner case, where
a vet was sueing for his
fees.
The defendents had refused to pay
because their dog had died after it bloated for
the second time.
They stated the vet should have tacked the dogs stomach after he had bloated the first time.
The plantiffs brought proof from another vet,
that a tacking should have been done at time of surgery.
Judge Wapner contacted a Vet from
some University and that Vet stated
also stated that CA. proceedure you now
tack a dog tummy.
The vet lost his case.

[Cataholic]

Well, as some of you might have been expecting....I NEED to chime in.

Perhaps the first thing I would like to address is "frivilous lawsuits". Does anyone stop and think that maybe, just maybe, to the person involved, the thing isn't quite so "frivilous"? Someone gave the example of someone suing over windchimes...well, have YOU ever tried to sleep, and found you couldn't, because of your neighbors noise? Did you realize that possibly, bringing a 'suit' under the town's noise ordinance was the ONLY way to stop the noise, and give you, the property owner, a good night's sleep? At 2 am, without sleep in sight, over a two week course, maybe YOU, too, would be ready to do something. The houses where I live are maybe 12 -15 feet apart. The neighbor's boy plays with his band, accoustics and all, for up to 4 hours at a time. Wanna know how that feels, after working 10-12 hours a day, trying to eat dinner, in your own house, and hardly being able to hear yourself think? It ain't pretty. I have called the police, I have complained directly (I like these people)...and prolly my last resort is to persue a civil action...I am not doing it...not because I think it is "frivilous", but, because I don't want to make things unliveable with my next door neighbor. So, until you have walked in their shoes (and know the entire set of facts behind it) maybe, just maybe, it isn't quite so "frivilous". And, no, it wasn't me that sued over the windchimes.

As to the comment about McDonalds suit. Did you know that McDonalds had received HUNDREDS of complaints about thier coffee being too hot? It causes 2 degree burns, people. That is HOT. Did you know that McDonalds made a conscious business decision to keep the temp of their coffee at that level because they would rather deal with 'some' complaints about the tempature than 'many' complaints about cold coffee? Did you know that the verdict (which was reduced by the Judge) had a symbolic relationship to the proceeds? Did you know that it represented ONE day of PROFITS for McDonalds? Look behind the front headlines....look behind the 'scandal'....

How would you have felt if you and your infant child were sitting down to eat breakfast at McDonalds...while your toddler played on the equipment. Your toddler ACCIDENTLY knocks your coffee over, it spills on your infant...and your infant now has 2 and 3 degree burns...BUT, that is OK with McDonalds...cause hot coffee, and hot food, is what makes McDonalds money? A business decision. Not a people decision. A business decision.

That is the McDonalds lawsuit.

The rest of my rant is coming next....

[Cataholic]

Tatsxxx1 hit it right on the head. Malpractice actions, be it against doctors, nurses, hospitals, etc., are the most expensive cases to try, and the hardest cases to win. I do malpractice. Know what I tell people that call? Unless you are dead, brain dead, or have lost a major limb, your case is not worth exploring. WHY? Because the insurance company that represents the doctor, hospital, nurse, etc., will fight, EVEN in the clear case of negligence, to the bitter end. Most plaintiffs, or their attorneys, simply DO NOT have the resources to fight these big entities. It is NOT about people, it is all about business. 10 % are in favor of the plaintiff. 10 %. So, it is not huge verdicts that are affecting the medical community. It is INSURANCE COMPANYS.

Plaintiff's attorneys, in the field of personal injury, malpractice, work on a contingent fee basis- they only recover if you recover. So, there ain't a whole lot of "frivilous" lawsuits going on...any more than any of you are counting on the lottery as your livlihood. It is not realistic. I can't take a case that won't more likely than not pay out for my client. Sad? Absolutely. But, that is the American justice system.

As for vets being held accountable...absolutely. Why not? Are they not professionals? Are they not licensed by the state? Do we not turn to them for a certain standard of care? It most certainly helps to weed out those that are substandard. Is it fool proof? No. Nothing is. It will not raise the price of office visits, unless you buy into that.

People that won't stand up and fight for those that don't have a voice stand the risk of being run over themselves. That goes for our children, our aged, our minorities, AND our pets.

Wanna hate the civil justice system in America? Then, go back to your 14 hour work days, segregated school system, inability to cast a vote, one religion under God, NO medical care system, guess what? Someone probably thought that was "frivilous" at one time, too.

Wow...I guess I got a little off track, didn't I?

Put me down as a YES vote for should you be able to sue your vet.

[moosmom]

WooHoo Johanna!!!!!

You've made very valid points in BOTH your posts.

There ARE frivilous lawsuits though, and yes, there are people who are looking to make a quick buck. One of the major news stations did an undercover investigation on loss prevention and you wouldn't believe what people would pull in order to sue. A woman nonchalantly dropping a cherry tomato on the floor at a supermarket and then making herself slip on it and cause injury. Or the woman who let her child run all around a department store till the kid got hurt and sued the store because they didn't properly supervise her own child!!! :eek: These are only a few.

I worked in personal injury law as a paralegal for 12 years. I have worked for a couple of sleazeballs who had chiropractors as friends, if you know what I mean. I actually had one who asked me to carry his business cards in my paramedic jumpsuit to hand them out!!!! Talk about hudzpa!!! Another one had the whole family of an accident victim come in and say that they were also injured (even though they weren't). After 12 years, I had had enough. The salary was great but my sanity was far more important.

You're right, the insurance companies will fight to the end for their medical malpractice clients. That's one of the reasons why I never pursued my daughter's misdiagnosis. Although I did want to secure her future since she's not able to work full-time, I decided it just wasn't worth the hassle or aggravation. Besides, she's doing great!!!

The American Justice System has finally begun to crack down and throw out bogus lawsuits and, it's about time.

I still stand by my vote of "YES!!!" veterinarians can and should be sued and held responsible for their negligence. It may be "just and animal" to them, but to their client's, those "animals" are their client's dearest treasures. And I speak for myself as well.

Johanna, are you SURE you don't need a legal secretary????? :D Just kidding. See you Sunday!!

[Snuggles]

when you take your animal to a vet, you are leaving your pet in your vets hands. They do everything possible to help your animal. My vet, luckily, belives in health and quality of animals. He has to pay his bills for meds and stuff, but he doesn't burden us with a high price either.
yeah, if I lost an animal I would feel real bad, but I can leave the fact that my vet tried the best.

[ramanth]

I was torn too...

When Kia became ill, many people told me that I should sue my vet for giving her that shot. I don't blame the vet for Kia getting sick. On the contrary, she and her staff were very helpful with getting Kia treated promptly and it ultimately saved her life.

Vets and Groomers for that matter should be held accountable if something is done that was not requested and an animal is injured.

Just last month, a couple dropped off their St. Bernard to be groomed. When they went back, their dog was dead.

They had muzzled the dog, and put him in a cage much too small for a dog his size. He began to stress and since he could not pant due to the muzzle, he died of heat exaustion.

You would think people that work with animals would know better. I was disgusted when I saw the news report.

Last I knew, they were sueing, and I say good for them.

[Sudilar]

I have decided. Yes, I think we should be able to sue (as long as it is not frivolous). Lives could be saved if some of these quack vets were removed from ever making these stupid mistakes. There should also be a website where there is a list of vets who were sued over negligence or malpractice and the result of the case.

Here I must interject that I love Killian's vet. This vet goes out of her way to find out all that she can to help him. She also works WITH you. Any suggestion I throw at her (usually something someone suggested from the liver-d message board), will be researched. However, she is in a practice office that is NOT cheap, who do not give 2 dog discounts or discounts for sick dogs who are seeing the vet constantly. My medical bills for Killian are higher than our whole family's medical bills!!:eek: