Woman finds 'euthanized' dog alive with new owner

[milanessa]

some day your eyes are going to get stuck like that

[dbell1]

i have no problem with the vet charging him. there should be a fee for being an asshat. i dont really care if he was defrauded.

I'm with you. The vet's fee could have gone towards an exam, new shots and the cost of rehoming the dog.

I have a friend who called her vet to get her 3 year old Maltese put down. Dog was a pet store leftover who had allergies. The vet had her sign over the dog and the tech took him home. She had another dog at home, he's now with me. Woman should not have ever had a pet.

As for the original vet, I hope he gets investigated and sanctioned. And I hope Lola/Tinker has a happy life.

[milanessa]

I have a friend who called her vet to get her 3 year old Maltese put down. Dog was a pet store leftover who had allergies. The vet had her sign over the dog and the tech took him home. She had another dog at home, he's now with me. Woman should not have ever had a pet.

As for the original vet, I hope he gets investigated and sanctioned. And I hope Lola/Tinker has a happy life.

Completely different situation.

[vesperholly]

I'm with you. The vet's fee could have gone towards an exam, new shots and the cost of rehoming the dog.

How do you know it didn't? Did the vet stash dollar bills in his pocket while gleefully cackling about how he can go to Vegas now? indeed.

[Scintillation]

This is just making me realize how good our vet is, and how right we were to have our dog and cat put down a couple of years ago. They were so ravaged by cancer that they were dead within 20 seconds of being injected. And they let us stay in the room to say goodbye.
Ugh, those were bad days. The only form I remember signing was about whether we wanted them to be cremated or not. They also made clay paw prints for each one, which was nice.
I'm happy the dog is alive and well, but that vet should be sanctioned for pulling something so shady.

[danceronice]

Then why take the money? Why say ok? He could have just said he could find the dog a home. Taking money for a service that you don't actually do is fraud. The guy took the dog to a vet, he didn't just dump it. True asshats dump their animals, or worse. The vet should have told him he had other options, or even taken a fee for finding the dog a new home, but taking a fee for a service, and then not doing it, is wrong.

Because a lot of those people will just go and dump the animal, find a vet who'll kill it in front of them so they know it's dead, or they'll find a do-it-yourself way of killing it or trying to. Most vets have a pretty good idea which "client" will listen to reason, and which is, as my little pony accurately puts it, an asshat.

[DAngel]

Then why take the money? Why say ok? He could have just said he could find the dog a home. Taking money for a service that you don't actually do is fraud. The guy took the dog to a vet, he didn't just dump it. True asshats dump their animals, or worse. The vet should have told him he had other options, or even taken a fee for finding the dog a new home, but taking a fee for a service, and then not doing it, is wrong.

I totally agree with you. Defrauding an asshat (or not) is still fraud.

I wonder if that is common practice in the vet business. Surely there's a regulation against that?

[moojja]

What would happen if you just don't have the money to save the dog? For example, cancer drugs or surgery cost a lot of money. People might love their pets, but not be willing to give up their retirement funds. Do they automatically lose their pets to a richer family?

[Garden Kitty]

The guy took the dog to a vet, he didn't just dump it. True asshats dump their animals, or worse. .

I'm quite comfortable calling someone who'd pay to kill a healthy animal merely because the animal has become inconvenient to them a true asshat.

[dbell1]

How do you know it didn't? Did the vet stash dollar bills in his pocket while gleefully cackling about how he can go to Vegas now? indeed.

Um, I was siding with the vet who saved the dog (And agreeing with mlp).

I'm outta this thread, too many for me...

[duane]

Then why take the money? Why say ok? He could have just said he could find the dog a home. Taking money for a service that you don't actually do is fraud. The guy took the dog to a vet, he didn't just dump it. True asshats dump their animals, or worse. The vet should have told him he had other options, or even taken a fee for finding the dog a new home, but taking a fee for a service, and then not doing it, is wrong.

I totally agree.

And who knows what the vet eventually did with the dog. Perhaps he took it to the humane society, where the same outcome (the healthy dog being put down) was likely considering 4 million dogs and cats are put down per year. If that happened, the vet was paid for a service that the humane society performed.

[BigB08822]

Then why take the money? Why say ok? He could have just said he could find the dog a home. Taking money for a service that you don't actually do is fraud. The guy took the dog to a vet, he didn't just dump it. True asshats dump their animals, or worse. The vet should have told him he had other options, or even taken a fee for finding the dog a new home, but taking a fee for a service, and then not doing it, is wrong.

Because while they are trying to find the dog a home it has to be looked after and fed. I would have charged the man double and told him our prices just went up. Maybe not, as I wouldn't want him to leave and take matters into his own hands. I can't believe anyone would find a problem with what that vet did, especially when the owner admitted he just didn't want the dog and nothing was wrong with it and it wasn't violent or aggressive.

Who cares if he did eventually have to put the dog down or take it to the Humane Society where they put it down? At least he TRIED to find the dog a home. This is a living thing we are talking about here, how can some of you be so cruel? I am getting very upset that all you want to think about is how the doctor was lying and committing "fraud." WTF!? How about focusing on the fact that the doctor tried to SAVE this perfectly healthy animal?

Life is not black and white, there are many shades of gray. Sometimes we do something that is wrong because it is right.

[Anita18]

Because while they are trying to find the dog a home it has to be looked after and fed. I would have charged the man double and told him our prices just went up. Maybe not, as I wouldn't want him to leave and take matters into his own hands. I can't believe anyone would find a problem with what that vet did, especially when the owner admitted he just didn't want the dog and nothing was wrong with it and it wasn't violent or aggressive.

Who cares if he did eventually have to put the dog down or take it to the Humane Society where they put it down? At least he TRIED to find the dog a home. This is a living thing we are talking about here, how can some of you be so cruel? I am getting very upset that all you want to think about is how the doctor was lying and committing "fraud." WTF!? How about focusing on the fact that the doctor tried to SAVE this perfectly healthy animal?

Life is not black and white, there are many shades of gray. Sometimes we do something that is wrong because it is right.

ITA. I'm normally a very honest person, but that is one kind of dishonesty I can get behind.

[Cachoo]

A quick thanks to everyone who responded about my former vet and Buddy. I feel better now about the experience and will also be more careful regarding my current sweet, goofy, hopefully healthy forever companion.

[DAngel]

This is a living thing we are talking about here, how can some of you be so cruel? I am getting very upset that all you want to think about is how the doctor was lying and committing "fraud." WTF!? How about focusing on the fact that the doctor tried to SAVE this perfectly healthy animal?

Nobody here is arguing that the vet should euthanize a perfectly healthy animal.

I just think that the doctor should be upfront about it. If the vet said "we don't kill a healthy animal, but we can help you find a new home for that dog" and charged the guy accordingly, wouldn't he have accomplished the same thing?

Life is not black and white, there are many shades of gray. Sometimes we do something that is wrong because it is right.

Indeed, it is not. There are many choices in life. The vet didn't only have two choices.

[Japanfan]

I don't know.... It would be completely heartbreaking to have to make a life or death decision on one's pet based on finances. To find out later that the vet lied to you, and gave your pet to an organization that would fix him or her and adopt them out to someone else is just SO wrong. That option should have been presented to the owner.

OTOH, I can see - what if the medical need wasn't that expensive, or was simple and routine, and the owner just didn't want to bother and would rather put their pet down? I can see allowing that person to think you were following their wishes and saving the pet...but where do you draw the line?

In that case perhaps it would be best to be honest and advise the person to surrender their pet for rehoming.

But there are some people who can't even afford relatively small veterinary bills. I'd like there to be some support for those people, but yeah, where do you draw the line? For example, homeless people can benefit from having pets, but they usually aren't able to provide pets with proper care.

[Angelskates]

Because while they are trying to find the dog a home it has to be looked after and fed.

I'm not disputing that, I'm saying that the man paid for a service that wasn't delivered, he was defrauded. If he really wanted to get rid of the dog, why didn't the vet just charge a housing/upkeep fee? Why did he say it was okay to euthanise? Why did he feel the need to lie? What else does he think it's okay to lie about in his profession?

From what mlp said, the man went in saying he didn't want the dog and wanted it put to sleep. The vet said okay. If it's not okay (and I agree with the vet, it's not okay to put a healthy animal to sleep), the vet should say so, and provide other options (like the vet himself finding the dog a home, for a fee if necessary). That's his (or her) job.

[clarie]

Well, it worked out well for both healthy young dogs, didn't it!! I could care less about how the people felt. If a young dog gets a second chance at life in a loving home, then that's what is most important IMO.

[JILEN]

In all of these, IMO the vet could have been more honest as suggested by few other posters as well.

Look, the problem isn't that the dog is alive, that's a great and wonderful thing, the problem is that the owner was told that the dog had died when the vet clearly did not intend to put the dog down at all. Why not let the patient's owner make an informed choice? We have that requirement for humans, for crying out loud, so it would make sense to hold veterinary care professionals to the same standard.

The vet told her the owner the dog died, and she and her little girl mourned the loss of their pet.

[milanessa]

Well, it worked out well for both healthy young dogs, didn't it!! I could care less about how the people felt. If a young dog gets a second chance at life in a loving home, then that's what is most important IMO.

Well, I won't roll my eyes, but you're saying the end justifies the means? I don't agree. It's great the dog was given another chance - but the vet was in the wrong, IMO.