Woman finds 'euthanized' dog alive with new owner

[duane]

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!?

Oh, I'm so sorry to have upset you. Please accept my apology. I will forever try to live by your supreme standards...and here's another

Stop preaching! No one knows exactly why the guy didn't want the dog anymore, or that he took no efforts to find the dog a home before ending up at the vet. Considering the dog was healthy and wasn't violent, the guy obviously took good care of it. And as stated earlier, he didn't just abandon or starve the dog. I seriously doubt that if the vet had simply said "keep your money. I'll try to find the dog a home", the guy would have objected.

Try your best to justify fraud, but it's still fraud.

[BigB08822]

And I am sorry the vet upset you by telling a little white lie (or fraud, as you call it) in order to save a dog. How horrible a person that vet is, going around lying to everyone and saving their defenseless dogs!!! SCUM!

[Angelskates]

And I am sorry the vet upset you by telling a little white lie (or fraud, as you call it) in order to save a dog. How horrible a person that vet is, going around lying to everyone and saving their defenseless dogs!!! SCUM!

The vet said it was okay to euthanise the dog, knowing full well he wasn't going to. Don't you think the vet should have given the owner some options?

[duane]

And I am sorry the vet upset you by telling a little white lie (or fraud, as you call it) in order to save a dog.

Where in my post did I vent, or express anger at the vet? I simply think the vet could have saved the dog without taking money. Or, are you suggesting that if the vet had been honest and told the guy he would try to find the dog a home instead of putting it down, the guy would have stormed out in a huff to find a vet who would?

[Coco]

If my dog needed a lifesaving operation, and I couldn't afford it, I would be ultimately choose to let someone else pay for the operation even if it meant I'd never see the dog again. But I'd really like that to be my choice.

[BigB08822]

I will forever try to live by your supreme standards...and here's another .

I am the one saying it is ok to lie and that makes me the one with supreme standards? What about those of you who read this story and the first thought in your mind was "wait, the doctor LIED!?"

Where in my post did I vent, or express anger at the vet? I simply think the vet could have saved the dog without taking money. Or, are you suggesting that if the vet had been honest and told the guy he would try to find the dog a home instead of putting it down, the guy would have stormed out in a huff to find a vet who would?

I already said that saving the dog costs money (food and any medical care while in the vets possession). I seriously doubt the vet profited much if anything and do you think the euthanization fee only covers costs? It is a business. As for why the vet lied, I do give him the benefit of the doubt. If he felt this man was going to take matters into his own hands then what decision should he have made? I don't think he was out to defraud someone. Do you think he vet sits in his office all day waiting for people to bring in perfectly healthy pets to euthanize so that he can lie to them and make a quick buck? Does that logic work for you?

[vesperholly]

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

I was agreeing with you too, I responded to the wrong quote.

[Garden Kitty]

The only things that appear to be undisputed facts based on this article is that while the woman had the dog, it got attacked. She decided not to try the surgery that might save the dog, she signed a document giving the vet rights to the dog, the vet was able to find resources to save the dog and get it a new home, and now the woman wants money back from the vet.

When it comes to whether or not the woman understood the document she signed (or if she had a chance to read it or it was explained to her), whether the amount paid was for euthanasia or an office visit, and whether the vet indicated he might try to get the dog the surgery or if he lied to the woman, we only have the woman's side of the story.

[MacMadame]

What about those of you who read this story and the first thought in your mind was "wait, the doctor LIED!?"

My first thought was: that poor kid had to mourn the "death" of her dog for absolutely no reason.

Which is why I find the actions of the vet to be less than It's not just the dog and what happens to the dog that's at issue here. The pet owners have feelings too and their wishes and feelings need to be respected.

[Garden Kitty]

My first thought was: that poor kid had to mourn the "death" of her dog for absolutely no reason. .

Perhaps the reason is because the Mom didn't bother to read the documents she signed, or because she was unwilling to pay for the surgery even though the doctor told her the surgery would likely be successful. The situation may be exactly as the Mom described, but we don't really know if we only hear one side of the story.

[BigB08822]

My first thought was: that poor kid had to mourn the "death" of her dog for absolutely no reason.

Which is why I find the actions of the vet to be less than It's not just the dog and what happens to the dog that's at issue here. The pet owners have feelings too and their wishes and feelings need to be respected.

This is getting confusing but I was talking about the other story that was mentioned further into the thread about the guy who dropped off a dog to be put down because he didn't want it and the vet took his money and then tried to save it.

[MacMadame]

Perhaps the reason is because the Mom didn't bother to read the documents she signed, or because she was unwilling to pay for the surgery even though the doctor told her the surgery would likely be successful. The situation may be exactly as the Mom described, but we don't really know if we only hear one side of the story.

Since we don't know, why assume the mom is lying or there was something bad about her.

This is getting confusing but I was talking about the other story that was mentioned further into the thread about the guy who dropped off a dog to be put down because he didn't want it and the vet took his money and then tried to save it.

Oh that one didn't bug me as much. It's still fraud, but the way the story was explained here it seems like the vet changed his mind later.

[DAngel]

I am the one saying it is ok to lie and that makes me the one with supreme standards? What about those of you who read this story and the first thought in your mind was "wait, the doctor LIED!?"

What about them? Are they too heartless and cruel for you?

As for why the vet lied, I do give him the benefit of the doubt. If he felt this man was going to take matters into his own hands then what decision should he have made?

If that man was going to take matters into his own hands, he would have done so without going to the vet. That man was willing to pay to get the dog euthanize, why assumed he was not willing to pay to get his dog a new home? Did the vet think that the man was an asshat and felt that "there should be a fee for being an asshat"?

Perhaps the reason is because the Mom didn't bother to read the documents she signed, or because she was unwilling to pay for the surgery even though the doctor told her the surgery would likely be successful.

I don't think 80% chance of failure is a surgery that would likely be successful...

[Allskate]

I left the room.
I have NEVER felt right about that decision and have never heard of anyone else asked to leave the room. Have you?

I had to put my cat down last summer. The vet gave me the choice of whether to be there or not. I chose to be there because my cat did not like other people and because he was very stressed out at the time due to the fact that he could hear a dog barking. In hindsight, I would do things a little differently. I'm glad I was there with him to comfort and calm him until he lost consciousness, but I wish I had left as soon as that happened instead of waiting until he was dead. When he lost consciousness, he looked peaceful and like he was sleeping, but he didn't look the same once he was dead. He did look dead then, and not just like he was sleeping, and I hate that this was my last image of him. (They had wrapped his body in a towel, so it wasn't as bad as it could of been, but it still isn't a good memory). I guess there are some vets who try to spare people this experience, but I think everyone should have an option. It's just hard to know what is right for you.

(The same is true with the vet giving people time to say goodbye before performing the euthanasia. That is very necessary for some people, but it wasn't necessary for me since my cat had had been sick for quite some time and the vet had warned me what the signs would be when it was time for me to put him down. So, I made sure I took the time to say goodbye to him at home before I brought him in that last time. The waiting/goodbye time they gave me at the vet was just upsetting for me because my very sick cat was stressed out from being at the vet listening to a barking dog. If I had it to do over again, I would ask them to expedite things for his sake.)

ETA: On the other topic, pet abandonment is a real problem. In some areas, a person surrendering a dog to the Humane Society has to pay a fee, so sometimes an owner just abandons the pet, who then may be injured, starve, or any number of other things. (Also, a lot of the time, the law doesn't allow a non-owner to surrender the pet to the Humane Society.) Sometimes, people really do treat animals terribly and vets have seen this and probably are frustrated about what to do in some of these situations. Sadly, sometimes people simply can't afford to take care of their pets, which is also a difficult challenge for vets. Medical treatement is about more than the cost of vet's time. There are other costs such as medicine, supplies, etc. It's not uncommon, especially with the current economy for people to give up pets that have treatable medical conditions, but cost money to treat.

[BigB08822]

If that man was going to take matters into his own hands, he would have done so without going to the vet. That man was willing to pay to get the dog euthanize, why assumed he was not willing to pay to get his dog a new home? Did the vet think that the man was an asshat and felt that "there should be a fee for being an asshat"?

Oh come on now. Do you honestly think this man didn't think about the fact that he could try something other than putting the dog down? If he wanted to save the dog he could have. There are no kill shelters and at the Humane Society the dog would have at least had a chance. He didn't even ask the vet if he knew of a good home for him. Apparently he just walked in and wanted the dog killed. Please don't act like the man would have taken the offer had it just been given to him. If he was that dumb then I am shocked the dog lived past its 1st birthday with such an owner.

[Badams]

My first thought was: that poor kid had to mourn the "death" of her dog for absolutely no reason.

Which is why I find the actions of the vet to be less than It's not just the dog and what happens to the dog that's at issue here. The pet owners have feelings too and their wishes and feelings need to be respected.

And my first thought was that i hate it when people throw children into the equation because it always seems like a ploy to get more sympathy...

[danceronice]

The vet said it was okay to euthanise the dog, knowing full well he wasn't going to. Don't you think the vet should have given the owner some options?

No. Because when you "give them options", those people walk and kill the dog anyway. People who think it's all right to put down animals just because they don't want them or they have minor training problems don't want to hear what they should have done. They just want to throw away the problem. Better the vet pocket some cash and get them out the door than it end up at shelters that don't have the room or resources (and won't charge as high a surrender fee.) If you honestly think that people who want vets to put animals down for frivolous reasons won't do something unpleasant when the vet says no, lucky you for your limited experience of the sort of people who are everywhere who think animals are accessories. They don't want help, they don't want to be told to make an effort, they just want to get rid of the animal they just don't want/are too lazy to train/both. People who've actually tried have already involved their vet and the vet's known that last-ditch euthing is on the table.

Putting a sick animal down because you can't afford the treatment is something else entirely. That's not just being bored now it's not a puppy any more or annoyed with it because it isn't a stuffed animal that moves.

[DAngel]

Oh come on now. Do you honestly think this man didn't think about the fact that he could try something other than putting the dog down? If he wanted to save the dog he could have.There are no kill shelters and at the Humane Society the dog would have at least had a chance. He didn't even ask the vet if he knew of a good home for him. Apparently he just walked in and wanted the dog killed. Please don't act like the man would have taken the offer had it just been given to him. If he was that dumb then I am shocked the dog lived past its 1st birthday with such an owner.

I don't know his mental state and I don't know what he did or did not do before going to the vet. However, I do have a hard time believing that the man would only accept that the vet euthanize the dog. If it doesn't trouble him further and doesn't cost him more, why would he insist the dog be put down?

[BigB08822]

I don't know his mental state and I don't know what he did or did not do before going to the vet. However, I do have a hard time believing that the man would only accept that the vet euthanize the dog. If it doesn't trouble him further and doesn't cost him more, why would he insist the dog be put down?

I worked for a vet and I have absolutely NO hard time believing someone would do that. There are horrible people out there who should never ever be allowed to own an animal.

[DAngel]

I worked for a vet and I have absolutely NO hard time believing someone would do that. There are horrible people out there who should never ever be allowed to own an animal.

If he is one of those people then I think there would be signs of abuse/neglect on the dog... If the dog is healthy and taken care of, then it's strange for the owner to suddenly change his mind and insist that the dog be killed.

I'm using a lot of ifs and I don't think we're going to agree with each other, so I'm going to stop here...