[HN Gopher] A suicide crisis among veterinarians
___________________________________________________________________
A suicide crisis among veterinarians
Author : rntn
Score : 97 points
Date : 2023-10-11 13:38 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
| chamakits wrote:
| When I was young, the first profession I said I wanted to be was
| a Vet. I was obsessed with it. I loved all animals, but dogs the
| most. Still do.
|
| Over the years of having my own pets at some point I realized I
| would be dealing with animals in their worst condition. Sick,
| injured, and suffering. I knew I would be bonding with animals I
| would rarely see and maybe even be responsible for putting them
| to sleep when the time came. I knew I definitely did not want to
| be a vet.
|
| I know a few vets, and I know they have that same love for
| animals. I don't know how they do it.
| ryandrake wrote:
| > When I was young, the first profession I said I wanted to be
| was a Vet. I was obsessed with it. I loved all animals, but
| dogs the most.
|
| Same with my 10 year old. We had a nice "what do you want to be
| when you grow up" conversation in the car the other day and of
| course she decided she'd be a veterinarian because she loves
| animals. I don't want to be Mr. Negative Dad or discourage
| anything, but we had a "let's think about that for a minute"
| talk and she figured out the unpleasant side of the idea pretty
| quickly.
| NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
| > One of the most common criticisms veterinarians receive is that
| they're greedy. Doctors and staff are often asked to give
| discounts or waive fees, and owners can get upset when the answer
| is no.
|
| Clearly, we need universal pet health care.
| wing-_-nuts wrote:
| I know you're joking, but it wouldn't hurt to have a nationwide
| nonprofit pet insurance offering.
| NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
| [flagged]
| wholinator2 wrote:
| I'm sorry you have not yet or are not able to experience
| the unconditional love of a loyal and caring non human
| companion. Someone who is always excited to see you. Say,
| some day your wife or husband dies and leaves you in an
| empty house your children have long moved out of. You wake
| up every day thinking of everything you've lost and begin
| to recluse, especially after your retirement. The house is
| empty, the people are dead. You could understand that that
| would be a difficult and painful position to be in, right?
| Imagine that every time you wake up there is a little dog
| who is excited to see you. Every time you come home they
| are extremely happy and joyous at your return. Every time
| you sit with you dinner, they sit with you. Every time you
| cry they are there. Every difficult emotion is made sweeter
| and easier by the _friend_ that _loves you unconditionally
| and purely_.
|
| You think that person is a low life? You think that person
| is a caveman who should just die alone? You can't see a
| single reason that _pure and unconditional love_ might be a
| good thing for some people? I hope you find some someday so
| you can understand they unadulterated joy and deep meaning
| of being alive on this planet, connected to other living
| things
| NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
| > I'm sorry you have not yet or are not able to
| experience the unconditional love of a loyal and caring
|
| I'm an adult. I'm supposed to give that sort of love, not
| receive it. That's one of the reasons I have children.
|
| Receiving it is for children.
|
| > You think that person is a low life? You think that
| person is a caveman who should just die alone?
|
| I think they're someone who can't afford $150/month in
| pet food.
|
| > I hope you find some someday so you can understand they
| unadulterated joy
|
| Why would you hope that I'm unsalvageably childish?
| partitioned wrote:
| Feel better?
| egypturnash wrote:
| "No matter how cute the pets, they cost money. In fact, pet
| ownership rates increase with household income.
|
| Close to 60% of households with incomes of more than
| $80,000 a year have pets compared with 36% of households
| with incomes less than $20,000."
|
| - https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2020/02/spending-
| on-p...
| yowzadave wrote:
| > I've seen the kind of people who get pets
|
| I'm sorry, what? Isn't pet ownership pretty universally
| distributed across all classes? We have a dog in the white
| house.
| yawnr wrote:
| You are completely out of touch with reality and the people
| from all walks of life who have and care for pets. Please
| keep your terrible opinions to yourself.
| NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
| Someone is clearly out of touch with reality.
|
| Here's another terrible opinion: pet owners have skewed
| the economy of veterinarianism such that farmers and
| livestock owners have trouble getting vets because
| they're too busy dealing with the guy on reddit the other
| day whining about how he spent $2000 on a credit card to
| save his pet rat. Supply is limited (much like doctors,
| only so many seats at vet schools), and demand for pet
| veterinarians outstrips it to the point that the one in
| the article was talking about having a half million in
| student debt.
|
| You're making the world a worse place than it has to be.
| Your cat spread T. gondii everywhere, has decimated (or
| worse) local song bird populations, and your house
| smells.
|
| Just because you're in the majority, doesn't mean you're
| in the right about this.
| reisse wrote:
| That'd be literally putting out fire of exorbitant vet costs
| with taxpayers money gasoline.
| wing-_-nuts wrote:
| I never said 'government funded', just non profit
| reisse wrote:
| Sorry, I mistakenly implied government participation from
| "nationwide nonprofit".
| stainablesteel wrote:
| the medical professions in general suffer under the cult of
| compassion, its not surprising that they have too much put on
| their shoulders. they're not being treated like people but are
| the parts of our societies that are forced to be the most
| compassionate to anyone else.
| rcarr wrote:
| I'm not really an animal person and I briefly dated a vet once
| and it always used to crack me up how when she was telling a
| story she would refer to the animals as patients. Like I get it,
| animals are sentient, have emotions, are intelligent, have ways
| of communicating etc. But there is still something inherently
| funny about this to me, like a sketch show where you're zoomed in
| on what you assume are two doctors in white coats with scrubs and
| stethoscopes talking about a problematic patient and then the
| camera cuts to the wide shot and you realise the doctors are
| actually vets and the trouble causing patient is actually a
| mischievous dog.
|
| Anyway, I bring this up, one because it's funny but two because
| it highlights how emotionally tough the job is for vets - most
| people can easily empathise with how hard a surgeon or doctors
| job must be but can struggle more when it comes to vets. But to
| these guys these animals are their patients and they feel the
| same level of responsibility to them that doctors do to humans.
| It's got to be tough when you have to put so many of them down
| week after week after week.
| partitioned wrote:
| I think its normal to be able to empathize with vets. I don't
| think I'd really want to be around someone who doesn't
| empathize with dealing with wounded and dying animals.
| rcarr wrote:
| [flagged]
| fishyjoe wrote:
| You admit not having experience with a certain field and then
| laugh at the terminology they commonly use?
|
| Your comment is unhelpful and barely related to the article.
| Then you get mad at a group for presumably downvoting your
| irrelevant comment?
|
| Also, I don't feel like "empathizing with animals" is a huge
| insight that you've cracked. Most people do it.
| deadbeeves wrote:
| In reply to your other comment that was flagged:
|
| Well, the reason why the Holy Grail killer rabbit is funny is
| precisely because a rabbit could never jump onto a man's neck
| and nibble his head off. If killer rabbits were actually a
| serious yet somehow obscure danger, maybe you'd find it
| initially funny, but you'd find it much less funny once you've
| found out many people are losing loved one to the buck-toothed
| menace. If you hear two people in white robes talking about how
| they lost a patient to cancer earlier today and how devastated
| the family was, and you laugh when you find out they're talking
| about a cat, what does that make you?
| fooop wrote:
| The business fundamentals and the emotional reality seem to be
| inherently at odds. I'll bet that this is a leading indicator for
| what's gonna happen in people medicine.
| biohax2015 wrote:
| > leading indicator for what's gonna happen in people medicine.
|
| It's been happening for a long time now:
| https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/15/magazine/doctors-moral-cr...
| nanolith wrote:
| I know that it's a tough and often thankless job. People don't
| understand the real cost of pet care.
|
| Euthanasia is difficult, especially with pets. Pets are very much
| like children. I make it a point when calling on a veterinarian
| for end-of-life care for my pets and my family's pets to talk
| with them and thank them afterward. It is absolutely hard for
| anyone in the room when a beloved pet is euthanized. That's a
| heavy burden for a vet to carry day after day, and it's crucial
| that they are reminded that they are doing the pet and the family
| a kindness. Intellectually, I'm sure they realize this. But, it's
| a brutal emotional situation, and I think it's important that
| they are shown gratitude for taking that on.
| [deleted]
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| I imagine vets go into the business because they like animals.
| Hard if you bond with every patient. Not sure how to get out of
| that particular catch-22.
| londons_explore wrote:
| > I imagine vets go into the business because they like
| animals.
|
| I thought that too. Then I met a bunch of vets. Turns out most
| of them like the fact they get unsupervised access to the drug
| cabinet and they love the ketamine...
| onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
| I'd be impressed if the percentage of vets that do drugs is
| higher than any other similar profession.
|
| A lot of people do hard drugs - I've seen conservative
| estimates at ~12% of the of the adult and teenage population.
| the_gipsy wrote:
| Sounds like you met a bunch of junkies that are so determined
| that they picked their career around drug-access.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Maybe I'm just unlucky, but I have met 4 vets now, all in
| different walks of life (yoga class, my rock climbing
| buddies, an ex-colleague who did a career change, and a
| cousin), and all of them have at least experimented with
| animal drugs...
|
| Hard to believe it isn't widespread in the industry.
| sjsdaiuasgdia wrote:
| You replied to a post about why vets choose to be vets
| with "most of them like the fact they get unsupervised
| access to the drug cabinet and they love the ketamine.."
|
| When challenged, you mention 4 vets you know. You say
| they've all at least experimented with animal drugs. What
| portion of the 4 said that was a reason for them to
| become vets? What portion did more than "at least
| experiment"? Do either of those represent a majority
| share of your sample? TBH, I think you would have phrased
| it differently if they did...
|
| What is it about this small sample which is still
| influenced by your location, social class, education, etc
| that makes it representative of all vets?
|
| Just wanted to note the wide gulf between your original
| reply and where you retreated.
| jihiggins wrote:
| maybe it's because people who have access to ketamine
| tend to be more likely to try ketamine? it's not that
| surprising that some people will take advantage of access
| to "free" party drugs.
|
| also, ketamine has been shown to help with depression.
| could be that people are self-medicating.
| tokai wrote:
| I'm guessing from your name that you are in the UK? That
| would explain why your experience doesn't map to other
| countries, as UK has a huge crisis of ketamine abuse.
| shrimp_emoji wrote:
| [flagged]
| bgandrew wrote:
| Or doesn't get along with humans too well. Which can be a sign
| of underliyng depression.
| coding123 wrote:
| Many people are pretty mean, so it's also a sign of a dis-
| functioning society that causes a lot of underlying
| depression.
| GlenTheMachine wrote:
| My wife is a vet.
|
| One big issue is that most people don't have pet insurance. But
| they do have medical insurance. As a consequence they are
| completely surprised by the out-of-pocket costs of medical
| procedures.
|
| Hip surgery (to pick something at random) is hip surgery, even if
| it's for a dog. It still costs thousands of dollars. But a
| significant portion of the population expects to pay what they
| would pay for insurance-covered human surgery, eg a couple
| hundred dollars at most. And when they see the bill they accuse
| the vet of "only being in it for the money" if they won't
| significantly discount the price.
|
| Meanwhile, the vet is paying back $150,000 in student loans, same
| as a human doctor, but only making a third of the pay.
| Doe-_ wrote:
| I looked into pet insurance. The best cover I could find would
| have cost me PS250/year, and would only cover up to PS7500.
|
| It cost me PS7000 for my cat to spend 2 days in "ICU", nothing
| surgical, though they did do a _cat scan_ and put him on
| oxygen.
|
| I found the cost of insurance ludicrous given how expensive the
| vet was and how little the insurance would cover. Granted ICU
| is expensive, I would still expect there to be an option which
| would wouldn't cap out at such a low figure.
|
| For such a measly cover, I would prefer to self-insure.
| unshavedyak wrote:
| Also, not sure how common it is, but an extended friend of mine
| was a vet tech. She quit due to the emotional toll of seeing
| animal abuse. Specifically sexual abuse. Apparently they had
| very limited tools to actually deal with the problem and
| instead had to give the dogs back to the abusers. That was not
| an emotional burden that she could continue with.
|
| Not something I would have thought vets would have to deal
| with.
| danielmg wrote:
| I used to work with a guy who developed photos in a lab in
| the 90s. He saw far too much stuff along those lines.
| pandemicsyn wrote:
| [delayed]
| Fomite wrote:
| I work in a veterinary school, and it's remarkable to see how
| worn down veterinarians are compared to my colleagues in "people
| medicine" (and my comparison group are infectious disease folks -
| they're not exactly a cheerful group).
|
| To be honest, at this point, between how hard it is to get into
| vet school, the debt load, and how you're signing up for crushing
| compassion fatigue your whole life, and a career of hoping
| someone will pay for a procedure to save their pet's life while
| being braced for "I guess we should put them down..." every day,
| I wouldn't tell someone I cared for to become a vet.
| wing-_-nuts wrote:
| > hoping someone will pay for a procedure to save their pet's
| life while being braced for "I guess we should put them
| down..."
|
| I'm sorry, but vet costs are _completely_ out of whack with
| reality these days. The truth of the matter is that most people
| cannot justify spending thousands of dollars on a pet, no
| matter how much they are loved, and that _DOES NOT_ make them
| bad or unfit owners. The story quoted $10k to remove a skewer a
| puppy swallowed, and then pressured the owner give the pup up
| when they couldn 't afford that. Can you not see how that would
| be viewed as _insanely_ predatory? For profit companies should
| not be involved in human or animal medicine. Once that cash cow
| is gone maybe vet school prices will come down to earth.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| > The truth of the matter is that most people cannot justify
| spending thousands of dollars on a pet, no matter how much
| they are loved, and that DOES NOT make them bad or unfit
| owners.
|
| I'd argue not having the means to deal with emergency
| situations would make someone unfit to own a pet.
|
| I get that circumstances can change and costs increase, but I
| also feel too many people assume a pet doesn't cost much or
| isn't much of a comitment.
|
| You're right that the costs are crazy, and not taking it into
| account when deciding to take or keep a pet is irresponsible.
| freedomben wrote:
| We already have a crisis of homeless/stray animals out
| there. I can't imagine how much worse it would get if we
| only allowed the 1% of the population with $10,000 or more
| to spare in case the pet needs surgery to own pets. Also
| suicides will go up. Pets are an important source of
| companionship and oxytocin/closeness for people who live
| alone.
| armchairhacker wrote:
| I agree that people shouldn't adopt a pet unless they have
| stable finances which are enough to pay for pet insurance
| and/or unexpected vet bills.
|
| Sometimes people's finances change though, and then
| (assuming it wasn't serious money mismanagement) I think
| it's cruel to say they should give up their pet.
|
| Pet insurance should be front-loaded, so you have to pay a
| lot the first few months, but if you stop paying you get to
| keep the insurance at least for a while.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| So every pet owner without at least $10k set aside for pet
| emergency care is a bad owner. That describes 99% of pet
| owners.
|
| I agree people should plan for more pet-related costs than
| they do, but, as technology progresses, there doesn't seem
| to be a ceiling on the amount you _could_ spend to save a
| pet.
|
| In my case, we have always taken in rescue animals. So the
| choice is between leaving the pet at shelter or a life in a
| good home with some limited options when it comes to end-
| of-life care. I think the latter option is more humane.
| watwut wrote:
| Or we accept that sometimes pets die and that if the
| operation costs 10000 then fit owner can still decide for
| the pet to die.
|
| That goes for fish, dogs or tarantulas.
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| Compared to animals in the wild, or animals we raise for
| food, our pets have it pretty good, even if we have to put
| them to sleep rather than pay an expensive vet bill. A
| painless death at the vet seems like nothing comparatively.
| Fomite wrote:
| Also, as for "Once that cash cow is gone maybe vet school
| prices will come down to earth." - the source of the rising
| cost is a combination of two things, neither one of which has
| anything to do with small animal medicine:
|
| 1) The loss of industry support for large animal vets
|
| 2) The loss of state funding for veterinary schools, which
| has put pressure on the one remaining dial available to those
| schools, which is tuition. This is a systemic problem that
| extends way beyond vet schools, but is particularly obvious
| there
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > Can you not see how that would be viewed as insanely
| predatory?
|
| I assume you must be an expert in the cost structure of
| operating a veterinary practice in that location, at that
| time, in order to determine a predatory and non predatory
| price.
|
| If you are not, I am not sure how you can make any claim
| about the prices.
|
| >For profit companies should not be involved in human or
| animal medicine.
|
| What kind of quality of life do you think veterinarians and
| doctors deserve? Should they be able to buy a Mercedes? C
| Class or S Class? Should they be able to buy a home in the
| better school district? How many square feet?
|
| These questions are relevant for determining the predatori-
| ness of the doctors' prices. Even more relevant is whether or
| not you want the top caliber people spending years studying
| one of the most complex machines. Or they could go study how
| to deliver ads to people.
| watwut wrote:
| Non predatory thing then is to help the owner to put the
| pet down painlessly and quickly for reasonable price.
| Without guilting the owner into 10000 operation.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I do not see any evidence of guilting.
|
| > The incident involved a four-month-old German Shepherd
| puppy who'd swallowed a skewer and needed emergency
| surgery life-saving surgery. The cost of the complicated
| procedure and after care was close to $10,000 - more than
| the owner could afford. As a last resort, to avoid
| euthanasia, the clinic offered her the option to
| surrender the puppy to a new owner who could cover the
| cost.
|
| What is a reasonable price? Unless someone is familiar
| with pricing from multiple vendors for some period of
| time, how could one know a reasonable price?
| samtho wrote:
| My partner and I have a number of animals and volunteered
| at a shelter for many years pre-pandemic. We worked with
| vets and vet techs and are roughly aware of the
| associated costs.
|
| $10,000 feels high at first glance but consider the size
| of the skewer compared to a small animal. There is likely
| damage done to other areas including major internal
| hemorrhaging which is not super straight-forward to track
| down completely (even in humans). If the skewer was
| single-use bamboo (which I suspect given how much wood
| will retain food smell and how puppies love destroying
| garbage cans), the puppy would have likely chewed on it a
| bit causing splintered mess internally.
|
| This would result in a multi-hour procedure with at least
| 2 surgical staff (surgeon and tech) and anesthesiologist
| (due to the complicated nature of this, we can't have the
| animal regurgitating as well as active life support
| monitoring). In addition to the standard tools, they
| would be using X-rays, dyes, internal (dissolvable)
| sutures, etc. Internal organs would be mended, stomach
| fluid would need to be removed from the abdominal cavity,
| and there would be at least 12 hours of monitoring post
| op.
|
| Expensive, yes, but I don't think it's that unreasonable
| unfortunately.
| somenameforme wrote:
| Is a million dollars a reasonable price? The point I make
| is that you might not be able to tell a reasonable price,
| per se. But you can generally tell an unreasonable price.
| It's some x-rays, animal quality anesthesia/meds, and
| labor. It's hard to see how this reasonably adds up to
| $10,000.
|
| Were time not an issue, they could probably take a trip
| to Mexico, get the operation done for _maybe_ a few
| hundred dollars, and come back home, all for _much_ less
| money than the vet was asking. And the reason I think
| that 's particularly relevant is that it's not like the
| underlying costs really change. That clinic in Mexico is
| probably importing those drugs and machines from the
| exact same places. So developing world costs tend to give
| you a 'raw materials' cost, where all that's left is
| labor + profit.
| reisse wrote:
| > I assume you must be an expert in the cost structure of
| operating a veterinary practice in that location, at that
| time, in order to determine a predatory and non predatory
| price.
|
| You don't have to be an expert when you can compare vet
| prices in US and in other parts of the world. And unlike
| human healthcare, vet is not subsidized anywhere, so the
| comparison is fair.
|
| With the price tag of 10K$ I'd say it would be worth to
| take a flight to Mexico, other LatAm countires, or even
| Eastern Europe to pay tenth of the price for the same
| operation.
| wing-_-nuts wrote:
| Frankly, if a vet can, as a matter of practice, afford to
| do procedures probono but only if the owner surrenders
| their pet, it means they are making an absolutely
| _staggering_ profit from those who are emotionally extorted
| to pay. _That_ is predatory.
|
| I miss the days when vets got into the business to run
| small practices for a reasonable profit and middle class
| lifestyle. Few of them wanted mercedes money . It's kind of
| gross to think modern vet medicine is making vast sums off
| of pet owner's worst days.
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Surrenders their pet to someone who can pay
| stef25 wrote:
| How much of that 10K would be Mercedes money ?
|
| It goes without saying that a vet should have higher than
| average income considering the length and cost of study and
| responsibility etc. Not at all trying to say that they're
| greedy.
| naniwaduni wrote:
| Not sure why this goes without saying.
| datameta wrote:
| I wholeheartedly disagree. After seeing the prices of
| basics like saline in hospitals, I'm not surprised to learn
| of inflated prices obfuscated from the general public.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| That one is obvious due to us knowing the hospitals sell
| to the government and insurers for much less.
|
| As far as I am aware, this does not apply to a veterinary
| business. The article also says it was $10k for emergency
| services at a vet hospital, including the aftercare.
|
| What are the labor costs of having highly qualified
| people, presumably in low supply, on call to provide
| these services? What are the costs of supplies like
| medicine, and malpractice insurance (if that applies)?
| [deleted]
| freedomben wrote:
| The vets that I've been too (minus a non-profit clinic I
| went to once) absolutely charge outrageous amounts for
| saline and other things. It's a hard business, so like
| most time-of-use sales points they take advantage and
| charge for the convenience. I'm not making a value
| judgment, just pointing out that it definitely is
| something they do.
| mynameisash wrote:
| * FTC acts against private equity firm's acquisition of
| veterinary clinics[0]
|
| * Private equity is buying everything from vet offices to
| tech conglomerates [1]
|
| I'm not opposed to people making money and having a
| comfortable life, but the fact that private equity is
| capitalizing on vet clinics is telling.
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31728350
|
| [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36313967
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Private equity companies frequently purchase struggling
| businesses, not prosperous ones
| 9991 wrote:
| > no matter how much they are loved
|
| I don't buy it. If their kid needed a couple thousand dollars
| to live, a lot more people would be able to scrounge it up.
| If they can't do the same for their pet, maybe they actually
| do love their pet less ... and that's OK.
| ryandrake wrote:
| > If their kid needed a couple thousand dollars to live, a
| lot more people would be able to scrounge it up.
|
| While I agree that many (most) people would make it work if
| it were for a child, I wouldn't use the insanity of the
| US's human healthcare bills to justify anything. It's also
| insane and a travesty that you can walk into your hospital
| and walk out with multi-thousand dollar charges you cannot
| pay. Both can be terrible and unjustifiable.
| watwut wrote:
| Emotional attachment does not mean that human is not able
| to do rational decision. No matter how deep I love my dog,
| I do not have the same responsibility toward him then
| toward my child.
| scythe wrote:
| Your child is very likely to outlive you. In fact, to some,
| this is a major reason to have children.
|
| On the other hand, your pet will die in your lifetime,
| unless you are very old or die unexpectedly. So most people
| are probably prepared for this emotionally on some level.
| iteria wrote:
| There are a lot of people who wouldn't spend a couple
| thousand dollars to save their own lives, let alone their
| kids. People get hit with thousands of dollars for their
| kid because once it gets bad enough, the system takes over
| and stick you with the bill. If people got a choice, they
| would not always choose their child. I can guarantee you
| this. We can see this where parents do get a choice: dental
| and vision care. There are a lot of kids suffering and
| going without because of a few hundred dollars.
| DangitBobby wrote:
| Absolutely. Any time we have a routine visit, e.g. shots and
| a checkup, it costs us about $300. I can't remember a single
| vet visit we had that was less than $100, and we haven't had
| an emergency visit in years. I have no idea how most people
| afford it, I assume they just don't take their pets to the
| vet.
| Mezzie wrote:
| Vet costs vary _wildly_ across different regions.
|
| I just took my cat in for an emergency (little idiot ate
| plastic and we had to see if she had a block in her when
| she was continuing to vomit blood) and got her examined, a
| shot of anti-nausea medication, imaging of her gi tract,
| and some bland food to take home (which had to be special
| as she's allergic to chicken protein) for $215. I thought
| that was pretty damn reasonable honestly.
| protastus wrote:
| I have yet to see evidence that it's out of whack. Vets are
| are doctors, have to employ staff, and have training,
| processes and tools analogous to human medicine.
|
| There's no vet industrial complex, so no
| administrative/insurance/legal parasitic overhead like in
| human medicine (in the US).
| wing-_-nuts wrote:
| >There's no vet industrial complex, so no
| administrative/insurance/legal parasitic overhead like in
| human medicine (in the US).
|
| You obviously haven't seen where private equity has been
| buying up private vet practices
| freedomben wrote:
| No, but costs are artificially higher than they need to be
| because the government restricts who can go into business
| by requiring advanced degrees, and the schools that provide
| those degrees make a lot of money doing so. It's certainly
| not an industrial complex anywhere near that of people
| medicine, but it's definitely out of whack thanks to
| regulatory burdens.
| CommieBobDole wrote:
| I would question that second assertion; given the rise of
| pet insurance, private equity buying up clinics, and the
| increases in cost of veterinary care entirely out of line
| with inflation, my suspicion is that we're in fact in the
| early stages of the buildout of a vet industrial complex.
|
| Seems like the usual suspects have realized that there's a
| ton of money to be extracted by the veterinary industry and
| we're seeing the direct (hey, our CFO did some analysis and
| we can raise prices 500% and only impact sales 20%!) and
| indirect (hey, since there's a lot of money in this
| industry now, we've developed a new veterinary surgical
| instrument that improves outcomes 10% for only 20x the
| cost!) effects of that process.
|
| And in this case, veterinarians are caught in the middle
| since they don't have a powerful cartel to protect them
| like human doctors; they end up with all of the stress and
| none of the profits.
| Fomite wrote:
| So one of the things that comes up a lot is that it's _not_
| actually that correlated with cost.
|
| Most vets I know (I also work for a state school, not a for
| profit company) are _very_ sympathetic toward very large and
| expensive bills, and have always been up front about cost in
| a way that human medicine is not. There 's also a myriad of
| ways they try to reduce bills when they can.
|
| The toll is from folks who aren't spending much smaller
| amounts of money on life saving procedures.
| pc86 wrote:
| The absolute amount of money is irrelevant, it matters what
| percentage of a person's disposable income it is.
|
| $10k is nothing if you making half a million dollars a year
| and have $200k in credit with no balance, because your
| disposable income is probably $400-450k/yr.
|
| $200 is a ruinous amount of money if you make minimum wage
| and take the bus to work because your disposable income is
| very likely negative.
| Dig1t wrote:
| >and then pressured the owner give the pup up when they
| couldn't afford that
|
| My wife is a vet and I hear about this often.
|
| From the vet's perspective, if the owner gives up the puppy
| then they don't have to put the puppy down. Putting down a
| puppy is heart-wrenching.
|
| You can't give out free medical care, she regularly gives as
| many discounts as she's allowed to give away, even some she's
| not supposed to, especially for cases like that. But in the
| end, the choice is A: put the puppy down or B: do the
| procedure for free but then the owner has to give up the
| animal.
|
| When presented that choice it's obvious you should try and
| convince the owner not to put the animal down.
| vector_spaces wrote:
| Why is it like that though? Like what are the economics of
| performing the procedure that it's possible for it to be
| free if the owner gives it up? Does someone different
| ultimately foot the bill?
| Dig1t wrote:
| You can do this a few times, and sometimes they do
| actually just do the procedure for free and the owner
| gets to keep the animal. But it does not scale. As soon
| as it becomes a rule then it becomes abused. One thing
| you realize quickly when running a clinic that deals with
| the public is any rule/policy that can be abused, WILL be
| abused. People try all kinds of tricks to not pay for
| their bills. And the clinic has to fight a constant
| battle with Yelp reviews as well, which greatly affect
| their business. If someone gets free treatment for one
| animal but not another they will destroy the business
| with Yelp reviews.
|
| You get a wide range of clients at a vet clinic, some
| people are very nice and deal honestly, but there are a
| ton of people out there, I would say they are "less than
| savory" characters who recklessly adopt a lot of pets
| (like 5 dogs, 5 cats, and no money to pay for any bills)
| and will abuse these policies all day.
| wing-_-nuts wrote:
| I can't see it as anything other than emotional
| extortion. It's not like the animal shelter is paying for
| that care. It's being written off, and the reason it's
| being written off is they make so much from the owners
| that do pay they can afford to do so.
| freedomben wrote:
| From a microeconomic perspective (which is also my own),
| I agree completely. I am trying to consider the
| macroeconomic perspective as well though, which quickly
| spirals into bankruptcy if they just start doing
| treatment for free for people who can't/won't pay for it.
| Unless/until we make it easier and cheaper for people to
| go to vet school, they have to make money.
| hvs wrote:
| The new owner pays for it.
| CommieBobDole wrote:
| How does that work, though? Is there a constellation of
| dog-seeking people hovering around veterinary offices
| that only want dogs that cost $10k and have recently had
| major surgery? People who are willing to donate $10k to
| save a dog's life but consider it very important that the
| current owner no longer have the dog anymore for some
| reason?
| ericbarrett wrote:
| > You can't give out free medical care
|
| Is this asserting a legal or professional requirement? Or
| rather a "rule of business"?
| hvs wrote:
| It's a basic rule of economics. Veterinarians need to eat
| too.
| burnished wrote:
| Why does the owner have to give up animal in that case? If
| its to prevent people from casually claiming they are
| unable to pay for treatment then why is putting that animal
| down for want of treatment something that they do?
|
| Not trying to hold you accountable for the practice of
| course, but it seems like you might know
| randmeerkat wrote:
| > ...do the procedure for free but then the owner has to
| give up the animal.
|
| Why go through the trouble of rehoming the pet when it
| already has a home that loves it..?
| operatingthetan wrote:
| Yeah it seems sort of like a punishment for being to poor
| to pay for the expensive vet care.
| [deleted]
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Medical doctors have a higher suicide rate
| candybar wrote:
| We can talk about other negative aspects of being a vet, but the
| primary factor is that they know how:
|
| > But that reality of the job can also colour the way
| veterinarians view human lives - including their own - and for
| those already experiencing suicidal ideation, it can provide a
| simple justification: death is preferable to suffering. In a 2021
| survey by pharmaceutical company Merck, 12.5% of the
| veterinarians surveyed said they were "suffering". And nearly
| half of the respondents were not receiving mental health care.
|
| > "There's an idea that veterinarians work on the belief that
| it's right to euthanise a hopeless case," says Volk, "and we are
| seeing ourselves, emotionally, as hopeless cases."
|
| > Death is a routine and repeated part of the job, and while it's
| never easy to end a life, Volk adds that it is easy to start
| seeing it as an option to alleviate their own distress. "I have
| medications in my clinic that are called 'Euthasol', and I
| euthanise all the time," she says. "Literally like five or six
| times a night."
|
| > The CDC's 2019 study identified poisoning as the most common
| cause of death among veterinarians. The primary drug used was
| pentobarbital, one of the main medications used for animal
| euthanasia. The study's authors determined that "training on
| euthanasia procedures and access to pentobarbital are some of the
| key factors contributing to the problem of suicide among
| veterinarians".
|
| What often stops otherwise suicidal folks is that it's not an
| easy thing to do - suicide attempts usually do not lead to deaths
| (https://www.mayoclinic.org/medical-professionals/psychiatry-...
| - 5.4% according to one study, and the denominator here is # of
| people. not # of attempts). Vets on the other hand are trained to
| put down animals painlessly and effectively - it's not a surprise
| that those that have the means to complete suicide and have
| plenty of experience applying this to other animals then die
| disproportionately from suicide.
| pydry wrote:
| This reminds me of bridge fences being successful at bringing
| down overall suicide:
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2610560/
| candybar wrote:
| Yup, suicidal attempts are often impulsive, so any barrier
| (in this case literally) even if it's relatively easy to get
| around, reduces suicide rates. Here's another study, this
| time on firearms:
|
| https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2020/06/handgun-
| owner...
|
| > The researchers found that people who owned handguns had
| rates of suicide that were nearly four times higher than
| people living in the same neighborhood who did not own
| handguns. The elevated risk was driven by higher rates of
| suicide by firearm. Handgun owners did not have higher rates
| of suicide by other methods or higher rates of death
| generally.
|
| Suicide attempts by firearm are far more likely to complete
| than most other means, ergo, suicide death rates are higher
| among those that have firearms.
| [deleted]
| philomath_mn wrote:
| I think about this a lot with my brother. He took his life
| in the alleyway behind the gun shop where he just bought
| the ammo -- I have no idea what his mental state was
| (estranged from family for many years) but I have to think
| there was some impulsive decision-making involved.
| I_Am_Nous wrote:
| I'm sorry to hear about your brother :( depression can be
| very much like torture. Some people can last for a long
| time before they will do/say anything to make it stop,
| but without help eventually it will wear you down until
| you don't value your life anymore and the promise of a
| "quick, painless end" via gunshot is hard to resist when
| you are too deep. Add in any kind of extra stress like
| drug addiction or trauma and it very quickly becomes too
| much.
| I_Am_Nous wrote:
| I remember reading about how "sticking your head in an
| oven" was a legitimate suicide method when using coal gas
| ovens. When people switched to natural gas/electric, the
| suicide rate dropped drastically:
|
| >The switch from coal gas to natural gas also had one
| unexpected effect. During the '50s and '60s, about half of
| the suicides in Britain were by coal gas. By the '70s, when
| the transition to natural gas was complete, the number of
| gas suicides had dropped to zero and the overall suicide
| rate was down a third. Even the suicidal appreciate
| convenience. If it's too much trouble, as Dorothy Parker
| said, "You might as well live."[1]
|
| 1. https://gizmodo.com/why-have-people-stopped-committing-
| suici...
| graypegg wrote:
| That actually gives me some appreciation for some seemingly
| pointless vertical posts my city put into a bridge near me.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-10-11 16:00 UTC)