Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the lady's vet misdiagnosed? Maybe a second opinion would have turned up something different. But I agree that it's odd she didn't choose a euthanasia provider where she could stay with the dog (at home or at the vet) instea of surrendering it to the shelter.
If it was an honest mistake I'm sorry for her, but LDCRF's policy is a good one and they shouldn't adopt to her again.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I mean, the dog needed a $7k surgery. Most normal people wouldn’t be able to pay that.
That’s why I pay $50/mo. for insurance for my dog, who I love dearly and would be devastated to have to surrender over what is a typical veterinary surgical bill these days.
I did the math and determined that it was better to pay the insurance and not have to euthanize or surrender an otherwise healthy dog if she got a blockage or broke a leg requiring surgery etc.
I also keep the deductible in a savings account, and I chose Trupanion because they pay the veterinarian directly instead of expecting the owner to front the cash and get reimbursed later.
I can’t blame the veterinarians- their schooling is expensive and so is the cost of facilities and staff and equipment etc. so of course the costs have escalated a lot.
I couldn’t read the story, but if the dog was able to be saved by veterinary care that the owner couldn’t afford, I can’t see why it wouldn’t be okay to do that and then offer the dog for adoption again. If I didn’t have insurance and that was the only option, I’d rather my dog survive and be happy with a new owner than have to die just because I’m poor.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I mean, the dog needed a $7k surgery. Most normal people wouldn’t be able to pay that.
That’s why I pay $50/mo. for insurance for my dog, who I love dearly and would be devastated to have to surrender over what is a typical veterinary surgical bill these days.
I did the math and determined that it was better to pay the insurance and not have to euthanize or surrender an otherwise healthy dog if she got a blockage or broke a leg requiring surgery etc.
I also keep the deductible in a savings account, and I chose Trupanion because they pay the veterinarian directly instead of expecting the owner to front the cash and get reimbursed later.
I can’t blame the veterinarians- their schooling is expensive and so is the cost of facilities and staff and equipment etc. so of course the costs have escalated a lot.
I couldn’t read the story, but if the dog was able to be saved by veterinary care that the owner couldn’t afford, I can’t see why it wouldn’t be okay to do that and then offer the dog for adoption again. If I didn’t have insurance and that was the only option, I’d rather my dog survive and be happy with a new owner than have to die just because I’m poor.
Anonymous wrote:I mean, the dog needed a $7k surgery. Most normal people wouldn’t be able to pay that.
Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/05/24/dog-euthanasia-adoption-maryland-virginia/
What a weird story. I have so many questions. How did two vets screw up the diagnosis so badly that led to her choosing to euthanize? And then, if she had the money for the procedure, why wouldn't she pay to have it done by one of those vets rather than sign it away to a shelter? Also, the dog was in terrible pain but the shelter was able to wait 6 months before doing surgery? And then it took 7 more months to be healthy enough to be adopted? I feel so bad for this dog, it must have suffered so much.
Anonymous wrote:That woman should not be allowed to adopt any dog again, especially not this dog. I hope he finds a loving home.