Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My daughter lives in Kent...I know not local to ED....

Yesterday she took her cat to the vets, it has kidney failure. The vet told her to bring it back today, treated as necessary,and sent her on her way.

Last night her cat collapsed. The emergency vet wanted to charge ?148 to put the cat to sleep. How humane is that? What if a poor animal was run over and the owner couldnt afford the vet bill? Would it have to suffer until the next day when the bill would be ?100 cheaper??? Before you ask she can afford it and isnt on a low income so doesnt qualify for free treatment. However,should this be questioned if an animal is dying?

Stepping down from soapbox now grrrrrrrrrrrr........

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/2203-gonna-have-a-moan/
Share on other sites

I'm really sorry to hear about your cat.


Have you tried looking for a local Blue Cross centre or something similar?


Losing a cat really is losing a member of the family so my heart goes out to you.


We had a wonderful cat who lived for 24 years who passed away peacefully under her favourite spot under the radiator on Christmas day a few years ago, terrible to lose a cat at this time of the year.


I'll chip in to buy a brick for spade, maybe we can take it in turns?

Well you lot are just insensitive bastards.

This is such a sad story.

I am so sorry to read it.

I do not know why so much money was charged.

When our cat was dying we called in Mr Lomax (that place has "gone to the dogs" since he retired, for sure) who charged us just ?50 to come round to our flat and put my cat to sleep in my arms.

I absolutely can not understand why these vets can get away with charging so much money.

My heart goes out to you and specially your daughter.

Lilolil I've had many similar experiences with normal vets and emergency ones in the past - last one being poor Gus, back in June. He was a young cat (only 3yrs old) and had a growth in his intestines. We took him to the vets, who took lots of tests including numerous x-rays. We colleted him the same day, they called us back the following day and advised he needed an operation to remove the growth which also meant he would have to stay at the vets the whole weekend. He came back in a really sorry state - the nurses hadnt really looked after him properly. Things were beginning to look positive and he was even beginning to run around like his usual loonytoon self but a few days later the vet called to say it was cancer and had spread so we had to have him put down.
As well as is being incredibly heart breaking it was a very expensive time. At no point were we asked whether we could afford everything, whether we had insurance and whether it was wot we wanted (u assume the vet knows wot theyre talking about). It seemed that they were using Gus to try out new procedures and tests instead of being realistic - growths in the intestines r serious things!

trying to post rest of my comment...


Now I'm not suggesting the vets were being mean money grabbing so and sos and I loved my Gus to bits but for the end result wot a waste of money in between.I think sometimes vets avoid making the "decision" for you and assume you are wanting to prolong ur pets life for as long as possible too - my mum knew a woman who had a cat who was very old, had no teeth, deaf, blind, incontinent, and couldnt walk.

She carried it around everywhere and had to bath it daily (for obvious reasons) but wouldnt do the kindest and decent thing (for the cat)and put it down.I could continue with my list of examples.. it's a shame some vets (not all) dont just tell it how it really is.


wots wiv that word man!

Hello!

Thanks for your kind posts had a similar experience with Lomax years ago.When he first moved in back in the 1960's, we had the shop next door. He was always very kind, and when our moggie became very ill, he put her to sleep free of charge. Likewise with a kitten I found that was badly deformed.

I dont expect free treatment but to pay a fair price. ?148 is extreme and not justified.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda and far more across their briefs than any minister I've seen in years. The consensus was that Labour are so unpopular and untrusted by the electorate already, as are the Conservatives, that breaking the manifesto pledge on income tax wouldn't drive their approval ratings any lower, so they should, and I quote, 'Roll The Dice', hope for the best and see where we are in a couple of years time. As a strategy, i don't know whether I find that quite worrying or just an honest appraisal of what most governments actually do in practice.
    • They are a third of the way through their term Earl. It's no good blaming other people anymore. They only have three years left to fix what is now their own mess. And its not just lies in the manifesto. There were lies at the last budget too, when they said that was it, they weren't coming back for more tax and more borrowing. They'd already blamed the increase in NIC taxes on what they claimed was a thorough investigation. They either knew everything then or they lied about that too .   They need to stop lying and start behaving. If they don't the next government won't be theirs, it will be led by Nigel Farage.  They have to turn it round rapidly. Blaming other people, telling lies and breaking promises isn't going to cut it any more.
    • Is it lame? Or is it Lamey? (sorry)
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...