# vet or owner-who has the final say?



## handbagsandhay (4 September 2017)

If a health issue - ie a tumor or the like - is diagnosed in your dog and you believe it to  be the best thing to let him enjoy his time until his health really deteriorates then allow him to be put to sleep - is this the decision of the owner or can the vet insist on putting the dog through treatment?


----------



## Clodagh (4 September 2017)

Owner all the time. If my vet insisted on not PTS I would change vets. Technically you can turn up with a perfectly healthy young, well trained dog and they should PTS if you demand it, I believe, although in that situation you can understand them suggesting an alternative.
Sorry if you are having a bad time.


----------



## Lacuna (4 September 2017)

We had this with a 12/13yo lurcher - diagnosed with cancer on the spleen.

We didn't have insurance at the time (about 15years ago) and we couldn't afford full treatment. We got steroids for him that let him live symptom free for a while and then was PTS when he had a final collapse 6 months later.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (4 September 2017)

The owner every time.  No vet practice  that I can think of is going to fund expensive treatment when the owner says "no".  apart from anything else.


----------



## meleeka (4 September 2017)

Always the owner, unless it's a welfare issue but that's likely to be more the other way when the owner wants to hang onto them but it's not in the dogs best interests.

If I had a vet insisting on expensive treatment I'm afraid I'd change vets.


----------



## PucciNPoni (4 September 2017)

No, a vet cannot insist on anything treatment wise.  They can give you options, and they can PTS on humane grounds but generally this is with consent.  But they cannot force you to do expensive treatments if you can't afford it.

The owner's responsibility and right to choose every time.


----------



## Auslander (4 September 2017)

handbagsandhay said:



			If a health issue - ie a tumor or the like - is diagnosed in your dog and you believe it to  be the best thing to let him enjoy his time until his health really deteriorates then allow him to be put to sleep - is this the decision of the owner or can the vet insist on putting the dog through treatment?
		
Click to expand...

I fail to see how it can be in the dogs best interests to wait til his health really deteriorates (presumably without the treatment the vet is suggesting) then put to sleep. Decisions about treatment are up to the owner - the vet can only suggest what is best for the animal


----------



## Alec Swan (4 September 2017)

handbagsandhay said:



			If a health issue - ie a tumor or the like - is diagnosed in your dog and you believe it to  be the best thing to let him enjoy his time until his health *really* deteriorates then allow him to be put to sleep - is this the decision of the owner or can the vet insist on putting the dog through treatment?
		
Click to expand...

It may be that it was a mistake to include the word '*really*',  as that would imply that you'd accept a degree of suffering,  which I'm sure that you didn't intend.  I have an elderly collie dog here,  wobbly on his feet,  he can't face sheep any longer,  and he just exists in a kennel being let out morning and evening.  He's now deaf and a little senile and his time on this earth is drawing to a rapid close.  I will dig the hole before I put him down,  it will be instant and he will be at peace.

Better in instant exit than a protracted and drawn out  shall we shan't we  end. .. and NO,  the decision is never that of the vet,  nor should it be.

Alec.


----------



## Goldenstar (4 September 2017)

Owners always trump the vets .


----------



## maisie06 (4 September 2017)

Owner - I fell out with one practice. My then JRT was 16 years old, he'd been getting stiff joints for a while and Metacam was giving him relief and he was still enjoying walks, food etc. One morning he was reluctant to move, dosed with Metacam and no real improvement, he couldn't make it to the garden and wee'd himself, that moment his spark went and I knew it was time.

I rang the vets and asked if it was at all possible for them to fit in a euthanasia asap to be told by the snotty receptionist "that's for a vet to decide not you" I won't repeat what I said....but suffice to say I dispensed with their  services and sent a stinking letter a few days later....Her attitude was disgusting (unlike Harry Hawkins the horse despatch people who are amazing and professional) 

I rang another local practice who listened and made a slot available and were excellent - have been with them ever since.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (4 September 2017)

Owner, of course. I've made the decision for the dog, the cat, the horse, it's not the vet who makes the decision when the animal is no longer having a good quality of life. 

Maisie, I would have been similar, who the f is the receptionist to tell you that?


----------



## rara007 (4 September 2017)

Owner, though often they like the vets agreement or even ask what would you do if it was yours. A surprising amount of the public whilst the choice is theirs want a great deal of guidance which adds the pressure. Obviously it's up to the vets to give realistic prognosis and options for the owner to base their opinion on and how you discus this does influence owners, and different vets explaining the same case to the same owners a different outcome can be made. A vet can refuse to put to sleep something they don't want to but that's rare and you just go to another vet! I can't imaging any would in the face of chronic or terminal illness. It's not something that would be taken lightly. A vet can also get the police/RSPCA to seize an animal if they feel it is suffering but the owners will not euthanise or treat otherwise to relieve suffering. I refused one last week (that wasn't a welfare case) but the (ex) owners were actually very thankful and he has already found a new home.


----------



## PucciNPoni (5 September 2017)

sometimes the owners seem to rely on the vet to tell them "now is the time" but in reality the vets should not and in theory do not say when it's the right time, apart from offering prognosis and offer the  best course of action.  Sometimes when an owner seems to be dragging their feet and it's becoming a welfare issue, a vet will say "there's nothing more to be done".  

And yes, how very dare that receptionist to say what she said Maisie!


----------



## Auslander (5 September 2017)

rara007 said:



			Owner, though often they like the vets agreement or even ask what would you do if it was yours. A surprising amount of the public whilst the choice is theirs want a great deal of guidance which adds the pressure. Obviously it's up to the vets to give realistic prognosis and options for the owner to base their opinion on and how you discus this does influence owners, and different vets explaining the same case to the same owners a different outcome can be made. A vet can refuse to put to sleep something they don't want to but that's rare and you just go to another vet! I can't imaging any would in the face of chronic or terminal illness. It's not something that would be taken lightly. A vet can also get the police/RSPCA to seize an animal if they feel it is suffering but the owners will not euthanise or treat otherwise to relieve suffering. I refused one last week (that wasn't a welfare case) but the (ex) owners were actually very thankful and he has already found a new home.
		
Click to expand...

As a vet, how do you feel about owners asking what you'd do? I'm always very careful not to put that on my vet, as I don't think it's fair to her. When Ted was PTS, I was going round and round in circles, until we discovered that he couldn't see, and the decision suddenly became easy. I really wanted someone to say "If he were mine, I'd do XXX", but didn't want to put that sort of pressure on someone else.
I'm sure my vet would have answered the question honestly, but I didn't feel it was fair to ask it


----------



## handbagsandhay (5 September 2017)

Thanks for all your replies. I am probably worrying over nothing and I am hoping it won't come to this but my dog is still relatively young and although currently still healthy, other health conditions he suffers from mean that I feel if things were to go downhill and/or it came down to major treatment I'd be swayed towards letting him go though I just wondered with him being younger if a vet would be reluctant

And no of course I would never have a dog suffering.  maybe it was poorly worded but thankfully most people could see that I wasn't suggesting the dog would be suffering before I would make the decision but yes when/if he deteriorates I will make a decision


----------



## MotherOfChickens (5 September 2017)

why not sound your vet out first? and if you arent comfortable with the reply then ask for another or go somewhere else.
 fwiw, an I've known a lot of vets, I've never met these vets that allegedly keep dogs going against the owners wishes when it comes to something with a poor prognosis or leading to poor quality of life. Conversely They also generally dislike putting a dog to sleep purely on the basis of relatively small amounts of money or if the dog could have a good quality of life at the end of it. 

having a chat about it first could put your mind at rest and take some of the stress away when the time comes. if you live in an area with a good mixed practice I'd start there-they seem to be more pragmatic IME.


----------



## millie99 (5 September 2017)

I had this problem with my 30 &#375;r old horse. The vet &#373;anted to carry on treating her to find out what was wrong, but she was getting worse, so i told him I wanted him to put her down so he did.


----------



## GirlFriday (5 September 2017)

As far as I know you can have your dog put down even if it is young and entirely healthy and happy. Not all vets will want to do it (understandably!) but I think owners have the option.


----------



## rara007 (5 September 2017)

Auslander said:



			As a vet, how do you feel about owners asking what you'd do?
		
Click to expand...

It's a bit awkward as I am in a small animal town based practice but coming from a more 'mixed' background. My own dog had one inconclusive needle biopsy and that was the only form of investigations or treatment he got for his cancer. Had he been castrated and had it removed when it first came up he could have been 'cured' but he was 13 and a previous GA for his teeth knocked the wind from his sails for the best part of 5 days, for me that was enough to let it run until he started to suffer (the slightest bit) and then PTS. So often I'm asked this question when already I wouldn't have gone so far down the treatment/investigations route. In person or having met in person it is easier and in general by the time anyone feels they should ask, the answer is clear. If there has been no treatment and there is a cheap and easy thing (usually steroids, diuretics or pain relief) that might 'quick fix' I will offer a short course of this if the owners want to feel they have 'tried', with them knowing it is not curing the dog just offering some support. Relatively frequently the question is over the phone regarding an inpatient when it is more tricky to judge their reactions- the old dogs do seem to wait until their owners go on holiday to try to die! I don't like it then as it feels too much like playing god, but I will still answer even if it's a bit roundabout. From my POV it seems that these vets that keep animals going far too long are few and far between yet owners who are in complete denial that their dog is on a one way street and suffering are much more common- almost a daily occurrence. These owners never ask though and are not happy when you suggest the quality of life is compromised and always will be!


----------



## handbagsandhay (5 September 2017)

Thank you for the reassurance all.  I should state it is nothing to do with £££  I have  a savings account which I have and would utilise to help the dogs if it was the right thing.  I am just know what I would and wouldn't put my boy through for the sake of keeping him here just for me.  Yes he is only 6 but other health issues mean I would still make that decision for him if it came to it

Thank you so much for all your help!


----------



## ester (5 September 2017)

I do think vets have to offer options, and sometimes that can seem like they are pushing those when sometimes that is not their intention (and they can't really push the PTS unless clearly currently suffering) but that they just don't always communicate that they are just options to owners. (not saying this is the case for you though handbags.)


----------



## CorvusCorax (5 September 2017)

We've been in the position twice (over several decades) where we've had to take adult, **physically** healthy dogs to the vet who we would have considered it irresponsible at best, dangerous at worst, to try and rehome, and were worried about how and where they could end up.
Both vets were understanding and acted as requested. 
With old and infirm dogs and those with no good outlook, I'd expect the same sort of support from a veterinarian.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (5 September 2017)

handbagsandhay said:



			Thank you for the reassurance all.  I should state it is nothing to do with £££  I have  a savings account which I have and would utilise to help the dogs if it was the right thing.
		
Click to expand...

I didnt think you were for a moment, but it's not uncommon. I've also never known a vet question PTS for aggression either, think they are on the receiving end too often!


----------



## Janah (6 September 2017)

I had a collie and she was having real trouble breathing to the extent she staggered out to wee.  The vet prescribed tablets for her which i had a problem getting down her because of her breathing.We persisted for a week.  My OH and I took her to the vets and asked for her to be PTS  which they did. She was the dog of a lifetime and a very hard decision to make.  I had been sleeping downstairs with her and never left her alone. To see her struggle up to go outside was absolutely heartbreaking. The best decision we made, for her.  The vet felt we could have got on top of it but at 13 1/2 yrs old I didn't think so.


----------



## Slightlyconfused (7 September 2017)

handbagsandhay said:



			Thanks for all your replies. I am probably worrying over nothing and I am hoping it won't come to this but my dog is still relatively young and although currently still healthy, other health conditions he suffers from mean that I feel if things were to go downhill and/or it came down to major treatment I'd be swayed towards letting him go though I just wondered with him being younger if a vet would be reluctant

And no of course I would never have a dog suffering.  maybe it was poorly worded but thankfully most people could see that I wasn't suggesting the dog would be suffering before I would make the decision but yes when/if he deteriorates I will make a decision
		
Click to expand...

I had a three year old collie pts. One vet at the practice wanted him on crate rest and more pain killers the other agreed that waa not in his best intereat and he was pts. 

Its not about age but quality of life. 

My 11 year old colle is getting a bit wobbly getting up and walks on his claws for a bit. Took him to the vets and he has delayed reactions in all four paws on the nuckle test which basicly means neuro. 

He is 11, still happy to go out for a run, eating, loving life and people often mistake him for a four year old so he is just being monitered untill he gives us the go ahead to say good bye which is what the vet suggested and we agreed.


----------

