# Would you bankrupt yourself for a horse's vet fees?



## Alfiem (5 November 2011)

This post isn't meant to start an argument  I know most people have their horses insured for vets fees and this post is not to have a dig saying people shouldn't have horses if they can't afford an 8k vet bill. And again if you would be happy to sell your  home to pay for vet bills that's your decision and I respect that.

Personally I wouldn't. I love horses but they are not the be all and end all of my life, and personally I would have to call it a day if the insurance money runs out and we are no further forward.  I also would refuse to pay £160 a month for medication for the retired horse, this may seem very callous but that money pays for my other 2 useful horses, and the retired horse would be PTS with dignity and respect, not passed on.

I also think that keeping a roof over my head is pretty important too, and couldn't justify losing my home to pay for vet fees, nor would I run up more than I could afford to pay back on loans or credit cards.

I have insurance for my vet's fees, the pet plan hi XS policy upto 3k - if mine went lame once the money ran out he would be chucked out for a year, and if still not right PTS as I think then it will never be right. And I would never put any of mine through colic surgery.

Anyone have any views on this?


----------



## TicTac (5 November 2011)

No I wouldn't.


----------



## Shilasdair (5 November 2011)

Alfiem said:



			This post isn't meant to start an argument  I know most people have their horses insured for vets fees and this post is not to have a dig saying people shouldn't have horses if they can't afford an 8k vet bill. And again if you would be happy to sell your  home to pay for vet bills that's your decision and I respect that.

Personally I wouldn't. I love horses but they are not the be all and end all of my life, and personally I would have to call it a day if the insurance money runs out and we are no further forward.  I also would refuse to pay £160 a month for medication for the retired horse, this may seem very callous but that money pays for my other 2 useful horses, and the retired horse would be PTS with dignity and respect, not passed on.

I also think that keeping a roof over my head is pretty important too, and couldn't justify losing my home to pay for vet fees, nor would I run up more than I could afford to pay back on loans or credit cards.

I have insurance for my vet's fees, the pet plan hi XS policy upto 3k - if mine went lame once the money ran out he would be chucked out for a year, and if still not right PTS as I think then it will never be right. And I would never put any of mine through colic surgery.

Anyone have any views on this?
		
Click to expand...

I suppose it all depends how selfish you are in life, and how much time you spend thinking about 'me, me, me'.
I have three horses, uninsured.
I have put two of mine through colic surgery.
I am paying for drugs each month to keep two of mine alive (one on Preds, one on Prascend).
But you know, all life is precious, and to me horses are not just vehicles for me to ride for my own selfish enjoyment.
S


----------



## Meandtheboys (5 November 2011)

I think every ones personal circumstances will definitly be a key to any decision, but me and OH have always said if its ' life saving' and our dogs / horses would still have some sort of value in life then we would remorgage the house, if prognosis was poor and and reduce value of life then whether it be money or not we would be brave enough to make the right call.


----------



## Capriole (5 November 2011)

literally bankrupt myself, lose the house? 

No.

Ive got other people to think of as well its not just me to think of.


----------



## Dancing Queen (5 November 2011)

probably.


----------



## jhoward (5 November 2011)

it would depend on the horse. 

i had a mare that had a tendon injury, she did have insurance but bills exceeded this, i never had planned to keep her but i loved that horse, and my view was if she coudl still jump wed take the chance. she came good.. and is alive and kicking. 

my coloured horse i have now id move hell and high water for he is totally the love of life. 

i bought a horse from the sales, he came in lame gave himself colic, after the 3rd visit from the vet in 10 hours i siad this is it. i will do everything for him but his next call out would be pts. (just to add after the colic i had the lamness investigated total bill 800 quid )

to put it in to perspective .. i can be a bit of a hard cow, but ive been paying my vets 80 quid a month for over 4 years.. thats a lot of vets bill! 

i could at the end of the day never let a horse suffer in anyway.


----------



## SpruceRI (5 November 2011)

I've got myself into serious debt before when my horses' treatment costs went beyond the insurance cover.... but back then I lived with my parents so my outgoing costs were a lot lower and I had a guaranteed roof over my head.

But now?  No I wouldn't.  

I have no one to fall back on.


----------



## Shilasdair (5 November 2011)

jhoward said:



			i could at the end of the day never let a horse suffer in anyway.
		
Click to expand...

Agree, LS, and unlike the OP, if my horse was lame (aka in pain) I couldn't just chuck it out for a year once the money ran out.  
I'd feel a responsibility to either treat the injury or if I was really skint, to PTS.
S


----------



## brown tack (5 November 2011)

I would give up my 'extras' ie sky, and cut back, prob sell my car and down size. I don't own my own house so can't sell that but don't think I would, as it would of taken me years to get to one in the first place. But I would manage the best I could to provide for the horse, and I have done in the past. 

But I've got a son so I can only give so much. I have insurance, highest level of vet fees on the policy I can have. But I would go down the turn way route if possible and see how that went. 

But I wouldn't let the horse suffer to keep it with me


----------



## whizzer (5 November 2011)

I've not bankrupt myself but my insurance ran out 3k ago & horse poss needs another 3k surgery soon-ish. I always said I would never go above my insurance & thought people that did were foolish! However once you're in that situation it's often a different matter & you think differently. The issues the horse has aren't just something that can be solved by retiring the horse & turning it away & I wasn't prepared to lose him without trying. I've decided if appropriate I'll let them have another crack at surgery but then enoughs enough if that doesn't work.


----------



## superted1989 (5 November 2011)

I have a family to think of so wouldn't be able to put them all out on the streets.
My old sec d was my horse of a lifetime.  He went crippled lame very suddenly, unisured for vet bills owing to his age.  I could have attempted some treatment, but the success rate would have been about 20%, the bill would have been around £500, and the most it would have lasted would have been 3 months.  The poor lad was in so much pain it was kinder to PTS.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (5 November 2011)

Tricky one. Do you carry on with treatment hoping against hope that the horse comes sound eventually or do you give up then wonder if it was the right thing to do forever after? 

When I reached my insurance limit with my Hanoverian X, I sat and thought about the projected further £8000 cost and decided against it. I have a husband who would have been affected by the debt and the prior condition/issues would have affected his future, probably adversely, on top of which, his recovery was very doubtful.

 It broke my heart to tell the vet to PTS, but I still think it was the right decision.

Not the same, but I happily forked out £6000 for the dog and would have paid anything had it saved him and with my current horse I would probably do the same.


----------



## Charem (5 November 2011)

If there was a good chance of my boy becoming sound enough to be comfortable out in a paddock for the rest of his days then yes I would.

I got him as a just broken 4 yr old and he has taken me beyond what I ever thought imaginable. The wear and tear on his legs is because of me, lets be honest if we all kept our horses in a paddock and didn't do anything with them the chances of them breaking down would be far lower. I did everything I could to reduce the effects of wear and tear but I also have to accept the concequences of going out eventing/showjumping/hunting ect. I've always said that I will live in a carboard box before my horse/dog goes without. But then I don't have any dependables and my horse and dog are my life.


----------



## Shilasdair (5 November 2011)

I think we have to be careful not to confuse the financial aspects of the OP's post, with the consideration of the horse's best interests.
Sometimes the two coincide - it is better for the horse to be PTS, as well as being the cheaper option.  
I think we should always try, within the limits of our resources, to do the best for our animals, but this doesn't always mean further treatment.
I don't regret colic surgery on either of my two - but doubt if I'd ever do two colic surgeries on the same horse - purely because statistically their chances of survival are so reduced.
S


----------



## Cinnamontoast (5 November 2011)

An impaction colic case died today because the owner's just wouldn't (not couldn't) pay for surgery, which may well have saved the horse. An awful lot of money had been spent training this horse for a professional job, more than colic surgery would have cost. Surgery would've been cheaper than training a replacement. 

Should the owners have just paid? Or were they thinking the horse would never perform as well after colic surgery and best to let it die? Why not actually PTS rather than legit just die? It would have been cheaper to PTS immediately rather than pay for painkillers etc.


----------



## Gingerwitch (5 November 2011)

Sorry - but to me you are cold and callous - its not something you can plan for and tbh 3k in vets bills and thats the end of the line - you cant buy a holiday anywhere decent for 3k in this day and age..... 3k and that's all your prepared to push yourself too - suggest you give up the horses and keep goldfish - you can always scooptthem up in a net and wack em on concrete to put them out of their misery.


----------



## FrecklesMum (5 November 2011)

Shilasdair said:



			I suppose it all depends how selfish you are in life, and how much time you spend thinking about 'me, me, me'.
I have three horses, uninsured.
I have put two of mine through colic surgery.
I am paying for drugs each month to keep two of mine alive (one on Preds, one on Prascend).
But you know, all life is precious, and to me horses are not just vehicles for me to ride for my own selfish enjoyment.
S 

Click to expand...

In my 4 years of being on the horse and hound forum i have not come accross such a self praising and insulting post. 

The fact that some people make the decison not to keep a horse alive which had no working use should never be criticised, eually those who are in a position to do so should always question weather it is the right thing in the long term - for  some horses it is, for other horses its not. 

However, for someone to suggest that on the whole people have put horses down because of finance and not long term welfare is just bloody ignorant and rude.


----------



## Shilasdair (5 November 2011)

cinammontoast said:



			An impaction colic case died today because the owner's just wouldn't (not couldn't) pay for surgery, which may well have saved the horse. An awful lot of money had been spent training this horse for a professional job, more than colic surgery would have cost. Surgery would've been cheaper than training a replacement. 

Should the owners have just paid? Or were they thinking the horse would never perform as well after colic surgery and best to let it die? Why not actually PTS rather than legit just die? It would have been cheaper to PTS immediately rather than pay for painkillers etc.
		
Click to expand...

That seems an odd decision both financially and in terms of future horse use - the science suggests that horses can return to normal function after colic surgery (after the initial recovery period which isn't actually that long).
But maybe they just didn't have the money.
S


----------



## Alfiem (5 November 2011)

Shilasdair said:



			But you know, all life is precious, and to me horses are not just vehicles for me to ride for my own selfish enjoyment.
S 

Click to expand...

You have you broomstick for that Shils!


----------



## Cinnamontoast (5 November 2011)

But it's true. If you can't afford a sudden £3000 bill and you prefer to PTS (on top of insurance) rather than let the horse suffer or in the case of an old horse, perhaps be buted up so it looks ok to ride and then sold on to God knows what, should you be crucified or praised?


----------



## Shilasdair (5 November 2011)

Alfiem said:



			You have you broomstick for that Shils!

Click to expand...

Too dangerous tonight - I was frightened I'd get a spark up my bloomers!
S


----------



## Alfiem (5 November 2011)

Shilasdair said:



			Agree, LS, and unlike the OP, if my horse was lame (aka in pain) I couldn't just chuck it out for a year once the money ran out.  
I'd feel a responsibility to either treat the injury or if I was really skint, to PTS.
S 

Click to expand...

I think I put that wrong - I would never chuck a horse out that was in pain per se, Although I do have an arthritic field ornament who has danilon for comfort! 

What I mean is an injury that needed time, but the horse was paddock sound - if it was in pain it would be PTS 

Does that even make sense???


----------



## FrecklesMum (5 November 2011)

cinammontoast said:



			But it's true. If you can't afford a sudden £3000 bill and you prefer to PTS (on top of insurance) rather than let the horse suffer or in the case of an old horse, perhaps be buted up so it looks ok to ride and then sold on to God knows what, should you be crucified or praised?
		
Click to expand...

Praised. There are a lot of owners who would stuff it full of bute and then sell it to a dealer. I know I ended up with a horse from a dealers who Rossdales vets said should have been PTS long ago but despite a decent competion history someone decided that instead of PTS a good long term servant, they would flog it to a rough dealers yard. As far as i am concerned they should be PTS!


----------



## Honey08 (5 November 2011)

I knew what you meant all along.  It was quite the norm a decade ago, before vets saw pound signs for scanning and nerve blocking etc.  And quite often it worked too.


----------



## maxapple (5 November 2011)

If you asked me a year ago if I would treat my 18 yr old TB if he had a life threatning injury, I probably would have said no. 

But then he did have one (he broke his leg). I had him on full livery at the time and my other one on diy - and although he was insured, had the cost of livery at the vets to pay ontop. Without my amazing friend (his other mum) I would not have been able to cope with the costs alone - but she paid his livery at the vets for the whole 10 weeks he was there, meaning I was able to cover the cost of 2 livery fees back at the yard, and my other horses day to day costs etc.  

Its almost been a year and he is now sound enough to be out in his field like a normal horse and be so happy and content again. We are able to hack out in walk, but I don't know that he will ever be able to do any more than that. 

I can't even start to add up how much it has cost us over the year to get him sound. His vet fees were covered, minus a £500 excess and minus call out fees when he came home £100 a go, so I must have paid £1000+ in vet bills. Add on all the costs of having a horse on box rest for 6 months, daily petrol costs to go to the vets every night for the 10 weeks he was there, electric fencing needed, bandages, wraps etc etc - between his other mum and me we have spent thousands. 

The problem is you can't forsee all of that at the start and once we knew there was a chance of recovery for his, we both felt we had to give it a shot. 

A year on, much poorer, it has 100% been worth it for our very expensive big pet!!


----------



## Alfiem (5 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			Sorry - but to me you are cold and callous - its not something you can plan for and tbh 3k in vets bills and thats the end of the line - you cant buy a holiday anywhere decent for 3k in this day and age..... 3k and that's all your prepared to push yourself too - suggest you give up the horses and keep goldfish - you can always scooptthem up in a net and wack em on concrete to put them out of their misery.
		
Click to expand...

ERRRR?? what planet exactly? And yes I do keep fish and if you knew anything about them you euthanaise with clove oil dissoloved in water, much more humane than bashing them...As I said this post is for intelligent people to DISCUSS in an adult manner, not rant and rave, Thankyou.


----------



## meandmyself (6 November 2011)

No, I wouldn't.


----------



## Syrah (6 November 2011)

No I wouldn't, I've got 2 small children and they come first above everything and everyone else.


----------



## Circe (6 November 2011)

My old boy was found with an injury in his paddock and I spent several thousand dollars treating it. ( vet & Physio & painkillers ). 
The cost of the treatment meant I had to cost cut in a lot of things, I've had to sell some possessions. In the end we couldn't control his pain & he was pts, the cost was not a factor. 
If he'd lived i would still happily pay for his treatment, as long as he was pain free... I would draw the line at losing the roof over my head though. 
I'm also lucky that I had things I could sell, a credit card & the opportunity to do extra hours at work. 
Kx


----------



## Enfys (6 November 2011)

Short answer, Hell No!

I have a family, what right have I to do that sort of thing to them?


----------



## Enfys (6 November 2011)

Shilasdair said:



			the science suggests that horses can return to normal function after colic surgery (after the initial recovery period which isn't actually that long).

S 

Click to expand...

I had a mare that did endurance, raced, hunted hard and bred four foals in the 12 years she lived after she had colic surgery. Never had another bout of colic in her life - and her op was in 1990.


----------



## teasle (6 November 2011)

What on earth is cruel about turning out a lame horse for a year to see if rest and natrure cure the lameness? I have done exactly that for my horse. The lameness has been investigated, even had an mri and the vet has not found the cause. I see it as giving the horse a chance.There are degrees of lameness and my horse has never been lame in walk, he is not crippled ,and seems to be, at the moment inproving.


----------



## jeeve (6 November 2011)

My animals are well looked after, and mean a lot to me. They are more than mere possessions, however, I am equally capable of making a rational decision as to whether I can afford the treatment or not. If not, even after juggling things for some time down the track, well then  I would make the decision I had to and have the animal put down.

I have a family, a husband, several other horses and so on. I made a decision not to have any more children because I could not support them emotionally or financially, so I have no qualms about making the same decions with respect to an animal.

Every animal I own though is looked after, happy and healthy. We have one old fellow I am wtactching but I think he has a few years in him yet.

I loathe clients that have us do the work and then cannot pay.I would not put some one else in this position.


----------



## skint1 (6 November 2011)

I wouldn't be allowed to lose my house, have a family to consider, but if I could somehow get a line of credit to pay the parts the insurance wouldnt I would. I have/am paying for expensive heartbars for our loan pony who had bad laminitis but my friend and daughter also pitch in, expect eventually will pay for cushings meds too


----------



## jhoward (6 November 2011)

FrecklesMum said:



			Praised. There are a lot of owners who would stuff it full of bute and then sell it to a dealer. I know I ended up with a horse from a dealers who Rossdales vets said should have been PTS long ago but despite a decent competion history someone decided that instead of PTS a good long term servant, they would flog it to a rough dealers yard. As far as i am concerned they should be PTS!
		
Click to expand...

this is why we have vettings/bloods.


----------



## quirky (6 November 2011)

No I wouldn't.

I have a family to think of first and foremost.


----------



## luckyoldme (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			Sorry - but to me you are cold and callous - its not something you can plan for and tbh 3k in vets bills and thats the end of the line - you cant buy a holiday anywhere decent for 3k in this day and age..... 3k and that's all your prepared to push yourself too - suggest you give up the horses and keep goldfish - you can always scooptthem up in a net and wack em on concrete to put them out of their misery.
		
Click to expand...

i too think this is a little bit extreme. There are so many different approaches to ownership and fall outs when they clash. I understand the folk who wouldnt keep anything unable to work on their yard. I also understand those who would shift heaven and earth to preserve a life that others would consider worthless. im more middle of the road... my horse will get a reasonable retirement as long as he is not costing me fortunes in vet bills. Money is an issue for me and I draw the line at operating on a retired horse.


----------



## Gingerwitch (6 November 2011)

Alfie - sorry Miss - did not realise I could not have an opinion that was not the same as yours. Note to self - must shoot a horse as soon as the insurance money runs out.... oh to be one of yours (well not for long ay?) -


----------



## ClassicG&T (6 November 2011)

if the horse was young and have loads of potential and a good outcome then i would do everything i could to pay for the vet bills (if the insurance cost ran out). 

But if the out come was not so could and it was an older horse that would spend the rest of its live on medicine and cost a fortue then no. 

But circumstances change so you can never really be sure what you would or could do


----------



## cc14 (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch I think you have missed the point slightly.  Many people commenting on here have children, husbands, families which often depend on them, and which I am fairly sure come first.  An 8k vetbill can be what some people have to spend in an entire year, and with a family to decide to take out such a large loan or find a way to finance this is would be irresponsible.  Insurance is there to cover the costs because we cannot, and vet bills up in the thousands are usually for serious surgery/treatments.  Personally, if all my available finances were exhausted, I would have no option but to seek an alternative, even if this means PTS.  A horse at the end of the day needs to be thought of as just an animal in certain circumstances, and I think OP has highlighted one of these circumstances.  My horse is my boy, I love him dearly, and to me he is so, so much more than "just an animal".  But, I also have to be realistic and think about my situation.  Sometimes we have to put ourselves first, our loved ones second, and our animals last, unfortunately that is just the way it is.


----------



## nikCscott (6 November 2011)

I adore my horses and they are well insured so hopefully that area is covered but more importantly I have 2 children and they are and always will be my number 1 priority


----------



## Daytona (6 November 2011)

No I would not...!!!


----------



## aintgotnohay (6 November 2011)

no. i would set myself a limit to how much vets bills i would be prepared to pay.if too much i would have the horse put to sleep.ive got other things in my life to consider like keeping roof over my head.i dont do insurance as waste of money in my view-from past experiences.


----------



## reddie (6 November 2011)

I wouldn't bankrupt myself.  I would pursue treatment as necessary and forgo a holiday, luxuries etc in order to give the horse best possble chance of recovery.  I would retire a horse to a field if necessary, but I definitely not bankrupt myself.  I have a famly to think about.  What if you bankrupted yoursef and the horse required further treatment?  I would not leave a horse in pain either


----------



## Niddlynoo (6 November 2011)

No, I wouldn't bankrupt myself, I have children and a husband to consider.
I do know someone who PTS their dressage horse because he wouldn;'t stay sound a enough to compete to the level they wanted. He could of gone on as a hacking horse, but they wouldn't rehome him as they wanted their insurance money to buy anouther horse.
Everbody has a different view, but I didn't agree with this one!


----------



## JenTaz (6 November 2011)

it would depend on the type of treatment needed, as if it was to go over my insurance policy then i'd start to question it, if it was something that he could recover from and go back into work, just hacking and being able to do so without being in pain, then i would give everything up for taz, without a doubt, only thing i wouldnt give up would be my space at uni, everything else would go, he's always been there and has been the best horse i could ask for not to help him if he wouldnt be suffering after treatment isnt fair, however if there was a say 50% or over chance he would suffer after treatement depending on the amount of pain he would get pts if he wouldnt be in alot of pain and could have a year happy retirement thats what i would do


----------



## BonneMaman (6 November 2011)

Shilasdair said:



			I suppose it all depends how selfish you are in life, and how much time you spend thinking about 'me, me, me'.

S 

Click to expand...

For some it is not a matter of me me me - we have families to think of and I would NEVER put their health, safety and roof over their heads before any animal.

You may think I am going a bit too far by stating health and safety but if it came down to staying where I live in a nice area with good schools or throwing that away to live in council accomodation in a rough area and bad schools then, yes, that would include health and safety!!  Of course that is just the roof - what about their lives and their hobbies?  My kids have just as much right to leasure time of their choice as I do.  If you cannot afford to pay large vet fees, get insurance, if you cannot afford insurance - don't get a horse.


----------



## thatsmygirl (6 November 2011)

I also have a young family so there is no way I would risk losing the family home, as much as I love my horses my family must come first. I had to take that decision a year ago when my beloved horse broke her elbow in the field, she was on box rest, getting skinner by the day but the vet say she would pull through and make a companion but ridden days were over!!! I excepted that but when she got a infection in her bone and the costs were rising I made the decision to pts, was I wrong? I wasn't going to risk not being able to pay the bills and feed my young children. I think everybody has to make the decision based on their personal situation but I would never judge anybody for putting the horse down instead off paying large vet bills. They are after all still taking responability in the hardest posable way I feel


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2011)

Shilasdair said:



			I suppose it all depends how selfish you are in life, and how much time you spend thinking about 'me, me, me'.
........
But you know, all life is precious, and to me horses are not just vehicles for me to ride for my own selfish enjoyment.
S 

Click to expand...

There is a strong argument in Psychology that all apparently altruistic behaviour is still motivated by thinking about "me, me, me".

The basis of the argument is that you would not do what you do unless it made you feel good, or at the very least unless you thought it would make you feel worse to do something else.

Those people who keep their horses alive and run up huge debts are doing it because it would make them feel bad not to do that for an animal they love. It is debatable whether they are actually doing it for the animal at all. And it certainly does not give them the justification to imply that those who choose a different path are more selfish than they are.

Or does it?


----------



## Luci07 (6 November 2011)

No I wouldn't. I have only myself to rely on and if I bankrupted myself and lost my home, thats my other horse needing a home plus the 3 dogs. I insure to give me the best options, would certainly go the extra mile but would not take out a huge loan - i.e the £8K which keeps being mentioned. As for my older mare - her vet insurance will only cover her for external injuries at 22. However, being realistic I would never put an old horse through something like colic surgery anyway. 

You cannot preach and be so self righteous as to how people prioritise their lives. You do not understand their committements or background. We all hope to do the best for our horses but each case is different and I would not think poorly of soneone who did not want to committ themselves to a massive debt.


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2011)

cinammontoast said:



			An impaction colic case died today because the owner's just wouldn't (not couldn't) pay for surgery, which may well have saved the horse. An awful lot of money had been spent training this horse for a professional job, more than colic surgery would have cost. Surgery would've been cheaper than training a replacement.
		
Click to expand...

It isn't that simple.

One in five never go home from the hospital. Those owners go home with a bill of thousands of pounds, unless they are insured, and no horse. Of the 4 in 5 that do go home, a number which I cannot currently find but I know is not insignificant, suffer further complications and die. Of the ones that are still alive a year later many are compromised. SOME go back to the full job that they were doing.


edit - best info I can find is from 1991 - "Over the course of several months/years, up to half of colic cases which survive are likely to have mild or severe complications, and a proportion of these will have to be put down."


----------



## rubysmum (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			Sorry - but to me you are cold and callous - its not something you can plan for and tbh 3k in vets bills and thats the end of the line - you cant buy a holiday anywhere decent for 3k in this day and age..... 3k and that's all your prepared to push yourself too - suggest you give up the horses and keep goldfish - you can always scooptthem up in a net and wack em on concrete to put them out of their misery.
		
Click to expand...

3 grand may be the cost of a holiday for some people - as a single parent on a below average salary & with an average mortgage - it is a sum beyond my reach - the only way i could possibly raise it would be to sell my 7 yr old car [ which has to last for ever] &then would be unable to actually travel to work - so hardly a sensible option
my horse is insured for a sensible sum of money for vet care - sadly, if she was to need additional extensive care after that - it would not be possible as that level of debt would impact on other people & that would be simply unfair


----------



## xspiralx (6 November 2011)

No I wouldn't, definitely not.

I don't believe that death is a bad thing to happen to an animal, as long as it is humane.


----------



## Spring Feather (6 November 2011)

This is an interesting topic.  I wonder what the answers would be if we swapped "horse's vet fees" for "your child's life saving medical fees"?  I suspect that the excuses that there are other family members who would lose out if we chose to pay the vet fees thus making us bankrupt would become null and void were it to be our child who needed bankrupt-worthy medical interaction.  This is just a muse btw  

For myself I would not bankrupt myself for a horse's vet fees but I can't see why or how it would be possible to do so.  When it comes to vet fees it depends on which horse has the problem, what the problem is and what the prognosis is likely to be which would determine how far I went with treatment.  I've never pulled out of treatment once I've decided to go for it but I have altered the treatment when it appears there's merit in trying another route. 

I very much value the lives of my animals and I have a high regard for their health and wellbeing so under usual circumstances and providing the prognosis is at least 50% positive I will go ahead with the treatment route which makes most sense to me and pay the vet bills accordingly.


----------



## Gingerwitch (6 November 2011)

A bad kick can run up a vet bill of easily 3k in this day and age - so what would you do then ?


----------



## Jesstickle (6 November 2011)

Spring Feather said:



			This is an interesting topic.  I wonder what the answers would be if we swapped "horse's vet fees" for "your child's life saving medical fees"?  I suspect that the excuses that there are other family members who would lose out if we chose to pay the vet fees thus making us bankrupt would become null and void were it to be our child who needed bankrupt-worthy medical interaction.  This is just a muse btw 

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that is why we have a free at point of care health service though  Because once upon a time people did have to make these decisions about their children and it was deemed an unacceptable choice to have to make!   (I know you know that)

Anywho, would I let myself get into serious financial difficulty for my horses? No, I wouldn't. I have insurance ( both mine are insured up to 5K so not too likely I hope) and I would pay what I could afford on top if I exceeded that but at the point I had run out of insurance and was looking at a further £1000 or more to get them field sound I would have to call it a day. I literally do not have the money so would have to borrow or steal it and I have my OH who rates just as highly as my horses in my life.I wouldn't be willing to compromise his quality of life (more than I already have, we have no holidays and had to downsize the house for the horses already) to chase shadows. 

And Cptrayes, I have always subscribed to the idea that there is really no such thing as an altruistic act. Most 'good deeds' we do are done to make us feel better about ourselves I think.


----------



## Boulty (6 November 2011)

I would never bankrupt myself but if my horse needed treatment above the insurance limit or for one of the many things that are now excluded from my policy (including colic after a few minor episodes that no claim went in for) I would do everything in my power to try and raise the money in some way so long as the prognosis was good (ie that he would at least be pasture sound), although obviously there is a limit to the amount of money I would be able to raise. If it was unlikely that my horse would recover even after expensive treatment  then I would opt to PTS. I also would not mind paying for ongoing treatment so long as the horse's quality of life can be maintained with that treatment. (eg treatment for cushings). I think the age of the horse would also have to come into it. Were my current horse to require colic surgery at his current age (16) then so long as the vet felt there was a reasonable chance of success I would likely go ahead and raise the money in whatever way I could, however if we were talking in 10 years time then in all likelihood I would call it a day as at that age I feel his chances of recovery would be reduced and there would likely be other disease processes going on in his body that needed to be considered (he already has arthritis and vets are dithering about him maybe having the first signs of cushings) and thus it would probably be unfair to put him through surgery at that age. So I guess my answer is that yes I would be prepared to get into debt but I would never bankrupt myself and I would only go ahead with costly treatment if I felt it in the best interests of the horse to do so.


----------



## Spring Feather (6 November 2011)

jesstickle said:



			I'm pretty sure that is why we have a free at point of care health service though 

Click to expand...

Ah sorry I should have been more specific.  I'm talking about having a child with an illness where no treatment is available in the UK thus having to take the child to somewhere like the USA to be treated.


----------



## Lolo (6 November 2011)

Horses go lame for the same reason we limp- because something hurts!! So turning a lame horse out, unless it was ok on bute and advised by the vet or it is mechanical lameness does seem mildly cruel. So I wouldn't do that.


----------



## tristar (6 November 2011)

i do think it depends on the circumstances, but i really admire people who go all out for their animals, i don't mean keeping them alive for the sake of it but when there is a fair chance, i call it unselfishness, generosity and going all the way, so if it did cost you may be it will come back to you later, life's funny like that in my opinion.

not suggesting that others do this but i've been there more than once i call it jumping off the cliff and learning to fly.


----------



## EllenJay (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			A bad kick can run up a vet bill of easily 3k in this day and age - so what would you do then ?
		
Click to expand...

What would YOU do if the bill was £15k, £25k, £30k - where do you draw a line?  For some £3k is a lot of money and would cause a lot of hardship for their familes, for you maybe £3k is affordable, but think of a sum of money that isn't affordable and then think what would you do?


----------



## lula (6 November 2011)

perhaps the focus should also be on the Vets who are obviously in business to make a profit but rack up such crippling charges as another poster pointed out - nerve blocking/thermal imaging/x raying/call out fees have risen exponentially in the last decade as they are such money spinners for the Practise. The average horse owner insured or not is struggling to afford them.

 A huge amount of horses are pts as the owner simply cant afford to financially bankrupt themselves to pay for treatment running up to 10k + for some surgeries and vets have to take part of the responsibility for this rather than simply the owner whose forced into making such a stark choice for their much loved animal.


----------



## FrecklesMum (6 November 2011)

jhoward said:



			this is why we have vettings/bloods.
		
Click to expand...

The horse passed a 5* vetting and by the time I went to get the bloods tested the vet had been struck off for malpractice. If you look at my posting history you will see that I successfully sued the dealer and won. 

Please check your facts before you patronise people.


----------



## Gingerwitch (6 November 2011)

So you have a horse insured - it goes lame on one of its legs - this leg is then excluded - so it goes lame again on this leg  and you will then pts - because you wont pay ?

What will you do then - go and buy another one - and repeat the same process?


----------



## lula (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			So you have a horse insured - it goes lame on one of its legs - this leg is then excluded - so it goes lame again on this leg  and you will then pts - because you wont pay ?

What will you do then - go and buy another one - and repeat the same process?
		
Click to expand...

Gingerwitch, not everyone has multiple thousands set aside for vet treatments, thats why we insure our animals and if we're ever in the unfortunate situation of having to pay a substantial cost ourselves other areas of our lives and our dependents have to go wirhout so we can pay these. .

Seriously though, if what you're saying is because of this we shouldnt be owning horses in the first place or that people should sell their houses and make themselves homeless before they say enough is enough, that they're cruel and heartless then you are otherwise a very rich lady and live in a fluffy bubble cushioned with pound notes or you are being utterly unrealistic to the real world we live in.

NO ONE make the decision to pts unless all avenues of funds to pay for the necessary veterinary treatment has been exhausted and it is not up to you to tell them where they should draw the line for their personal circumstances or frankly judge them for it.


----------



## Sophstar (6 November 2011)

No for definite. Just by coincedence, our yard had a vet visit last week and even he admitted that the number of horses being PTS is rising considerably because their owners cannot afford to treat them for ongoing difficulties such as arthritis and laminitis. My friend's jaw dropped to the floor and was utterly horrified, however this has always been my opinion. If the owner cannot afford to keep their horse happy, comfortable and pain free then out of respect a horse should be PTS. 

One of my ponies has just been diagnosed with cushings, and yes I shall be paying for his meds to keep him healthy and I'm sure this will add £300 + on to his yearly costs, but as soon as he requires more and more medication to keep his levels normals and it costs too much for me, then he shall be PTS, with me knowing he was happy and healthy to the day he went. My other pony has just been diagnosed with bone spavins and despite numerous people saying 'this isn't the end of the world,' I am not willing to pump painkillers into him daily just so he is field sound. He has gone from slightly sore to 4/10ths lame within 4 weeks and at 19, the vet agrees (and my bank balance) that surgery is not an option. I do not have the finances to inject his joints, on the knowing they might not work or they work but it will have to be a regular thing. Nor do I have the finances to keep him as a field ornament, knowing he is pain without painkillers and in severe discomfort with allergies through the summer. People should respect that some owners do not have the money to maintain ongoing illnesses/diseases and before their horse gets to the point of being in continuous pain the owner has taken an even braver decision in them being PTS. Neither of my oldies are insured and my vet knows this and is giving me every option I may be able to afford. This doesn't make me a bad owner. My little one is semi retired and my cob has an easy life as a happy hacker and they mean the world to me but I have to look at it realistically and not fork out for every vet bill that rolls in just so I gain a sense of self achievement in that I've kept them going a little longer.


----------



## Gingerwitch (6 November 2011)

No i dont live in a "fuffy bubble" padded with wads of notes BUT i will move heaven and earth and get a 2nd job, go without if neccesary to pay for an animal that is part of my FAMILY.

Ok - would you have a horse pts because the insurance would not finance its treatment and then go out and buy another one?


----------



## pedilia (6 November 2011)

My views have changed considerably over the last 2 years, I have had to have 3 horses PTS during that time and have just had to retire a fourth at the age of 9.
All of the ones I had PTS I had spent literally thosounds trying to get them right (only one was insured) there was no more that could be done and I was left with no option+.

In answer to OPs question, no I wouldn't myself, I have four children and as important as my horses are, a roof over my childrens head is more important.

We have spent between 15-18k in the last 2 years trying to mend horses (just vets, physio, saddles, remedial shoeing) and I have to say that process has hardened me, the emotional turmoil is hard enough but I am not prepared to keep throwing money, if it happens again, I would make the decision to PTS far quicker, there are far worse fates for a horse than being PTS.


----------



## Ibblebibble (6 November 2011)

No i would not bankrupt myself for a horse or any other animal, it would be rather foolish for a start as a horse is considered an asset and could be taken from you by the receivers to be sold to help pay off your debt! 
Anyone who has faced crippling debt and been through bankruptcy would know how utterly soul destroying it is and would not willingly put themselves and close ones through it, and yes i do speak from experience
 By taking ownership of my horses i have committed myself to providing for them to the best of my ability and that includes financially, and because i am not a millionaire there are limits to my finances, now i'm not going to put a figure on it because it's no one elses' business! Of course i would do my utmost for them but there are so many factors that would have to be taken into account, the age of the horse and it's long term prognosis for a start. one thing is for sure though, i would not let my heart rule my head.


----------



## xspiralx (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			No i dont live in a "fuffy bubble" padded with wads of notes BUT i will move heaven and earth and get a 2nd job, go without if neccesary to pay for an animal that is part of my FAMILY.

Ok - would you have a horse pts because the insurance would not finance its treatment and then go out and buy another one?
		
Click to expand...

Yes I would.

What you need to understand is that for you, your horse may be part of your family.

But other people have horses for a purpose. It doesn't mean that they don't love them or treat them well - but simply that they have a different outlook.

Being PTS is not the worst thing that can happen to a horse.


----------



## Honey08 (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			No i dont live in a "fuffy bubble" padded with wads of notes BUT i will move heaven and earth and get a 2nd job, go without if neccesary to pay for an animal that is part of my FAMILY.

Ok - would you have a horse pts because the insurance would not finance its treatment and then go out and buy another one?
		
Click to expand...

If I couldn't claim and I couldn't afford to pay myself of course I would PTS and if I managed to save up again then yes, of course I'd buy another later!  What would you expect people to do, sit around for the rest of their lives in a sea of remorse!

Nobody really knows what they would do until they are in the awful situation, and my heart goes out to anyone who has been.  Gingerwitch your posts must be making them feel awful.  

So you don't live in a money filled bubble, but you are possibly living in a naive bubble.  Perhaps you're lucky that life hasn't sent you any curved balls yet.  Its easy to say that you'd get a second job - lots of people are struggling to find any work at all at the moment..


----------



## hairycob (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch - do you have any human dependants - kids or maybe elderly parents who rely on you for a roof over their heads? Because most of us on this forum do & we will always place their needs above an animal.
Do you have any responsibilites other than your horses? You don't sound like you do.
Do you have to provide a roof over your own head or can you run back to Mummy & Daddy if it all goes wrong. Because I can assure you that the vast majority of us cannot and I doubt our horses would be too impressed if we moved into the stable with them - though how a bankrupt would pay livery bills I don't know.
You give the impression that you are very young, very naive & very,very inexperienced in the hard knocks that life can dish out. Lucky you, but don't ever feel that your rose tinted view of life is the only valid one.


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			i will move heaven and earth and get a 2nd job, go without if neccesary to pay for an animal that is part of my FAMILY.
		
Click to expand...

I love my horses but they aren't part of my family. I can't replace my Dad, but in over thirty years of horse ownership I've had to replace quite a few horses. It does not compare.

Gingerwitch you and other people are writing as if it is a simple matter of "spend £x thousands and your horse will live, even if as a paddock ornament". It's not that simple. Very often, people are spending £x thousands and still ending up with an empty stable. At some point in time you have to say "enough is enough, I can afford/justify no more". Who are you, or anyone, to tell an owner where that point is?


----------



## Lennyfan (6 November 2011)

Yes, every day and twice on Fridays!


----------



## Tickles (6 November 2011)

Precisely why I share instead of owning. There are plenty of wealthier people than me who can afford to support their horse(s) through thick and thin. But don;t necessarily have the time to care for and ride them every day.

I own what I can afford to support (1k down on small fluffy dentistry in the last couple of months...) and I share what I cannot.

So, I for one am happy to have a go at any horse owner who takes on an animal without a good degree of certainty of being able to afford an 8k vet's bill.

I wouldn't bankrupt myself because I won't own until I can afford to.


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2011)

Tickles said:



			So, I for one am happy to have a go at any horse owner who takes on an animal without a good degree of certainty of being able to afford an 8k vet's bill.
		
Click to expand...

Have  go at me then. I have a Shetland as a pet and he cost me a few quid. I have absolutely no intention ever of spending £8,000 on veterinary treatment to keep him alive when there are ponies like him going through the sales for £10 and ending up as meat. Faced with a bill of £8000 to keep him alive, I will let him go, cry, and buy another so it won't go in a tin.

What is your problem with that?


----------



## lula (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			No i dont live in a "fuffy bubble" padded with wads of notes BUT i will move heaven and earth and get a 2nd job, go without if neccesary to pay for an animal that is part of my FAMILY.

Ok - would you have a horse pts because the insurance would not finance its treatment and then go out and buy another one?
		
Click to expand...

yes agreed Gingerwitch, but what we're talking about here is when the second job/selling valuables/loans/credit has all been done and the next step is bankrupcy or selling your house to afford treatment.

Perhaps im wrong, but thats what i took the OP to be asking here..would you bankrupt yourself for your horse.
Ideally, we'd all LIKE to go to any length but in real life, children, livelihoods dictate that we CANT always do this.

As i said before however, i do think vets have to take a large responsibility for their fees in chasing profits too and the decisions horse owners are being forced into to terminate treatment as the expense is simply too exorbitant to continue.

would i pts if the insurance would not cover treatment and go out and buy another>? No. If i had the money for the second horse that money would be paying the vets fees as most people on this thread's im sure, would.


----------



## Holly Hocks (6 November 2011)

Shilasdair said:



			I suppose it all depends how selfish you are in life, and how much time you spend thinking about 'me, me, me'.
I have three horses, uninsured.
I have put two of mine through colic surgery.
I am paying for drugs each month to keep two of mine alive (one on Preds, one on Prascend).
But you know, all life is precious, and to me horses are not just vehicles for me to ride for my own selfish enjoyment.
S 

Click to expand...

I totally agree with Shils on this one.  I couldn't have put in in words any better.


----------



## quirky (6 November 2011)

Tickles said:



			So, I for one am happy to have a go at any horse owner who takes on an animal without a good degree of certainty of being able to afford an 8k vet's bill.
		
Click to expand...

I think you may have a queue of people to 'have a go at'.
My horse is uninsured for vets fees because most of her is exempt at the young age of 6 .
I paid not a lot of money for her and 3 times that amount has come from insurance on vet fees.
Sad to say, if something major happens to her, she'll be gone. I could afford to treat her to a certain extent but there is little point in throwing good money after bad .


----------



## lula (6 November 2011)

Tickles said:



			So, I for one am happy to have a go at any horse owner who takes on an animal without a good degree of certainty of being able to afford an 8k vet's bill.
		
Click to expand...

wow. the view must be dizzy making so far up on your moral high ground.


----------



## Jesstickle (6 November 2011)

quirky said:



			I think you may have a queue of people to 'have a go at'.
My horse is uninsured for vets fees because most of her is exempt at the young age of 6 .
I paid not a lot of money for her and 3 times that amount has come from insurance on vet fees.
Sad to say, if something major happens to her, she'll be gone. I could afford to treat her to a certain extent but there is little point in throwing good money after bad .
		
Click to expand...

Same I'm afraid. Nits was £800 and she's had over £3k spent on her this year. Things which are covered by insurance aren't a problem but her leg will be excluded from April I'm sure and if it needs another £3k spending on that then she's for it really. I am very, very fond of her but I can't magic money from thin air!


----------



## Jazzy B (6 November 2011)

not been on this forum for long but wow don't some of you get nasty! 

I'm on my own and have a child and have two horses and no as much as love my horses, no I wouldn't bankrupt myself.  My old pony is 25 now and owes me nothing if she were to get sick or lame, she would be PTS.  She's a very proud pony and deserves dignity to the end!  My other horse, he has insurance for the maximum vets fees and quite frankly if he went over that limit, I would have to question what quality of life he would have.


----------



## Alfiem (6 November 2011)

OH GROW UP please - you are the one who has a problem with other people's opinions, And it's MRS actually.


----------



## wattamus (6 November 2011)

My horse has just reached her 5K limit on vets fees for ringbone and there is talk that she may have to have another £2500 operation to remove the implants. Hopefullt this will not have to happen. 
Even worse, she may have cushings so may need tablets costing £150 per month. To me she is worth it, every penny. Once she's come off box rest she should be able to live a long and full life  (as long as she doen't have cushings) and i would never throw a good, happy life away  
i wouldn't literally bankrupt myself over an illness but id push myself very close to it


----------



## Alfiem (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			So you have a horse insured - it goes lame on one of its legs - this leg is then excluded - so it goes lame again on this leg  and you will then pts - because you wont pay ?

What will you do then - go and buy another one - and repeat the same process?
		
Click to expand...

Yep - you have the idea, BUT it depends what the lameness was/is. As I have said before, I have a retired paddock ornament who is happy and soundish, not in pain - you can have my vet's number if you wish to discuss the matter with him, if I were "cold and callous" I would have had her shot years ago!! so work that one out....

I am actually getting RID of my insurance and just keeping 3rd party cover, I know what I'm prepared to spend on a vet bill for a condition and that's MY business and no one else's, I would never see and animal suffer and if PTS were the best option then it would be done.

My old TB had a serious cut, he wasn't insured the bill was £700 - I paid it no probs, he never had another problem after that.

I think vet's attitudes to insurance are "interesting" if they know your NOT insured they are far more "sensible" in treatment than if they know you are they rack up a bill as long as your arm in a very short time indeed, it's easy money really and all of us are now paying ridiculous premiums as a result.

I think my "problem" is that I come from a farming background animals are only treated if financially viable, and my horses are not really pets and certainly not my family.


----------



## Alec Swan (6 November 2011)

No,  I wouldn't.  I'd consider the cost of the treatment,  the chance of a full recovery,  and the value of the horse.  Then I'd make a decision.

Alec.


----------



## Spring Feather (6 November 2011)

Alfie, re the insurance thing.  As long as I can remember it's always been the case that cost of treatment is significantly less when the vet knows you are paying cash rather than them having to deal with insurance companies.  I haven't insured my horses for vet fees for a very long time and I've no doubt I've saved much money over the years because of it.


----------



## The Fuzzy Furry (6 November 2011)

Alec Swan said:



			No,  I wouldn't.  I'd consider the cost of the treatment,  the chance of a full recovery,  and the value of the horse.  Then I'd make a decision.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Same as ^

I say to the lady who cares for mine when I'm away - its quality of life that concerns me most.

My vet practice (and horse-care chum) has it noted that old fuzzy is to NOT leave the yard under any circumstances unless has been PTS. This has been discussed at length & all agreeable.

Anything else I own is weighed up on merits of what Alec says above.

I think thats also what most people on here are saying, with differing budgets too, with only a few going the bankrupt route.


----------



## Alfiem (6 November 2011)

Gingerwitch said:



			A bad kick can run up a vet bill of easily 3k in this day and age - so what would you do then ?
		
Click to expand...

Poor prognosis of return to work = PTS

Good prognosis = 3k insurance + credit card if needed.


----------



## Alfiem (6 November 2011)

Spring Feather said:



			Alfie, re the insurance thing.  As long as I can remember it's always been the case that cost of treatment is significantly less when the vet knows you are paying cash rather than them having to deal with insurance companies.  I haven't insured my horses for vet fees for a very long time and I've no doubt I've saved much money over the years because of it.
		
Click to expand...

That's the conclusion I have come to. Over the years I have spent around 10k in premiums, and only claimed around 3.5k in vets fees over several horses. I would be alot better off now with that in the bank! I will be putting the "premium" in another account and using that if needed for the unexpected.


----------



## Shilasdair (6 November 2011)

cptrayes said:



			It isn't that simple.

One in five never go home from the hospital. Those owners go home with a bill of thousands of pounds, unless they are insured, and no horse. Of the 4 in 5 that do go home, a number which I cannot currently find but I know is not insignificant, suffer further complications and die. Of the ones that are still alive a year later many are compromised. SOME go back to the full job that they were doing.


edit - best info I can find is from 1991 - "Over the course of several months/years, up to half of colic cases which survive are likely to have mild or severe complications, and a proportion of these will have to be put down."
		
Click to expand...

You really must learn more effective research methods, cptrayes.  
http://www.liv.ac.uk/equinecolic/post_operative_survival.htm

ETA: I think the key point when contemplating colic surgery, is that you don't have time to think about it or 'wait and see' when your horse is colicking - you must act quickly either to PTS or to move the horse to a clinic for operation.
S


----------



## dressagelove (6 November 2011)

cptrayes said:



			I love my horses but they aren't part of my family. I can't replace my Dad, but in over thirty years of horse ownership I've had to replace quite a few horses. It does not compare.

Gingerwitch you and other people are writing as if it is a simple matter of "spend £x thousands and your horse will live, even if as a paddock ornament". It's not that simple. Very often, people are spending £x thousands and still ending up with an empty stable. At some point in time you have to say "enough is enough, I can afford/justify no more". Who are you, or anyone, to tell an owner where that point is?
		
Click to expand...

this^^^ completely. I also adore my horses, of course I do, otherwise why would you have them. But, they are not the be all and end all. Anyone who says so is not living in the real world I'm afraid. x


----------



## Tnavas (6 November 2011)

I think there is a point where you have to be realistic.

If the final outcome was to have a sound horse, able to be worked and not require long term pain relief then I would be prepared to go to a reasonable expense. 

I am not ever prepared to fund a paddock ornament or a horse requiring long term treatment for pain relief.

I love my horses and respect them too, I would rather they be PTS than to risk them being in long term discomfort.


----------



## phantomhorse (6 November 2011)

Jiggle said:



			literally bankrupt myself, lose the house? 

No.

Ive got other people to think of as well its not just me to think of.
		
Click to expand...

This.


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2011)

Shilasdair said:



			You really must learn more effective research methods, cptrayes.  
http://www.liv.ac.uk/equinecolic/post_operative_survival.htm

ETA: I think the key point when contemplating colic surgery, is that you don't have time to think about it or 'wait and see' when your horse is colicking - you must act quickly either to PTS or to move the horse to a clinic for operation.
S 

Click to expand...

Thanks Shils, survival rates are as bad as I thought they were. 23% dead within a week. Over 1/3 dead within a year, over half dead within 3 years, with further complications in the meantime causing the early death.

I absolutely agree with your last paragraph and would urge everyone to decide NOW what they will do if their horse gets a colic which will kill the horse if it is not operated on, so they are not bounced into a decision, either way, that they later regret.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (6 November 2011)

cptrayes said:



			I love my horses but they aren't part of my family. I can't replace my Dad, but in over thirty years of horse ownership I've had to replace quite a few horses. It does not compare.

Gingerwitch you and other people are writing as if it is a simple matter of "spend £x thousands and your horse will live, even if as a paddock ornament". It's not that simple. Very often, people are spending £x thousands and still ending up with an empty stable. At some point in time you have to say "enough is enough, I can afford/justify no more". Who are you, or anyone, to tell an owner where that point is?
		
Click to expand...


I quite agree!
Over the years, as a family, we have spent far too long and too much money, treating dogs and cats with what proved to be terminal illnesses and realised that they would actually have been better pts much earlier.
Fortunately we've never had to choose a course of action with the horses - our fatal illnesses have all been fairly short and clear-cut.
BUT we choose not to insure the horses for vets' fees, partly because of a bad experience with an insurance company who refused to pay out much less than we had paid them over the years for a horse which had to be pts, partly because we know that we would not put any horse through colic surgery/
protracted box-rest.
Our horses are treated as pets, rather than only being kept to do a job.
We have kept field ornaments, one for 12 yrs and would do so again.  I would also pay for long-term medication if it guaranteed quality of life for the horse.
I certainly would NOT bankrupt myself.  I have no children but do have other horse/animals, what would happen to them?  How would I pay for the on-going treatment of the horse in question?  Where would this mythical horse live if I lost the house and land?  I certainly wouldn't be able to afford livery fees, would I?


----------



## noodle_ (6 November 2011)

nope. i adore my horse. But if vets fees didnt cover it - they have no concept of tomorow


my last horse cost 11k in vets bills (went well over the 5k insurance)....we paid it then he was eventually pts as we literally had no money

never will i do that again


----------



## Alfiem (6 November 2011)

cptrayes said:



			Thanks Shils, survival rates are as bad as I thought they were. 23% dead within a week. Over 1/3 dead within a year, over half dead within 3 years, with further complications in the meantime causing the early death.

I absolutely agree with your last paragraph and would urge everyone to decide NOW what they will do if their horse gets a colic which will kill the horse if it is not operated on, so they are not bounced into a decision, either way, that they later regret.
		
Click to expand...

I have decided that if any of mine get colic that requires surgery they will be PTS. My vet is respectful of this and it's on my notes if I'm not able to be contacted.


----------



## noodle_ (6 November 2011)

Alfiem said:



			I have decided that if any of mine get colic that requires surgery they will be PTS. My vet is respectful of this and it's on my notes if I'm not able to be contacted.
		
Click to expand...

tbh mines had colic 3 times (gas tho) if she had impaction colic, im honestly not sure i could put her through it either.... 

sounds awful but with this horse im very realistic... anything broken though thats definate euthanasia.

I had a horse on box rest for 12 months  - it was awful. never should have allowed it


----------



## Marydoll (7 November 2011)

I think it depends on your personal circumstances.
I have a 13 yo, who has been unridable, but comfy on danilon every 2nd day for the last 9 years
He cost £1500 to buy
Insurance spent £3,500 on him
I spent £2000  + over the years on jabs, tildren and analgesia, above insurance costs.
As it stands hes insured but if his condition deteriorated further, needing more treatment, tbh id have to think long and hard about it, i dont think im selfish, infact i think ive done alright by him, hes had every chance to come sound, to no avail. There comes a point when its just not feasable to keep throwing money at the problem. 
I also have a 27 yo retired mare, who ive already made my mind up, if she presents with an issue that will likely cause increased discomfort or has a poor prognosis she will be pts, ive already discussed it with the vet and i love every bone in her body.
Both these horses mean the world to me, and i have looked after them well and given them the best veterinary treatment when needed but i wouldnt bankrupt myself for them

Would it bankrupt me, probably not ( at this point in time ) but as others have said, when you have other dependants, you do the best you can as an individual within your means


----------



## smellsofhorse (7 November 2011)

I would try my best for my horse and do almost anything.

But i also have a 3 year old daughter to think about.
Whilst we could make cut backs and save money, putting her future at risk would be something we would do anything to avoid.

So id do almost anything that was possible but it if wasnt i would do the kindest thing, weather that be putting to sleep or something else.


----------



## OldNag (7 November 2011)

Ibblebibble said:



			No i would not bankrupt myself for a horse or any other animal, it would be rather foolish for a start as a horse is considered an asset and could be taken from you by the receivers to be sold to help pay off your debt! 
Anyone who has faced crippling debt and been through bankruptcy would know how utterly soul destroying it is and would not willingly put themselves and close ones through it, and yes i do speak from experience
 By taking ownership of my horses i have committed myself to providing for them to the best of my ability and that includes financially, and because i am not a millionaire there are limits to my finances, now i'm not going to put a figure on it because it's no one elses' business! Of course i would do my utmost for them but there are so many factors that would have to be taken into account, the age of the horse and it's long term prognosis for a start. one thing is for sure though, i would not let my heart rule my head.
		
Click to expand...

^^this.  And I have to consider my family: have 2 young children, my OH has absolutely no interest in horses and I know what his answer would be.  

I am making sure I have a "pot" put by in case of emergency, and my horses are insured for vets' fees but if there came a point where the cost of treatment was unaffordable ...


----------



## Arabelle (7 November 2011)

Shilasdair said:



			I suppose it all depends how selfish you are in life, and how much time you spend thinking about 'me, me, me'.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly.  I have a family to support so do not have the luxury of thinking 'me, me, me' and have to balnce my/my horses needs against everyone elses.

I could never bankrupt myself for a pet, for that reason.  It has been pointed out further up the thread that it would also be pretty pointless as the horse would be taken as an asset to face an uncertain future!


----------



## rubysmum (7 November 2011)

folks have used the word bankruptcy lightly in this thread, so just to clarify, bankruptcy is a terrible serious step - with huge long & short term implications,
it becomes difficult/impossible to get insurance, any form of credit, mortgage, fuel suppliers may insist on pre-payment meters etc etc. ALL your creditors will get litle or nothing - why should they suffer because you have a horse. It may effect your employment in the future [ & not just in obvious ways - i had hoped to foster but that may now be impossible]
Incidentally, horses are not generally seen as assets, particularly if you own a single one, & are listed as liabilities. Ironically, those who own several with some real worth [ prob over 5 grand each] might find their other more valuable animals listed as assets & sold to pay for care for the ill/injured one.
As someone who has been through bankruptcy [ caused by the failture of my consultancy business & the end of a relationship], quite frankly it is a horrible business offered to individuals who have no other options, is it really right to use this because of debt caused by owning a horse?


----------



## Laura1812 (7 November 2011)

there is no way i would bankrupt myself for any horse, and even if i was prepared to, theres no way my husband would allow it. my riding horses are insured and my retired ones have a self imposed vet fee limit before pts. that might sound harsh to some but that is reality to me. i love my horses but not at the expense of the humans in my life.


----------



## soulfull (7 November 2011)

cptrayes said:



			There is a strong argument in Psychology that all apparently altruistic behaviour is still motivated by thinking about "me, me, me".

The basis of the argument is that you would not do what you do unless it made you feel good, or at the very least unless you thought it would make you feel worse to do something else.

Those people who keep their horses alive and run up huge debts are doing it because it would make them feel bad not to do that for an animal they love. It is debatable whether they are actually doing it for the animal at all. And it certainly does not give them the justification to imply that those who choose a different path are more selfish than they are.

Or does it?
		
Click to expand...

Echo this!!

We all have things in our lives that shape us and the way we think and react.  I lost my beloved horsey teenage daughter and swore that I would honour her life by doing all I could to enjoy what life I had and not spend it stuck at home being miserable, to  me that enjoyment comes from riding and competing when I can.  I have already lost 4/5 out of the 10 years since she died due to horse and my lameness.  current horse is coming back from a bruised tendon so fingers crossed it will happen soon

Simply put no I wouldn't even get into serious debt either.  Been there many years ago bought on by illness and loss of job,  horrid nasty place to be!

I live on my own and have no one else to consider BUT does that mean that I should go further than anyone else  NO  I don't think so.   Just because I don't have children living at home does not mean I should give up my already tiny house for any animal no matter how much they mean to me.  I never go on holiday so can't give that up. I wouldn't  even put myself in that dark dark place called debt  NO WAY.  If you have ever been there you would understand, if not do not DARE to even try and imagine what it is like 

There are so many stories of I spent 'ridiculous amounts' on said horse and still it is not sound or had to pts. (I have one of them)

as for the person who said you should have 8K to spend. well I know an awful lot of people and not one of them would or could spend that kind of money.
I wouldn't do it if I had it.  yes I would spend 5k insurance and 3/4k on top if I was assured of good outcome BUT not 8k of my own money. 

 Reason:- same horse could do similar thing the next day. 
That 8k could go into a bank account and make a massive difference to my future grandchild (when ever that maybe) 
Or shoot me, buy me a lovely new horse,  irrelevant as I don't have 8k anyway 

I learnt with my last horse that just because you throw a lot of money at one problem doesn't mean that is anywhere near the end of it. I did it over and over again and will NEVER ever do it again

So yes I would PTS and go out and buy another one, as soon as  I could afford it


----------



## Flame_ (7 November 2011)

xspiralx said:



			No I wouldn't, definitely not.

I don't believe that death is a bad thing to happen to an animal, as long as it is humane.
		
Click to expand...

This.


----------



## Maesfen (7 November 2011)

TicTac said:



			No I wouldn't.
		
Click to expand...

Nor would I.  Much as I love mine, I'm not that stupid to put them before my family.  It would be put down if time wasn't a cure.


----------



## LaurenBay (7 November 2011)

No I wouldn't.

I am actually facing something similar at the moment. Insurance have excluded my mares right hind leg. A couple of months ago she became lame. The problem is her right hind leg (typical would be the leg that is excluded) so insurance will not cover any of the costs! Everything I am paying is out of my own money, I do not have a credit card or any loans. So far I have spent £500. She appears to be sound at the moment. Vet is out this week to let me know the outcome. If she is sound she will be brought back into work. If she is field sound I will put her on grass livery for the rest of her life. However if she needs more tests that are likely to get into the £1000's she will be PTS. I simply cannot afford it and I will not get into debt for her. I have seen a family member get into so much debt he became homeless and suffered from depression. I will not let this happen to me. 

Will I get another Horse after? Yes, once I have saved up enough money to buy another. What is wrong with that?


----------



## chessy (7 November 2011)

rubysmum said:



			folks have used the word bankruptcy lightly in this thread, so just to clarify, bankruptcy is a terrible serious step - with huge long & short term implications,
it becomes difficult/impossible to get insurance, any form of credit, mortgage, fuel suppliers may insist on pre-payment meters etc etc. ALL your creditors will get litle or nothing - why should they suffer because you have a horse. It may effect your employment in the future [ & not just in obvious ways - i had hoped to foster but that may now be impossible]
		
Click to expand...

Thank you SO MUCH for saying this!

It seems some people in this thread think that bankruptcy just means being in debt, when it is actually so much worse!


----------



## Spudlet (7 November 2011)

Everyone has a point where they have to say enough, unless they are Bill Gates. It's just a fact of life.

I hope I would do absolutely everything possible until reaching that point as long as that was within the welfare interests of the horse (no point putting a horse through the mill if the chances of them recovering to be at least field sound are tiny IMO), but once that point was reached I would have to PTS. I wouldn't like having to make that choice and I'd hope not to get to that point, but it does exist and that's all there is to it.


----------



## smiffyimp (7 November 2011)

Meandtheboys said:



			I think every ones personal circumstances will definitly be a key to any decision, but me and OH have always said if its ' life saving' and our dogs / horses would still have some sort of value in life then we would remorgage the house, if prognosis was poor and and reduce value of life then whether it be money or not we would be brave enough to make the right call.
		
Click to expand...

^^^this^^^ and we have done for one of our dogs. She's now happy and bouncing. But I wouldnt lose my home, i'd work a lot of hours to keep it all going (and have done) but the animal would need to have a good life after. I wouldnt pay huge monthly costs keeping my old boy alive either although it'd kill me PTSing him.


----------



## Faithkat (7 November 2011)

chessy said:



			Thank you SO MUCH for saying this!

It seems some people in this thread think that bankruptcy just means being in debt, when it is actually so much worse!
		
Click to expand...

 . . .  and if you are declared officially bankrupt, they will take literally everything you own apart from personal essentials like clothes and sell it to realise some capital with which to pay your creditors.  I've never been bankrupt but a friend was - she used to breed and show dogs and all the dogs had to be sold.


----------



## fatpiggy (7 November 2011)

As others have said, bankrupty is a major thing, not a way of dodging your debts (although sadly alot of people seem to treat it like that) and no I wouldn't go that far, but my horse has cost me in excess of £30,000 in the 16 years I have her, all for drugs which without she would have been put down 16 years ago.  Am I sorry - yes, do I REGRET it- no.  She gave me hours of fun and pleasure and now she is enjoying her retirement. I was never one for possessions anyway.  I waited decades to have my own horse and knew instantly she was the one so having her put down and starting over again never even crossed my mind.  At the end of the day it is only naughts on a piece of paper and I will be so much the poorer for losing her.


----------



## Zimzim (7 November 2011)

I'd do everything I possibly could for my horses but I certainly wouldnt get "bankrupt" in doing so, I have a OH and other animals to think of aswell. 

If said horse needed treatment/ surgery etc and there was a really good survival rate/ positive outcome then I'd go ahead (within reason), but if there wasnt a high survival rate/ or positive outcome then I wouldnt put my horse through it - been there and done that before.

I'm quite weary about surgery now after losing a youngster earlier on in the year who had to be PTS after a reaction to the anesthetic after he had an operation (no choice - he was left paralysed). I know its not heard about alot, but you always think it wouldnt happen to you and when it does, its the worse thing ever. You never quite know how things will turn out.


----------



## Gingerwitch (7 November 2011)

After seeing the poor state of several horses after colic surgery I too would never send a horse off to be operated on.  Of the 5 I know of in the last 7 years - not one has lived the year out... all different ages, breeds, and types of colic.  The recovery of the last one was heart breaking and the poor girl looked awful till the day she gave up on life - and I do blame the vets for this - she should never have been taken to Liverpool, the facilities back at the livery yard would never have suited a recovering horse and the horse was just a hollow when she came back.

Now an other situation - what would you have done in this position?:-

My horse had a very serious eye problem last year - after several weeks of treatement, and various lenses being fitted - it was 50/50 if we need surgery to remove the eye.  Now I had rocked up 2.5 k already on vets bills , the op was going to cost approx 2k - and then follow up treatement.  If i had been insured and the money was going to run out at the 3k.... what is being suggested here is that i would have pts.

In the end we were lucky and he did not have to have the op - but i was still left with the 2.5k bill BUT i would have found the other money to have the eye removed if it had come to that.


----------



## cptrayes (7 November 2011)

That's an easy decision Gingerwitch. Eye removal is not life threatening and nor, in most cases, is it even life limiting. The decision depends entirely on how much you are prepared to spend to have a horse which is pretty much guaranteed to return to a full working life with no further complications. There are one eyed horses doing BE eventing. It is clearly worth spending at least as much as a horse with the same capabilities and age will cost to buy, without even taking into account any emotional attachment involved.

Your example has almost no bearing whatsoever on most of the cases people have to deal with, which are fraught with uncertainty over the horse's prospects of a return to health, never mind work.


----------



## MrsMozart (7 November 2011)

Bankrupt, no.

Take a loan or high street line of credit, yes.


----------



## FionaM12 (14 November 2011)

Tickles said:



			. I for one am happy to have a go at any horse owner who takes on an animal without a good degree of certainty of being able to afford an 8k vet's bill.

I won't own until I can afford to.
		
Click to expand...

So people on low incomes like me, who get an older semi-retired horse no-one else would want for little or no money, shouldn't be allowed to?

Mollie is insured for accident, but not illness because of her age. With me she will have a loving devoted no-frills home. I will do my best to make sure she never suffers. A generous friend has offered to help if she ever needs vets bills paying, but that's not going to be a bottomless pit, so if she falls very ill and £k's are needed, she'll have a painless end.

I'm in my mid-fifties, my financial situation is unlikely to change. According to you, I should never have a horse. Are we to live in a world where only the rich should have horses?



Gingerwitch said:



			Sorry - but to me you are cold and callous - its not something you can plan for and tbh 3k in vets bills and thats the end of the line - you cant buy a holiday anywhere decent for 3k in this day and age..... 3k and that's all your prepared to push yourself too - suggest you give up the horses and keep goldfish - you can always scooptthem up in a net and wack em on concrete to put them out of their misery.
		
Click to expand...

Utterly ridiculous post. I don't have holidays either, "anywhere decent" or otherwise.


----------



## DipseyDeb (14 November 2011)

Syrah said:



			No I wouldn't, I've got 2 small children and they come first above everything and everyone else.
		
Click to expand...


This^^ I have a family, while I love my lad to bits, He is insured and I would never let him suffer, I would do all I could for him, but I would never leave my children homeless and my family penniless!


----------



## lochpearl (14 November 2011)

rubysmum said:



			folks have used the word bankruptcy lightly in this thread, so just to clarify, bankruptcy is a terrible serious step - with huge long & short term implications,
it becomes difficult/impossible to get insurance, any form of credit, mortgage, fuel suppliers may insist on pre-payment meters etc etc. ALL your creditors will get litle or nothing - why should they suffer because you have a horse. It may effect your employment in the future [ & not just in obvious ways - i had hoped to foster but that may now be impossible]
Incidentally, horses are not generally seen as assets, particularly if you own a single one, & are listed as liabilities. Ironically, those who own several with some real worth [ prob over 5 grand each] might find their other more valuable animals listed as assets & sold to pay for care for the ill/injured one.
As someone who has been through bankruptcy [ caused by the failture of my consultancy business & the end of a relationship], quite frankly it is a horrible business offered to individuals who have no other options, is it really right to use this because of debt caused by owning a horse?
		
Click to expand...

Well said and sorry for your previous circumstances.

Even if you were to bankrupt yourself for an animal you would then not be able to afford to support the animal in the future as you would not be entitled to a wage.

My horses and dog if viable to them will have everything they need, if the vets fees outrun the insurance and I didn't have the money I would get a loan for whatever it cost. If the horse/dog was ill and in a lot of pain then I would do right by the animal. My animals owe me nothing and I owe them everything. One of my lads has already had nearly £20k paid out by the insurance, he only cost me £5.5k, he is now sound, happy and very healthy and whilst he continues to be he will get whatever treatment is necessary and the supplements that he needs to be on for the rest of his life. He has exclusions on his insurance now that means if he has any other similar injury or issue that they wont pay out. If he needs treatment then I will find the money. 

So yes I would if viable to the animal get into great debt for them, bankruptcy is probably the wrong term.


----------



## aintgotnohay (14 November 2011)

chessy said:



			Thank you SO MUCH for saying this!

It seems some people in this thread think that bankruptcy just means being in debt, when it is actually so much worse!
		
Click to expand...

well i went bankcrupt and it was easy.i closed all my bank accounts down and opened a new one just for bankcrupties with the co-op amd set new direct debits up and i told my employers.i never lost my house as it was in neagative equity,i never lost my jobs,didnt loose my car my car as it worth less than 2 k and needed it for work,never lost my horse cos it worthless at 100£ they didnt want to know.im not interested in credit anymore so doesnt effect me.my mortgage company wernt bothered cos i had paid my mortgage and never missed a payment on it,nor my gas,electric or council tax bills.i just pay a nominal fee of £50 per month on a 25 grand debt.id recommend going bankcrupt anyday.to me it was a relief and nothing has really changed.


----------



## Super_Kat (14 November 2011)

I honestly don't know.
With three of mine I wouldn't but with the other it would totally depend on the prognosis and my personal situation.


----------



## ihatework (14 November 2011)

What an emotive subject!!!

Firstly, I would NEVER bankrupt myself for a horse.

But I try and have myself in a position whereby bankruptsy would be an unlikely scenario in the first place. I try and live within my means and all my animals (bar the cats) are insured to an extent that I deem risk acceptable. I suppose I am lucky to be in the position I am in.

For me personally, being able to physically finance something doesn't actually come into it. I could somehow finance most veterinary eventualities. For me it is the choice of whether I am willing to finance something. That probably makes me sound even more heartless!

The choice to PTS would always be gut wrentching, what ever the situation. I tend to often think of the 'what if' scenario so do tend to be fairly clear on what I would do in a given situation.

For me a lot depends on the horse in question and how much I like the horse. However I don't have time and energy to keep a field full of ornaments (I don't own that magic field)

My current new horse I like a lot and already know that I would go quite far for him. He'd have treatment / surgery on the proviso he would have a fair chance of a quality of life afterwards.

My previous horse wasn't one I gelled with. I was considering selling him and then he injured himself. He had a good chance of recovery and had a high chance of a useful working life. He had the money spent on him (circa 8K in total) most of which was covered by insurance, and then he was sold cheap with his history declared. If his outlook had not been so good I would have PTS without much of a second thought.

My competition horse previous to that I still have, a paid for retired field ornament. He from day 1 was the best horse to have landed on my doorstep. He was originally on loan, the contract ran out and 8 years later he is still here - I don't technically own him and would be in my rights to send the lame bugger home. He isn't going anywhere though! Through various insurance claims he probably totalled about 15K in vets fees until I called it a day and decided he was only insurable for external stuff and was a nightmare to keep sound and it wasn't viable to continue to invest so much emotion into him. 2 years into full retirement and he is a happy sound field ornament. He now has a 1K vet limit on him - should treat small minor stuff but anything bigger or requiring surgery and he will be PTS (and I will be distraught!)

With regards to colic surgery I am fairly clear that a retired horse would not be operated on. A working competition horse would always get 1 chance on surgery. The requirement for surgery 2 would be PTS.


----------



## SplashofSoy (14 November 2011)

In short - No i would never be so irresponsible.


----------



## marmalade76 (14 November 2011)

No, as much as I love my ponies, I have a family and they have to come first. There is no way I would put my home at risk.

 I would not keep a horse going on long term expensive medication nor put  a horse through colic surgery. 

Quite happy for anyone to call me selfish as I am quite happy to admit that I am!


----------



## aintgotnohay (14 November 2011)

marmalade76 said:



			No, as much as I love my ponies, I have a family and they have to come first. There is no way I would put my home at risk.

 I would not keep a horse going on long term expensive medication nor put  a horse through colic surgery. 

Quite happy for anyone to call me selfish as I am quite happy to admit that I am!
		
Click to expand...

you are been very sensible and realistic.my pony is old and he is a pet come light hack.i dont want to compete or even canter.he suits me.when his time comes he will be pts and if i could never afford him anymore he would be pts.he has had rough life in the past and he wont be sold or loaned out as a companion.


----------



## cptrayes (14 November 2011)

aintgotnohay said:



			well i went bankcrupt and it was easy.i closed all my bank accounts down and opened a new one just for bankcrupties with the co-op amd set new direct debits up and i told my employers.i never lost my house as it was in neagative equity,i never lost my jobs,didnt loose my car my car as it worth less than 2 k and needed it for work,never lost my horse cos it worthless at 100£ they didnt want to know.im not interested in credit anymore so doesnt effect me.my mortgage company wernt bothered cos i had paid my mortgage and never missed a payment on it,nor my gas,electric or council tax bills.i just pay a nominal fee of £50 per month on a 25 grand debt.id recommend going bankcrupt anyday.to me it was a relief and nothing has really changed.
		
Click to expand...

You have left the rest of us paying your £25,000 debt for you in higher prices for what we buy. It doesn't just disappear into thin air because you walk away from it. Thank heavens there aren't more people like you in this country.


----------



## cptrayes (14 November 2011)

aintgotnohay said:



			you are been very sensible and realistic.my pony is old and he is a pet come light hack.i dont want to compete or even canter.he suits me.when his time comes he will be pts and if i could never afford him anymore he would be pts.he has had rough life in the past and he wont be sold or loaned out as a companion.
		
Click to expand...

You can't afford him now.

Make no mistake, as a bankrupt, it is your debtors who are paying to keep your pony, not you.


----------



## aintgotnohay (14 November 2011)

cptrayes said:



			You have left the rest of us paying your £25,000 debt for you in higher prices for what we buy. It doesn't just disappear into thin air because you walk away from it. Thank heavens there aren't more people like you in this country.
		
Click to expand...

i am paying £50.00 per month back and YOU do not know the circumstances of my debt-it was a business that went bankcrupt OKAY.


----------



## aintgotnohay (14 November 2011)

cptrayes said:



			You can't afford him now.

Make no mistake, as a bankrupt, it is your debtors who are paying to keep your pony, not you.
		
Click to expand...

I am working 50 hours a week for your information and i went bankcrupt 12 years ago so clearly you need to gets facts for critising others.At least im paying debt back and not on benefits.


----------



## Maesfen (14 November 2011)

Agree with you entirely Fiona; I think Gingerwitch and Tickles are totally out of order.

Just who do they think they are that they should dictate who does and doesn't have a horse?
3 grand for a holiday?  I'm not that stupid to waste that much money on trivialities (even if I had it which I don't but I don't begrudge anyone else wanting to waste their money)


----------



## Wagtail (14 November 2011)

No I wouldn't bankrupt myself so that we lost the house and everything else, as then I wouldn't be able to care for the horses in any case. But I have racked up some serious loans to pay huge vet fees. One of £4k for unsuccessful colic surgery. The other for £8k for chemo for a dog. I am expecting to have to pay out above and beyond my insurance limit for my current horse that has a poor prognosis to return to work, though he should be able to retire, and I have paid plenty of excess on my retired mare who is the horsey love of my life.


----------



## FionaM12 (14 November 2011)

Maesfen said:



			Agree with you entirely Fiona; I think Gingerwitch and Tickles are totally out of order.

Just who do they think they are that they should dictate who does and doesn't have a horse?
3 grand for a holiday?  I'm not that stupid to waste that much money on trivialities (even if I had it which I don't but I don't begrudge anyone else wanting to waste their money)
		
Click to expand...

Well, I've had to wait until this age to be able to ride again then (bliss!) have a horse, something I literally have dreamed about all those years. It's a struggle with health and cash, and very hard work, but it's heaven.

I'm not putting up with some smug *****s who talk of holidays "anywhere decent" and suggest people should have spare 8ks lying about telling me I shouldn't own a horse. 

I don't resent other people having money, but I take exception to them thinking it gives them the right to tell others how they should live.


----------



## FionaM12 (14 November 2011)

Wagtail said:



			The other for £8k for chemo for a dog. I am expecting to have to pay out above and beyond my insurance limit for my current horse that has a poor prognosis to return to work, though he should be able to retire, and I have paid plenty of excess on my retired mare who is the horsey love of my life.
		
Click to expand...

It's great that you're able to do that, and presumably you're not borrowing money you can't repay. But for me, when my beloved little rescue terrier got cancer, my then teenage daughter and I agreed that Dusty would have pain control for a while, but as soon as she started to show signs of this not working, we'd have her pts. I was single mum, I couldn't afford further treatment.

The irony of this story is, that when we got our two dogs, I was still married and my husband had a good income. However, husband moved out, took his income with him, and the woman he went off with was our vet!!


----------



## devonlass (14 November 2011)

As much as I am fond of my ponio,I would never allow my family to suffer financially for him.

He is insured with a decent company for the maximum amount possible and that will have to be enough.


----------



## typekitty (14 November 2011)

*shrugs*

I think it's wise to make sure you have a certain amount of money put aside before buying a horse, just in case something happens out of the budgeted allowance. It's a long term investment that is risky - similar to a car or even a bicycle. 

No I don't think only 'rich' people should own horses but one needs to be realistic before jumping in. Why I haven't - aside from being unrealistic, I'd rather save money for a house. 

*waits to be shot*


----------



## FionaM12 (14 November 2011)

typekitty said:



			*shrugs*

I think it's wise to make sure you have a certain amount of money put aside before buying a horse, just in case something happens out of the budgeted allowance. It's a long term investment that is risky - similar to a car or even a bicycle. 

No I don't think only 'rich' people should own horses but one needs to be realistic before jumping in. Why I haven't - aside from being unrealistic, I'd rather save money for a house. 

*waits to be shot*
		
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone will want to shoot you!  It depends what your priorities are. I've had my family, own my little house and now have a chance to have a horse. I'll happily do without other stuff to manage that.

It's not an investment though, it's money down the drain. Except it makes me happy.


----------



## typekitty (14 November 2011)

FionaM12 said:



			I don't think anyone will want to shoot you!  It depends what your priorities are. I've had my family, own my little house and now have a chance to have a horse. I'll happily do without other stuff to manage that.

It's not an investment though, it's money down the drain. Except it makes me happy. 

Click to expand...

Haha thanks, never know on here!

Horses are in my future, probably when I'm retired! I've got 40 years to convince the boy they aren't all bad


----------



## maggiehorse (15 November 2011)

i have £10,000 put away in a high interest account , i dont insure after the last time when i had an enormous fight with aims to get them to pay out a paltry £700 claim which i had to pay upfront to vet anyway , so whats the point of insuring?
             i have 4 horses , 3 i would pay for complicated surgery one i wouldnt   and no i wouldnt bankrupt myself for any of them


----------

