Reply #51

In the discussion thread: Woman finds 'euthanized' dog alive with new owner [View all]

Response to knitter4democracy (Reply #35)

Mon Feb 20, 2012, 08:46 PM

51. I agree, why doesn't the rescue group help pay for the surgery and keep the "family" intact?

Not only did the dog have to suffer the trauma of the attack and surgery, but it also had to suffer being re-homed.

The vet's position is the most indefensible here if you ask me - s/he didn't give the owner all the details. But the fact that the rescue group will pay the money for the surgery but won't keep the pet with its human during it's worst crisis?

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

66 replies	Author	Time	Post
Woman finds 'euthanized' dog alive with new owner [View all]	Blue_Tires	Feb 2012	OP
All I can say is that I would have been outraged.	RebelOne	Feb 2012	#1
ever since we had to put our collie mix to sleep	nadine_mn	Feb 2012	#2
She's upset that her dog IS NOT Dead?	alphafemale	Feb 2012	#3
Yes what is wrong with you?	whistler162	Feb 2012	#5
No. She just didn't want to pay for it.	alphafemale	Feb 2012	#7
What story are you reading????	whistler162	Feb 2012	#9
She's upset her dog is alive and happy.	alphafemale	Feb 2012	#10
Maybe you should read it again, instead of complaining no one else read it.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#15
Actually what was said	auburngrad82	Feb 2012	#66
Well I bothered to read the story, and the vet didn't tell her there was no chance.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#13
They don't say what the cost was, though.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#17
But it also said the dog was viciously attacked...she may have thought	nadine_mn	Feb 2012	#25
The vet needs a good ass kicking.	bluedigger	Feb 2012	#4
The vet needs a big	LisaL	Feb 2012	#14
As does the rescue group, frankly.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#16
Oh you have got to be kidding me.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#18
She signed the dog over under fraudulent circumstances.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#19
Oh for crying out loud!	LisaL	Feb 2012	#20
I'm not upset about that. Not sure where you got that.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#21
The little girl didn't lose the dog because the vet lied to mom.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#24
The mom's choice was based on fraudulent information, though.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#28
What was the truth of the situation?	LisaL	Feb 2012	#30
What if the rescue group offered it?	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#35
That's not what rescue groups do.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#40
I agree, why doesn't the rescue group help pay for the surgery and keep the "family" intact?	riderinthestorm	Feb 2012	#51
I think this dog rather "suffer" from being rehomed than being dead.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#55
Uhm, can you clarify this post? It's pretty much a word salad... nt	riderinthestorm	Feb 2012	#59
About your edit: so the vet got paid twice.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#22
I don't see anywhere in the article that the vet charged the rescue group to save the dog.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#23
So, the rescue group got free care?	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#27
WTF makes you think that original vet was the one caring for the injured dog?	LisaL	Feb 2012	#41
"I would want a new dog, too."	alphafemale	Feb 2012	#26
She lost her dog due to fraudulent care and information, though.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#29
She was told this dog had a chance to live if she paid.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#31
But "a new dog" would make it ok. Animals are replaceable like furniture. nt	alphafemale	Feb 2012	#32
Yes. Obviously.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#34
I don't want to pay for the appendectomy for my child...put him to sleep instead.	alphafemale	Feb 2012	#36
Apples and oranges. Appendectomies have high success rates.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#42
And if they didn't?	LisaL	Feb 2012	#46
Like I said, apples and oranges.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#65
Hardly a chance.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#33
Why should have vet told her the dog's chances were 50-50 if they weren't?	LisaL	Feb 2012	#37
The vet should have been honest--that's my main point.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#43
If you sign something, you need to read what it is that you are signing.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#58
I don't disagree. Upset humans, however, tend not to read closely.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#64
I stay with my pets when it is that time. They need the comfort.	HopeHoops	Feb 2012	#6
I have never had a pet put down except and unless it was obvious	1monster	Feb 2012	#8
This so called care giver that couldn't be bothereed to see the act through?	alphafemale	Feb 2012	#11
On the other hand, my husband cannot stand the idea of participating in	1monster	Feb 2012	#12
No, I'm sorry...if your pet is being put to sleep, it is time to man the fuck up and be there	TheCruces	Feb 2012	#38
I have to agree with you on this point. n/t	MadrasT	Feb 2012	#48
There are some vet clinics where you are not allowed to be with the pet, per insurance regs	riderinthestorm	Feb 2012	#52
I have never heard of that before	TheCruces	Feb 2012	#60
Nope, pet clinics too. I told the story of one of my dogs that I had to take to the clinic	riderinthestorm	Feb 2012	#62
Yeah, I know it's not a problem at the vet I'm planning on taking my dog to, if needed	TheCruces	Feb 2012	#63
Something I am wondering...	jmowreader	Feb 2012	#39
Interesting point.	knitter4democracy	Feb 2012	#44
I really don't see the need to make stuff up.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#45
The vet certainly did	jmowreader	Feb 2012	#54
I don't see how	Doc Holliday	Feb 2012	#47
From AMC's new spin-off zombie thriller series, "Walking the Dead".	MiddleFingerMom	Feb 2012	#49
maybe with 2012 disaster approaching dogs shall have the nine lives?	RedCloud	Feb 2012	#50
Wouldn't you bring the body home for a burial?	sammytko	Feb 2012	#53
We rent a home - no where to bury, both of our dogs were cremated	nadine_mn	Feb 2012	#56
Well if the dog is cremated there are still ashes.	LisaL	Feb 2012	#57
I believe there might be a case for malpractice. At the least the vet committed fraud.	yellowcanine	Feb 2012	#61

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.