To consider not taking my lame pet to the vets?

[THERhubarb]

Before you all tear me apart let me explain....

This is a 2 week old chick. We have 3 of them and this is the youngest. I paid around £3 each for them and they are being cared for by one of my hens.

Yesterday I noticed this little fella was limping but was still getting around. I checked its foot, couldn't find anything stuck in it so let it go back assuming it would get better by itself.

Today it cannot put any weight on the foot. I have taken it indoors and examined it and it's not any of the usual foot diseases I've so far googled. I can't feel any broken bones so could just be a sprain, but obviously I don't know for sure.

The chick is a Pekin bantam so its tiny still and difficult to treat I would imagine. I've not put it back with it's mum or the others but have brought it in as it was not coming out of the hutch for food or water, at least this way I can make sure its eating.

I've just phoned the vets and they charge £10 consultation fee plus whatever else for treatment/medication.

Now when all is said and done, it is just a chick and doesn't appear to be in constant pain, it just can't walk around as it refuses to put the bad leg down. I am tempted to just pop it back under mother hen tonight, then take it out again tomorrow and do what I'm doing today, which is to keep it in an egg box with food and water and hope that the leg gets better with plenty of rest so it can eventually join the other two and mother hen.

Would this be totally unreasonable?

[SlobAtHome]

I'm not gonna read the thread. YABU.

Nothing should be left without vet treatment when it is needed, no matter what they pet. 10 pounds is a cheap vet.

[LesserSpottedNeckSnake]

Are you treating them for coccidiosis? Are the toes straight? If the toes are curled, I'd make it a shoe and stick it on with a plaster. You can find step by step instructions via google. Was the hatch ok? I lost a serama chick at a few weeks old. It had curled toes on one foot, which I fixed via a splint, but it failed the thrive. Had to despatch it as there was clearly more going on there. In my experience, your average vet is utterly clueless about poultry and will generally prod them a bit and offer baytril. Birds get stressed very easily, and a vets trip will stress it out. If it's hunched, tail low and sleeping a lot I'd be inclined to put it to sleep. Pekin chicks are tiny, and very, very hard to treat. Just check it hasn't pasted, because sometimes that can put them off their legs.

[GogoGobo]

"Whatevs mate"?
Yes, I have just seen this further up the thread. I have seen it all now. You sound so annoying OP, I am quite literally cringing reading some of your chippy little posts
Hth

[wokeupwithasmile]

Hopefully when you will be unable to use your leg/s your family will decide to bring you to the doctor and get you treated. It would be sad to see you go with your neck twisted or just be left there and looked at because your brain is the size of a pea

[candycoatedwaterdrops]

I don't think the OP is being cruel by not taking the chick to the vet but I do think she should put it out of its misery. Many animals do not show signs of pain but they are indeed very much in agony.

[Chippednailvarnish]

If you can't afford to properly care for an animal, don't buy them.

[SlowlorisIncognito]

OP, it is illegal to allow the animal to suffer as you are doing under the Animal Welfare Act (2006). The chick is subject to the act because it is a non-human vertebrate that is not living in a wild state. Under the act, you can be prosecuted if your faliure to act causes an animal to be in distress and this is something you could have reasonably predicted.

I'm not saying that you're likely to be prosecuted, but you really should take the animal to a vet. How much the animal costs, how young it is, or if you regard it as a pet does not matter in the eyes of the law. Farmers have welfare responsibilities to their animals too.

The only reason you could justify not going to the vet is if you think taking it to the vet would cause more suffering due to the shock.

If you are unwilling to do this, I would give it another 24 hours, then put it out of its misery if you are confident doing so.

[Booooom]

Most vets don't know how to treat chickens, so unless you have an avian vet locally, it would be pointless to take it to the vet.

Many problems that animals get, just like in humans, are self limiting.
To be honest, if you took the chick to the vet, they will probably hmm and haa and give it a vitamin injection (that won't help) or they will put it down. The chick will have endured a distressing trip, examination under harsh lights, for pretty much nothing.

Rhubarb, you are doing exactly the right thing. See how the chick gets on, if it's not getting better, dispatch it at home rather than dragging the poor little thing to the vets.

I do wonder why you posted this in AIBU though. As a long standing poster, you must have known the replies you would get. Are you fixing for a fight today?

[Edendance]

If its not in pain (it's usually quite easy to tell with animals as they'll stop eating and moving) then give it a few days and see what happens. No point rushing straight to a vet if they seem ok. Maybe it pulled a leg muscle and is just resting it a bit.

Then if it stays and if affecting the chicks quality of life you could either take it to the vet or deal with it yourself. I'd tend to always go down the vet route to be honest and I think looking at it purely in terms of cost is a bit mean- kittens can be adopted for free, that doesn't make them worthless. But if nothing can be done and the chick is suffering its an easy judgement call.

[Yonilovesboni]

A lot of crap on this thread! Op I think you are doing exactly the right thing. You are been far from cruel! Well done for not been a wet lettuce and rushing to the vets!

[Edendance]

Ah, forgot to mention and lesserspotted seems to know her stuff anyway but was going to suggest googling for any problems it might be and ways to treat it at home. Good luck!

[candycoatedwaterdrops]

Edendance I disagree that it's easy to tell when animals are in pain. I have been told countless times by various vets that many animals do not express pain as it's a sign of weakness that would get them killed in the wild e.g. eating their own vomit. My dog has a knee dislocating condition and I know he's when pain because I know him but to the outsider, he would appear a happy chappy.

[Edendance]

Fair enough, vets will know more about it than me but they will often stop eating as much or at all- and this is a good indicator. I have often spotted that on animals I've owned as a sign they're not well.

[SuburbanRhonda]

THERhubarb, clearly you're getting defensive now, but why the comment:

I assume the sentimentalists are veggies.

This thread seems controversial enough without you dragging in vegetarians for a bashing for which there is no evidence they deserve.

[peggyblackett]

You should either take it to the vet, or end it's life humanely.

[StuntGirl]

You should probably do some more research on chickens before you decide to start keeping them for profit.

And find better places to research than mumsnet.

[StephenFrySaidSo]

So what is the verdict OP? Its been 2 days since the limp. Is he any better, worse, the same?

[RattersReward]

I'm interested to know too. Has the limp healed itself or have you dispatched the chick?

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

"THERhubarb, clearly you're getting defensive now, but why the comment:

I assume the sentimentalists are veggies.

This thread seems controversial enough without you dragging in vegetarians for a bashing for which there is no evidence they deserve."

I interpreted this differently.I thought the OP was saying it was massively hypocritical to be sentimental if you weren't veggie....

[vaticancameo]

I don't get why we're being hypocritical if we're not veggie (or vegan as another poster suggested).

I eat meat. I only buy high-welfare meat. I accept animals being killed so that I can eat them but that doesn't mean I accept them being in pain whilst they're alive.

[candycoatedwaterdrops]

Vatican Genuine question - do you not think killing the animal causes them pain, even if is momentary pain?

[LegoDragon]

I am an ex farmer. The animals we looked after were definitely not pets, and even though they were my livelihood- they existed to ensure I had money essentially- I couldn't bear one of them to be suffering pain if I knew there was a chance for it to be stopped. However, it sounds like it will be too young and small for the poor mite to be treated and the vet trip will almost certainly be distressing for her. Weighing it up, I think the vet trip would be worse, give it a few more days, and then make the decision- if it hasn't improved much, killing it would probably be better than the vet- which can be incredibly frightening and 'painful' (from the lights and disorientation) for a small animal which probably can't be treated.

[Artandtravel]

It is amazing and sadly amusing how much concern there is here for this chick. Imagine if each poster contributed ten pence, the chick's vet bill would be paid for by now. Enough for a trip to the vet and The Maldives. I reckon Mrs. Rhubarb will need a holiday for her nerves after reading some of the self-righteous posts on here. Of course she is concerned for the chick. If she weren't, it would be in the bin by now and you never would have known about it. During the course of this discussion, hundreds of innocent children and adults have died anonymously of hunger, war, and untreated disease. How privileged we are to have the time and technology to ponder this issue.

[vaticancameo]

Candy, if stunned properly as they should be, no, I don't. I have seen it done and whilst it's not pleasant to watch, that is because of the blood involved and the fact that we as humans know what is happening. The animal doesn't. It's much, much more humane than deaths wild animals experience (whether by being killed by other animals, dying slowly of disease or starvation etc). I cannot condone the miserable lives battery chickens live, so I don't buy that meat. But a free range chicken from my local farm shop, which lived a good life and had a humane death at the small local abbatoir - I see no cruelty in that at all.

Beef cows, incidentally, live a much more natural, pleasant life than do dairy cows, and both types of cow meet the same death in the end (and are eaten). I know a lot of people who don't eat beef on "welfare grounds" though, who will happily drink milk and eat cheese. That's illogical to me.

[fackinell]

Just a chick? It's a creature in pain! If you decide to keep animals you should bloody well pay for their care. Do them all a favour and rehome.