Sorry to ask but can anyone explain why it costs so much to have veterinary treatment?

[DeirdreDoo]

I hope this doesn't offend - I am aware there may be vets who post on here and am hoping they won't mind putting it into context for me, as I am a bit perplexed, and don't want to jump to conclusions.

We have two rabbits and have had them for several years. Nothing's really gone wrong until yesterday when I had to take in my boy rabbit for a few stitches to a wound. It was fairly straightforward and he needed sedation, and we picked him up after about 6 hours though he hadn't eaten (they kept him there an extra 3 hours so that they could make sure he did - but told me to pick him up anyway in the end - he has now started eating so that's not a concern)

We have some precautionary antibiotics (£12) and the rest cost £83.

When they were neutered several years ago it was £35 per male rabbit.

I can't understand why a few stitches with sedation is now the best part of a hundred pounds?

Is this to do with inflation?


The vets are lovely and faultless in their care and I would never raise this issue in person. I don't see them as charging so much because they are out to make a profit - I'm sure it is minimal - so why is it that they have to charge so much compared to a few years ago?

Thanks of anyone got this far.

[DeirdreDoo]

Oh and it could be too many pellets then. She suggested he was a bit overweight, (he's not fat, honest!) which could prevent him from grooming properly but again it's only a very recent problem. I'll be cutting out the pellets from now on, anyway

[DeirdreDoo]

Thank you very very much for offering your advice. I hope you didn't mind me asking.

I did wonder why they didn't check the teeth, if they didn't - it would sensible to check the most common causes of the grooming issue, I suppose, but perhaps they just treated the immediate problem and didn't have time to do the investigative thing.

Anyway I will get him seen again if his eye continues to water. It could just be the hay I suppose but he hasn't had issues with hay previously.

Thank you again

[SunshineAndShadows]

Deirdre you sound like a great rabbit owner!Basically rabbits should be fed pretty much 100% hay or grass with occasional pellets and veg.

They need to chew extensively to wear their teeth and daily pellets can fill up without offering extensive chewing opportunities.

However many pet breeds of rabbits are genetically pre disposed to dental issues especially dwarf or other smaller breeds as their teeth are often crowded within their jaws. For these rabbits it doesn't matter how great you are, they'll often need dental management.

From what you describe a dental check is in order but I'd also be questioning why they weren't checked during the stitch up. Dental issues often predispose to a dirty bum.

[DeirdreDoo]

I am worrying now (sorry, thread drift) about how I could have avoided our rabbit becoming ill...basically (self diagnosis using the web) I think he may have dental problems, because he hasn't been very active the last few weeks, I found he had stopped being able to clean himself, thus a build up of dirt around his bottom which I had to try and remove and wasn't quite gentle enough - so he tore slightly, thus the stitches. Now his eye is watering, which it wasn't before, and I'm connecting the lack of grooming (which he's never had problems with until now - he's about 4yo) and that and coming up with teeth.

They are in a large walk in covered run, with a 6ft x 2ft hutch, with access to the garden nearly every day, fresh greens, loads of hay, farming grade pellets, the odd carrot or apple, water every day. Wood to gnaw and trees to ring

I can't think how I might have caused him to have dental problems. It's just his age perhaps? If that's what it is. It's going to be a right nuisance to sort out though - and I don't even know if they checked his teeth yesterday when intubating him. So here we go again...

[SunshineAndShadows]

Dogs trust and many breed specific charities offer old age fostering

By responsible pet ownership I mean that people should research the needs of their pet and ensure that they can provide for those needs. For example the vast majority of 'medical' problems in non-dog or cat pets are due to husbandry/nutitional issues caused or significantly contributed to by inappropriate care. The biggest reason for relinquishing dogs to shelters (and a significant cause of euthanasia) is behavioural issues. Many health conditions could be avoided by buying a functional breed from parents that have been health screened.

These are all avoidable 'medical' problems that people could mitigate but don't and then complain when they require expensive veterinary input.

Different insurance companies will have different policy clauses and limits. It's responsible to research these. Or if you choose not to take insuresnce, have a pet 'bank account' or credit card that you can use.

There are many ways of being responsible but ultimately uts a choice that pet owned make - vets can't be held accountable for it any more than doctors are in countries with private healthcare systems.

[OneMoreCasualty]

I bow to the vets on the thread saying neutering is a loss leader - but presumably it's also easier to schedule so that you do several I a row/fit in between more complex ops?

[Lonecatwithkitten]

There as much if not more research into veterinary drugs as there to human drugs. It costs in the region of £5 million to bring a new veterinary drug to market with the development and licensing costs.
A large number of the companies fund a huge amount ongoing research and the standard is publish regardless of results (not so in human market).
The biggest thing is that in the last 20 years there has been a massive growth in knowledge and specialism within the veterinary sector. The investigation and treatment of cushiness disease was almost exclusively performed in vet schools now it is an every day thing in ordinary practice.

[Lonecatwithkitten]

There as much if not more research into veterinary drugs as there to human drugs. It costs in the region of £5 million to bring a new veterinary drug to market with the development and licensing costs.
A large number of the companies fund a huge amount ongoing research and the standard is publish regardless of results (not so in human market).
The biggest thing is that in the last 20 years there has been a massive growth in knowledge and specialism within the veterinary sector. The investigation and treatment of cushiness disease was almost exclusively performed in vet schools now it is an every day thing in ordinary practice.

[OytheBumbler]

To make it clear, I'm not saying the vets shouldn't make a profit. I'm just wondering if there's any way a two-tier system could work? Maybe a community animal health centre that just provides primary care, like a human casualty centre.

[OytheBumbler]

I'm not trying to get at the vets either but what do you mean about responsible pet ownership? An animal could live for nearly 20yrs and people's circumstances could change in that time. Or the insurance company may not pay out for a recurring condition. In my case the insurance company put the premiums up year on year until we could no longer afford it.

Is responsible pet ownership keeping £10000 per pet in case they need vet treatment? I don't think many charities/rescues pay for medical costs - they can't afford it either.

[SunshineAndShadows]

Yes I suspect that's true Laurie I've definitely worked with some that I've had concerns about.

In those situations the best recourse is to raise it with the vet practice and if no joy, then the RCVS our licensing body who deal with issues of malpractice.

[DeirdreDoo]

I can completely see how vets have got stuck in between the customer and the cost of equipment/licensing regs/drug costs etc.

I think we maybe need to look further down the line at the drug companies and how they are orchestrating all this? Maybe? I'm not an economist, but it does strike me as odd that you can't use generic meds.

I also understand that so much more can be done now for pets, but the thing is, many people don't want extreme treatments for their pet - and can't afford it anyway - my parents' cat had a thyroid condition and they were offered a radioactive chamber or something bizarre like that, it was almost funny, the thought of a glow in the dark cat that no one was allowed to touch and they declined and kept her on varying levels of drug till she sadly died. The guilt they suffered at all this was enormous - having the option to give her pretty much human level treatments, yet not wanting to do so - should they pay up whatever the cost?

It's an awful situation to be in. I was greeted with utmost care and sympathy during the summer when my rabbit needed to be PTS (the other one) and I wasn't in the least upset - I am quite pragmatic - he was a rabbit, he was no longer living a pain free life, the treatment had a poor prognosis, and I couldn't give him daily specialised care. So I was fine about it. I got the feeling they expected me to be gutted, but I wasn't

When you have had a lot of chickens and as we know they have a fragile grip on this mortal coil, and shuffle off it at the drop of a hat and often there's nothing you can do anyway - or you have to dispatch - or sit there digging maggots out of a tumour, or whatever, covered in purple spray - it feels more like farming really.

If the animal is free and happy, so am I. But I don't get attached. If they are suffering, unable to eat or hold their head up unassisted or they have a lot of pain, I don't see my job as prolonging their existence at all costs to avoid the loss of a companion for myself.

So maybe some people are sentimental and well off, and will do anything, maybe others are guilt ridden and will do some of it, and others like me are slightly nervously unsentimental about it all (in case I am wrong not to care so much?) and just want an honest answer.

[OllyBJolly]

I agree that we find vet bills high because human medical care is free at point of use in the UK and we're unaware of real costs. However, I do know that some vets can go overboard on expensive treatment and tests that aren't always necessary.

My dog is no longer insured and bills have gone way down for the same operations and procedures (biopsies, X-rays etc). I baulk a bit about the £60 quid a month for Metacam when I can get it cheaper at the other practice in town or online for much less, but the vets do look after him well and know his foibles now.

[LaurieFairyCake]

I definitely don't think you're money grabbing or heartless ( you're funny though ) but I have had some very crap veterinary experiences over the years. There are some really dodgy vets out there ( just like there are bad apples in any profession)

The problem with 'dodgy' vets is that the general public can feel very guilted into unnecessary treatment. At a time when they feel very vulnerable.

[SunshineAndShadows]

It's also worth saying that many rescue charities offer foster schemes for older pets where the pet goes into a home but the charity covers medical costs. Without these schemes many older animals would not be rehomed

[LaurieFairyCake]

No, no medication. He said he'd be dead in a couple of weeks with those levels

[SunshineAndShadows]

Vet nurses can only practice under the supervision of a vet they cannot make diagnoses or prescribe treatments so no that's not an answer.

I think we have a lot of work to do on educating the general public on what responsible pet ownership actually is

[SunshineAndShadows]

Is your pet on medication Laurie? For many kidney meds the data sheet recommends regular monitoring of kidney parameters. If vets don't follow through with this recommendation and the animal experiences side effects they could be sued for negligence.

Or we could just be money- grabbing and heartless. Take your pick

[OytheBumbler]

I don't know what the answer is Sunshine. Would it be possible to have a vet nurse surgery for minor injuries/treatments?

It sometimes seems like the only option presented is the most expensive. I understand this is the best option for the animal but if you just can't afford it then the animal has to be pts as the only affordable option, or else not taken to the vets in the first place for fear of the cost.

I too would like to give older animals a home but I couldn't take the risk of them needing treatment.

[LaurieFairyCake]

horses are tricky



Proper laughed out loud at the thought of burying a horse in my back garden

[LaurieFairyCake]

Yes, owning pets is very unfortunately a luxury now.

I took on 2 rescue cats 8 years ago when they were too old/had existing conditions to get insurance. Over their long and happy lives they cost over £4000 pounds of treatment.

One (my last pet) is still alive after the vet said 11 months ago he had 5% kidney function left and there was no treatment but I should bring him in monthly for a blood panel to 'check his levels' at a cost of £145.

For no reason because there is no treatment.

I won't ever rescue any animals or get further pets as now it is too expensive for treatment. By the time my dog died insurance was £96 a month, and the excess was £120.

[SunshineAndShadows]

Laurie I also said that you could bury your pet for free depending on the species (horses are tricky)
The risk of water course contamination or scavenging is minimal if a pet is buried)

[SunshineAndShadows]

And I think most vets would agree with you Dierdre it would certainly make our lives much easier. However I think part of the shift has been that people expect much more for their pets now but don't want to pay for it.

40 years ago my parents and other relatives of that generation would have PTS'd a dog rather than pay for surgery - dogs were there to be useful. Rabbits were food not pets, and spending money on mice (vermin) would be unthinkable.

However modern vets need to be skilled in treating many more species with a greater variety of technologies and medications and the inevitable complexity of the system adds costs.

I think the emotional attachment we have and the access to newer medical technologies makes making those decisions much harder.

[Lonecatwithkitten]

The problem is Deidre that the provision is very expensive to provide the healthcare that pet owners expected. This time last year I purchased a new X-ray developer at a cost of £15K. I recently had a revaluation of the equipment in my practice which is an ordinary GP vets I have over £200K tied up in equipment and then another £40K tied up in drug stock. My drug bill for a small practice was £350K last year, I have 17 staff to pay. The total costs of running my small practice is just under £1million. I am the low cost practice in the area, I help clients with payment plans when possible and I provide my own out of hours service as reasonable cost (consult at just under £100).

[LaurieFairyCake]

I did say in the first line that they took dead animals away for free and not euthanised ones

Apparently I could also have buried him for free at home and released pentobarbital into the ground