VETS, this way pls - ingrowing hair in the eyes?

[Vallhala]

I've just read the most appalling article about ROLF

I was just about to write to the Cambridge News advocating no kill rescue and ranting that Rolf had been killed unnecessarily when it dawned on me that Soham and Wood Green Animal Shelter (not a place I respect and not no-kill so I'm very wary) are a considerable distance from one another. That being the case Rolf might havebeen treated for the ingrowing hairs upon his eyes and still been suffering beyond help I suppose.

So, before I go screaming to the press about the effing RSPCA et al I thought I'd ask here about the expected pain levels caused by ingroeing hair to the eyes after treatment and the long-term prognosois for such a dog. Can any of you nice vets advise please?

ingrowing, not ingroeing!

I am no vet, so probabably shouldn't comment, but hey, if he was but to sleep just beacuse of his eyelids, then I am quite shocked afaik entropic eyelids are a pretty simple surgial proceedure, if indeed it is even neccessary (which tbf if his were in a bad way it probably was). The vet would just cut little sections out from under the eye re-sew and bobs your uncle.

But that, matted fur, a flea allergy and a torn ear does not sound unsavable to me.

My thoughts too, WTWTW, and that of the rescue boss where I help out.

He has such a beautiful face too, poor boy.

Have had a v brief look. Entropion can cause severe ulceration in the eyes and if untreated this may cause severe pain, possibly requiring enucleation (eye removal) if other treatment options are insufficient to allow healing. It might be that due to his condition and other problems (the article doesn't really give enough detail to be able to say) it was genuinely in the interests of his welfare not to pursue treatment, especially in an animal who has already been through a lot.

Thank you WildandCrazy, that makes far more sense than the article did. We were discussing it on the forum of the rescue I help out at where in retrospect and after horrified reactions from both of us this was said by the rescue owner:

"I think its probably bad reporting and the fact that there was no owner to pay for treatment. I suspect that a specialist could have sorted the eye problem and in the worst case dogs can cope well without their sight.

My horse had an eye problem and a growth removed by a local vet twice but it came back. I got him to the AHT who removed the eye but said that they could have saved it had they been consulted first. He was actually better with one eye than with one good and one bad but couldnt see one side obviously.

To be fair, it just isnt possible to pay for every treatment to every stray and there are just too many dogs and not enough homes.

But it does illustrate the giant task of changing public opinion that we face."

Sums it up probably though I do still wonder if cost was not a factor in the decision . :(