The Many Sins Of Pet Owners

JUST how many times would we discuss Vet-client relationship on this page? I can’t really answer. But we need to continue to talk about issues that promote the wellbeing of pets and those things that stabilise the liaison we have with their care givers.

All over the world, veterinarians are on a preeminent platform, providing their well-known service, that is, alleviating the sufferings of animals in the most plausible manner, sanctioned by the owners after a thorough consultation must have been done with diagnostic and therapeutic plans understood by them.

It is in the light of this that well-grounded veterinarians have come to take the delivery of service to their clients very seriously.

And, in like manner, discerning clients have also understood that they need to be absolutely open to vets for any semblance of success to be acknowledged.

A very major characteristic of veterinary medicine is that the animal patients do not talk. And that is what makes it unique.

Vets are more or less pediatricians who rely on the observations of the mothers of their wards and the outcome of their own clinical assessment to institute a workable therapeutic plan.

Oftentimes, mothers are there for their babies. Conversely, however, a lot of owners are not always there for their pooches. So, it becomes very difficult for the vets, who now have to work with no or inadequate history, to establish a plan for the diagnosis and eventual therapy.

Yet, when the unexpected happens, owners are quick to point accusing fingers at veterinarians, forgetting that they also abdicated and neglected their responsibility of being partners in the team. For me, this is a major sin of our clients.

Another critical sin is the assumption of knowledge by some clients. This category of clients believes more in half-baked sources of information than that provided them by the vets.

They don’t verify information; they are more often than not misguided about veterinary related issues. They quote medical books out of context. They arrogate knowledge to themselves, which invariably are from the wrong sources.

They are always quick to dump the blame on the doorsteps of their vets for any real or imagined problems of their pets.

They are the ones that will see their dogs vomiting blood and call it Parvo (a form of viral enteritis), violently accusing the poor vets of not vaccinating their dogs properly.

These people self-medicate their dogs in the belief that they know as much as the vets. For them, a drug cures all and because most of them have been dealing with dogs for several years, newcomers into the industry tend to believe them more, especially when they offer prospects that will evade visits to the vets. They are in essence the problem of the industry.

Non-adherence to instructions is another grave sin that clients often commit. Since it is very necessary for medications to be administered to the pets when presented for any treatable condition, drugs and other medicaments are often dispensed for use at home.

But when this is not done or done improperly, the good work of the vet is messed up, making the condition more chronic or recurring all the time.

When this happens, the client usually finds the scapegoat in the vet.

Even when this is envisaged and the owner is told to allow the pet to be admitted, they often pretend to be capable and still fail to comply with instructions.

What do you then have? A dead dog most times. And what is the final judgment? ‘The vet killed my dog.’

Do you respect or trust your vet? Why did you choose your current vet? What really informed his choice?

I am asking all these questions because a lot of clients do not respect and trust the judgments of their vets. They usually throw his suggestions to the gutter.

The question is, if you don’t trust him, why then did you engage him? This is another unforgiveable sin.