I must apologise in advance for this post which is not about veterinary CPD at all; however I just have to say something on this issue. I expect most vets and nurses have seen Matthew Watkinsons ‘expose’ article of the veterinary profession by now- if not see the link below.
The article starts with the question ‘are vets the saints they are made out to be?’ In the article, Matthew goes on to say how ashamed he is to be part of our profession. He describes how pet insurance has assisted unscrupulous vets in forcing expensive, unnecessary and cruel treatments on unsuspecting pet owners.
Quote from the article:
‘But, however you look at it, insurance is simply a licence to print money. Unfortunately, the only creatures insurance helps are vets. If you are a loving owner you will not want to put your pet through cruel, lengthy and costly procedures.’
Hmmmm……Then he goes on to describe a greyhound that was recommended an amputation and chemotherapy because of ‘bone cancer’.
‘And even if it did give that greyhound an extra year or so of life, how could anyone explain to it that the suffering was for a reason? That lying in a small cage, surgically maimed, and hooked up to a drip for weeks, perhaps months, would be ‘worth it’.
“Oh please! Where has this man been working? Who keeps a dog in a cage hooked up to a drip for weeks or months after an amputation? It’s far more likely to be home within a couple of days; much happier because it is now pain-free. Matthew also conveniently does not mention any of the multiple instances in which pets have been saved from extensive suffering or being euthanased unnecessarily. How about the dog with a fractured femur that requires plating; the crippled Labrador with hip dysplasia or the dachshund with multiple disc extrusions? All of these and many many more can be successfully treated and go on to have a much better quality of life. However money is required to pay for the practice facilities, theatre, equipment, gases, drugs, nurses, surgeon, cleaners, receptionists, etc etc. There is a lot involved in providing surgery and ongoing medical treatments effectively. And they have to be paid for.
Matthew’s clinical knowledge is decidedly suspect. I was relieved to see that he has not attended any of our veterinary CPD courses! And did I forget to mention that he is promoting a new book? I’m sure that has nothing to do with this sensationalist, inaccurate and misleading article, which is far more likely to have a negative effect on pet welfare than pet insurance, as owners (or Daily Mail – reading owners) resist treatments that would benefit their animals.
