|
|
 Hog Tie My Mojo
Posts: 4847
   
Location: Opelousas, LA | Sometimes a vet 45 minutes away IS a local vet.
I really can't believe people are questioning the judgement of the horses owner in this situation. I sure hope your horses are never so seriously injured that you have to put them down yourself vs. waiting hours for a vet or putting an injured horse thru an excruciating trailer ride.
Do you really think a vet that is so callous to post these pics with a caption reading "horse-0, car-1" is going to get there in any kind of hurry?
Sometimes when you have a seriously injured horse it is very clear that there is not much chance at the horse having any quality of life without spending thousands of dollars and even after all that the horse may still have to be put down. Why should any horse owner be looked down on for not wanting to put their families financial security on the line and cause further suffering for thier horse?
They got a vets opinion and ended the horses suffering quickly, what is so wrong with that, why are we all wondering what the other side of the story is? Seems pretty obvious to me they did the best they could in a bad situation.
I am so sick and tired of vets thinking you are a sorry horse owner because you don't want to go to heroic measures to save every animal you own that gets sick or injured. They have no problem marking a $15 bottle of meds up to $115 but they have no clue how hard some people work for that $100. Sounds to me like the vet was one of those who thinks every horse should be treated like Barbaro and has no concept that a huge vet bill on a horse that may end up dead anyways may not be financially feasable for some.
| |
| | |
  Fact Checker
Posts: 16575
 
Location: Displaced Iowegian | Barnmom - 2014-02-08 11:22 AM Sounds to me like the vet was one of those who thinks every horse should be treated like Barbaro and has no concept that a huge vet bill on a horse that may end up dead anyways may not be financially feasable for some.
~~the vet then said that he thought the horse would not recover even with surgery.
Her statement in the OP.......my point is....that without seeing the ACTUAL posting of the picture and "story" and NOT the OP's "interpretation" of it, we don't know the FULL story! | |
| | |
The Advice Guru
Posts: 6419
| Barnmom - 2014-02-08 11:22 AM
Sometimes a vet 45 minutes away IS a local vet.
I really can't believe people are questioning the judgement of the horses owner in this situation. I sure hope your horses are never so seriously injured that you have to put them down yourself vs. waiting hours for a vet or putting an injured horse thru an excruciating trailer ride.
Do you really think a vet that is so callous to post these pics with a caption reading "horse-0, car-1" is going to get there in any kind of hurry?
Sometimes when you have a seriously injured horse it is very clear that there is not much chance at the horse having any quality of life without spending thousands of dollars and even after all that the horse may still have to be put down. Why should any horse owner be looked down on for not wanting to put their families financial security on the line and cause further suffering for thier horse?
They got a vets opinion and ended the horses suffering quickly, what is so wrong with that, why are we all wondering what the other side of the story is? Seems pretty obvious to me they did the best they could in a bad situation.
I am so sick and tired of vets thinking you are a sorry horse owner because you don't want to go to heroic measures to save every animal you own that gets sick or injured.  They have no problem marking a $15 bottle of meds up to $115 but they have no clue how hard some people work for that $100.  Sounds to me like the vet was one of those who thinks every horse should be treated like Barbaro and has no concept that a huge vet bill on a horse that may end up dead anyways may not be financially feasable for some.Â
Â
No one know the story, and each person will do different things in the same situation it all depends on available resources, and past experiences.
As for putting families financial security in front of the horse, I do believe if you own a horse, you need to be responsible for the costs that owning a horse, food, shelter, adequate fencing, and emergency situations. But in this situation no one knows the degree of damage, what the owner said to the vet, as the vet maybe said the horse would not recover to performance level. And the vet perhaps asked to use the photos, the owner just never imagined him using them the way he did.
I do believe there are always 3 sides to every story the truth that the owner and vet know, the vets interpretation, and the owners.
I would be glad that the automotive insurance hasn't sued for damages, as if the horse was out on the road, the owner is at fault.
If the owner of the horse is concerned or feels violated she can contact the college of veterinarians.
| |
| | |
 Member
Posts: 37
| cheryl makofka - 2014-02-09 11:16 AM
Barnmom - 2014-02-08 11:22 AM
Sometimes a vet 45 minutes away IS a local vet.
I really can't believe people are questioning the judgement of the horses owner in this situation. I sure hope your horses are never so seriously injured that you have to put them down yourself vs. waiting hours for a vet or putting an injured horse thru an excruciating trailer ride.
Do you really think a vet that is so callous to post these pics with a caption reading "horse-0, car-1" is going to get there in any kind of hurry?
Sometimes when you have a seriously injured horse it is very clear that there is not much chance at the horse having any quality of life without spending thousands of dollars and even after all that the horse may still have to be put down. Why should any horse owner be looked down on for not wanting to put their families financial security on the line and cause further suffering for thier horse?
They got a vets opinion and ended the horses suffering quickly, what is so wrong with that, why are we all wondering what the other side of the story is? Seems pretty obvious to me they did the best they could in a bad situation.
I am so sick and tired of vets thinking you are a sorry horse owner because you don't want to go to heroic measures to save every animal you own that gets sick or injured.  They have no problem marking a $15 bottle of meds up to $115 but they have no clue how hard some people work for that $100.  Sounds to me like the vet was one of those who thinks every horse should be treated like Barbaro and has no concept that a huge vet bill on a horse that may end up dead anyways may not be financially feasable for some.Â
Â
No one know the story, and each person will do different things in the same situation it all depends on available resources, and past experiences.
As for putting families financial security in front of the horse, I do believe if you own a horse, you need to be responsible for the costs that owning a horse, food, shelter, adequate fencing, and emergency situations. But in this situation no one knows the degree of damage, what the owner said to the vet, as the vet maybe said the horse would not recover to performance level. And the vet perhaps asked to use the photos, the owner just never imagined him using them the way he did.
I do believe there are always 3 sides to every story the truth that the owner and vet know, the vets interpretation, and the owners.
I would be glad that the automotive insurance hasn't sued for damages, as if the horse was out on the road, the owner is at fault.
If the owner of the horse is concerned or feels violated she can contact the college of veterinarians.
If the horse was in open range then it actually would have been the drivers fault for hitting the horse. | |
| | |
The Advice Guru
Posts: 6419
| zerotlperformancehor - 2014-02-08 1:21 PM
cheryl makofka - 2014-02-09 11:16 AM
Barnmom - 2014-02-08 11:22 AM
Sometimes a vet 45 minutes away IS a local vet.
I really can't believe people are questioning the judgement of the horses owner in this situation. I sure hope your horses are never so seriously injured that you have to put them down yourself vs. waiting hours for a vet or putting an injured horse thru an excruciating trailer ride.
Do you really think a vet that is so callous to post these pics with a caption reading "horse-0, car-1" is going to get there in any kind of hurry?
Sometimes when you have a seriously injured horse it is very clear that there is not much chance at the horse having any quality of life without spending thousands of dollars and even after all that the horse may still have to be put down. Why should any horse owner be looked down on for not wanting to put their families financial security on the line and cause further suffering for thier horse?
They got a vets opinion and ended the horses suffering quickly, what is so wrong with that, why are we all wondering what the other side of the story is? Seems pretty obvious to me they did the best they could in a bad situation.
I am so sick and tired of vets thinking you are a sorry horse owner because you don't want to go to heroic measures to save every animal you own that gets sick or injured.  They have no problem marking a $15 bottle of meds up to $115 but they have no clue how hard some people work for that $100.  Sounds to me like the vet was one of those who thinks every horse should be treated like Barbaro and has no concept that a huge vet bill on a horse that may end up dead anyways may not be financially feasable for some.Â
Â
No one know the story, and each person will do different things in the same situation it all depends on available resources, and past experiences.
As for putting families financial security in front of the horse, I do believe if you own a horse, you need to be responsible for the costs that owning a horse, food, shelter, adequate fencing, and emergency situations. But in this situation no one knows the degree of damage, what the owner said to the vet, as the vet maybe said the horse would not recover to performance level. And the vet perhaps asked to use the photos, the owner just never imagined him using them the way he did.
I do believe there are always 3 sides to every story the truth that the owner and vet know, the vets interpretation, and the owners.
I would be glad that the automotive insurance hasn't sued for damages, as if the horse was out on the road, the owner is at fault.
If the owner of the horse is concerned or feels violated she can contact the college of veterinarians.
If the horse was in open range then it actually would have been the drivers fault for hitting the horse.
Seriously, wow. | |
| | |
 Veteran
Posts: 292
Location: Northeast Nebraska | NJJ - 2014-02-07 6:19 PM
I really HATE these types of threads that are always from one point of view (and heresay at best)....there is always, at the very least, two sides to EVERY story which has been proven out time and time again here on BHW.....You shouldn't crucify the vet UNTIL you hear HIS side.....Â
What's his side? Give me one good reason for what he did. | |
| | |
The Advice Guru
Posts: 6419
| GoGaited - 2014-02-08 1:26 PM
NJJ - 2014-02-07 6:19 PM
I really HATE these types of threads that are always from one point of view (and heresay at best)....there is always, at the very least, two sides to EVERY story which has been proven out time and time again here on BHW.....You shouldn't crucify the vet UNTIL you hear HIS side.....Â
What's his side? Give me one good reason for what he did.
You would have to ask him his side, I guess he has a different recollection of events. | |
| | |
Cold hands and Warm Heart
Location: oklahoma | Why doesn't she just call the vet up? I had one hit by a car 30 years ago, something a person never forgets. | |
| | |
Fact Checker
Posts: 16575
Location: Displaced Iowegian | cheryl makofka - 2014-02-08 1:43 PM GoGaited - 2014-02-08 1:26 PM NJJ - 2014-02-07 6:19 PM I really HATE these types of threads that are always from one point of view (and heresay at best)....there is always, at the very least, two sides to EVERY story which has been proven out time and time again here on BHW.....You shouldn't crucify the vet UNTIL you hear HIS side..... What's his side? Give me one good reason for what he did. You would have to ask him his side, I guess he has a different recollection of events.
GoGaited.....THAT IS the point !!!! What IS his side? You can't give a reason (or an opinion) for what he did without actually SEEING the photo and reading the story.........everything else is "heresay"..... | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 38
| ANYBODY that has any questions on anything to do with a vet should contact their State Vet Board. ( in Texas it is the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners ) . They should be able to answer all your questions at no cost ,or visit their web site . Also is a good place to see if your vet has had any disciplinary action against them.
They are the governing body for all Vets in all states and each vet Must respond to their inquest.
They are just as powerful or more than your local law enforcement and know the actual responsibility of all vets. | |
| | |
 A Somebody to Everybody
Posts: 41354
Location: Under The Big Sky Of Texas | NJJ - 2014-02-08 3:48 PM cheryl makofka - 2014-02-08 1:43 PM GoGaited - 2014-02-08 1:26 PM NJJ - 2014-02-07 6:19 PM I really HATE these types of threads that are always from one point of view (and heresay at best)....there is always, at the very least, two sides to EVERY story which has been proven out time and time again here on BHW.....You shouldn't crucify the vet UNTIL you hear HIS side..... What's his side? Give me one good reason for what he did. You would have to ask him his side, I guess he has a different recollection of events.  ^^^^ I would like to know what the Vet's side to this story is too, thats why I posted earlier, confront the Vet and see why he posted the pictures, I would call him or go to his office and talk with him. There is another side to this 
Edited by Southtxponygirl 2014-02-08 4:07 PM
| |
| | |
 Forever Young
Posts: 6768
Location: relocated to Texas | Zanadoo88 - 2014-02-08 6:20 PM What exactly are you insinuating about there being more to the story? My friend called me when she found the horse immediately after the accident. I was the one who referred her to the vet because my friend called me in a panic as I had used him in the past and was pleased with him. I arrived at my friends house minutes after she got off the phone with the vet.
Not insinuating anything, simply saying there is more to the story. There has never been a pancake made that was so thin it didn't have two sides. The vet is not on here to defend his or herself, you are a third party to the story. Ever heard of that game a lot of us played as kids called telephone? Basic jest of it was that the more times the story was repeated, the less it sounded like the original. | |
| | |
 Warmblood with Wings
Posts: 27846
Location: Florida.. | without PROOF of the post by vet.. .. its hearsay..
has nothing to do with if hes right or wrong..
its hearsay without PROOF of POST and HEARSAY of the conversation | |
| | |
 More bootie than waist!
Posts: 18425
Location: Riding Crackhead. | cheryl makofka - 2014-02-08 1:26 PM zerotlperformancehor - 2014-02-08 1:21 PM cheryl makofka - 2014-02-09 11:16 AM Barnmom - 2014-02-08 11:22 AM Sometimes a vet 45 minutes away IS a local vet.
I really can't believe people are questioning the judgement of the horses owner in this situation. I sure hope your horses are never so seriously injured that you have to put them down yourself vs. waiting hours for a vet or putting an injured horse thru an excruciating trailer ride.
Do you really think a vet that is so callous to post these pics with a caption reading "horse-0, car-1" is going to get there in any kind of hurry?
Sometimes when you have a seriously injured horse it is very clear that there is not much chance at the horse having any quality of life without spending thousands of dollars and even after all that the horse may still have to be put down. Why should any horse owner be looked down on for not wanting to put their families financial security on the line and cause further suffering for thier horse?
They got a vets opinion and ended the horses suffering quickly, what is so wrong with that, why are we all wondering what the other side of the story is? Seems pretty obvious to me they did the best they could in a bad situation.
I am so sick and tired of vets thinking you are a sorry horse owner because you don't want to go to heroic measures to save every animal you own that gets sick or injured. They have no problem marking a $15 bottle of meds up to $115 but they have no clue how hard some people work for that $100. Sounds to me like the vet was one of those who thinks every horse should be treated like Barbaro and has no concept that a huge vet bill on a horse that may end up dead anyways may not be financially feasable for some.
No one know the story, and each person will do different things in the same situation it all depends on available resources, and past experiences. As for putting families financial security in front of the horse, I do believe if you own a horse, you need to be responsible for the costs that owning a horse, food, shelter, adequate fencing, and emergency situations. But in this situation no one knows the degree of damage, what the owner said to the vet, as the vet maybe said the horse would not recover to performance level. And the vet perhaps asked to use the photos, the owner just never imagined him using them the way he did. I do believe there are always 3 sides to every story the truth that the owner and vet know, the vets interpretation, and the owners. I would be glad that the automotive insurance hasn't sued for damages, as if the horse was out on the road, the owner is at fault. If the owner of the horse is concerned or feels violated she can contact the college of veterinarians. If the horse was in open range then it actually would have been the drivers fault for hitting the horse. Seriously, wow.
We have open range law here in South Dakota. Years ago our neighbors Black Angus cattle got out. Hubby left for work in the middle of the night. He hit and killed numerous cows and calves. Thank goodness hubby wasn't hurt more than what he was but the cattle owners weren't liable for anything. | |
| |
| |
Folks on-line