independent advice on recent vet diagnosis

[JDV23]

Hi guys....

Hoping someone can offer me some advice.

 

 

I am a little confused over my rights during a recent series of unfortunate events regarding my 8yr old bitch, Honey (mixed breed).

 

Some months back she tore her cruciate ligament. It took me a while to decide how best to proceed, considering costs involved. Having decided to go ahead with surgery to fix the problem, surgery was duly carried out and the recovery process proceeded without complication (including a check-up 7 days post op). 12 days post op, I noticed a large (child fist-sized, approx.) lump near her left hind leg. Assuming this to perhaps be a hormonal/stress reaction to the surgery/post-op medication etc, I wasn’t immediately or overly worried by this.

 

14 days post op, I took Honey in for stitches removal. I pointed out the lump to the vet, who proceeded to take a biopsy from the lump, and from other swollen lymph glands running down her neck. He called the next day to confirm that she had lymphoma, with a prognosis of 4-5 weeks left to live. Distressing/shocking to say the least.

 

Am I correct in assuming that a thorough pre-op check would've been conducted on Honey, to ensure she was fit for surgery? Surely if this was undertaken thoroughly, concisely and accurately than this, obviously advanced-stage cancer surely should have been detected?

 

My point is that I never would have undertaken the expensive leg surgery had I been aware of the existence of such an advanced-stage terminal disease.

 

Is there a case here of professional misconduct, and if so, should I be in the least refunded for the leg surgery which I would never have agreed to given the knowledge of the cancer?

[JDV23]

Sorry, should have included this in original msg.

 

Have got in touch with RCVS, who have sent me the stock complaint form.

 

If i'm understanding the role they play/powers they have, they only really get involved with matters of "disgraceful conduct in a professional respect". I would not say that my situation suggests 'disgraceful conduct', rather negligent conduct, something that the RCVS appear to consider something of a grey area and advise contacting the Vet in question.

 

Now, call me a nay-sayer, but I'm fairly sure said Vet would not readily acknowledge professional negligence to me, and refund the £1500 cost of the ligament surgery (plus associated costs - petrol for vets visits, time of work etc).

 

This considered, whom should I approach for further advice on this (potential) situation?

 

Any advise gratefully received.

[postmn]

I had a simalat situation the dog went in for surgery and then I had a emergency call out 2 days later due to problems with the surgery that I was not told about . the way how I sorted it was I approached the vet in writing to express my unhappiness of the service and then we came to a agreement on the bill . I think that is what you are hoping for some form of gtesure towards the bill .

to put it into context I had a bill for £1300 and eventually we settled on £500

[JDV23]

I had a simalat situation the dog went in for surgery and then I had a emergency call out 2 days later due to problems with the surgery that I was not told about . the way how I sorted it was I approached the vet in writing to express my unhappiness of the service and then we came to a agreement on the bill . I think that is what you are hoping for some form of gtesure towards the bill .

to put it into context I had a bill for £1300 and eventually we settled on £500

 

Thanks for your reply postmn - yes, situations sounds similar (though not identical).

I guess in my case, I feel that the vet either

1) knew about the Lymphoma, but failed to tell as I was obviously never going to spend £1500 on leg surgery for a terminally ill dog

2) didn't know about Lymphoma, but should've picked up on it when conducting pre-op tests

 

In my mind, case 1) amounts to gross professional conduct (but how would I prove this??)

case 2 ) amounts to professional negligence (but how would I prove this??!!)

[postmn]

Thanks for your reply postmn - yes, situations sounds similar (though not identical).

I guess in my case, I feel that the vet either

1) knew about the Lymphoma, but failed to tell as I was obviously never going to spend £1500 on leg surgery for a terminally ill dog

2) didn't know about Lymphoma, but should've picked up on it when conducting pre-op tests

 

In my mind, case 1) amounts to gross professional conduct (but how would I prove this??)

case 2 ) amounts to professional negligence (but how would I prove this??!!)

 

I would have to say what do you want out of this , if it is a reduction in the bill due to the fact your dog only had weeks to live I think you could do that , however if you want to prove neglicence etc I think that is very difficault , what did the vet say when you quieried it with him .

[JDV23]

I would have to say what do you want out of this , if it is a reduction in the bill due to the fact your dog only had weeks to live I think you could do that , however if you want to prove neglicence etc I think that is very difficault , what did the vet say when you quieried it with him .

 

Agreed - to prove negligence is going to v.hard, probably impossible.

I have yet to query with vet - still trying to digest the bad news... this is obviously the next step; I just wanted to clarify where I stand and best course of action before approaching the vet.

Not really sure what I'm hoping to achieve here (sounds dumb I know). Certainly some kind of reduction in bills if its apparent that he should have picked up on the Lymphoma before operating on Honey's leg (if not a complete refund!!)

[jm2k]

Agreed - to prove negligence is going to v.hard, probably impossible.

I have yet to query with vet - still trying to digest the bad news... this is obviously the next step; I just wanted to clarify where I stand and best course of action before approaching the vet.

Not really sure what I'm hoping to achieve here (sounds dumb I know). Certainly some kind of reduction in bills if its apparent that he should have picked up on the Lymphoma before operating on Honey's leg (if not a complete refund!!)

 

Firstly find out about diagnosis of Lymphoma:

http://www.wearethecure.org/lymphoma

Did the pre-op blood tests check for it or is it a specific test not showing signs under routine bloods?

This could found the basis of pre-existing condition which the vet could/should have found prior to operating and can be used as lack of competency on their side.

 

Hope these people on the link can help.

Very sorry to hear about your dog and the fact she had such a trauma of any operation when she needs her calm and happy life at most now

[JDV23]

THanks guys,

 

Honey sadly passed away at home with me a couple of weeks ago (the morning of the day I was going to have her put to sleep anyway).

JM2K - I requested a copy of her recent medical history - and from what I can see, no pre-op bloods were taken (Is this normal?) The Lymphoma was only diagnosed via a biopsy of a lump that I noticed, a week or so after the operation.

[jm2k]

THanks guys,

 

Honey sadly passed away at home with me a couple of weeks ago (the morning of the day I was going to have her put to sleep anyway).

JM2K - I requested a copy of her recent medical history - and from what I can see, no pre-op bloods were taken (Is this normal?) The Lymphoma was only diagnosed via a biopsy of a lump that I noticed, a week or so after the operation.

 

So sorry for hearing you lost girl and my delay in reply.

Usually the vet asks if you wish to have a pre-op blood screening, rather than them do it automatically. It adds about £60 to the bill.

Unless they ask you and you agree to it, generally most vets would not automatically run them.

[hightail]

Could the surgery and associated stress have aggravated a previously dormant condition?