Complaint Review: Cares Center For Animal Referrals Langhorne Pa - Langhorne Pennsylvania

I agree with Laura and her different point of view (actually the main reason why I like to hand around on this site :-), on this one. It very well may have been the actions the vet took that is the reason the animal was still up and around the next day. They are only human, and sadly must protect themselves. And maybe due to today's society, quite often feel that they must do so much more than neccesary in order to avoid a cry of foul play. However, if that was truly the condition the pet was in, I can certainly see why they would release it AMA. As far as not letting people in the back? It would be very easy for people who are not in the know to misunderstand some very neccesary protocols and procedures if you did know what you were seeing or the reasons for it. Not to mention all the other aspects that may be involved such as insurance, drugs, what if you wandered in the room during x-rays without adequate protection, stuff like that. *just my opinion*

MY BELGIAN MALINOIS K-9 DOG SLIPPED HIS COLLAR WHEN I WAS WALKING HIM AND HE GOT HIT BY A CAR. THE DRIVER AND I BUNDLED HIM UP AND I WENT TO A VET CLINIC WHICH IS NO LONGER IN BUSINESS THAT WAS LOCATED IN AUSTIN, TEXAS OFF OF 183 IN YUPPIE TOWN. I WENT TO A VET IN NORTH AUSTIN BECAUSE WHEN I THOUGHT MY BOXER HAD BEEN SHOT, I TOOK HIM THERE AND THEY LET ME HAVE A PAY AS YOU GO PLAN AND I PAID THEM IN FULL EVERY DOLLAR I OWED THEM. SO I WENT THERE BECAUSE THEY WERE CLOSER TO MY REGULAR VET. THEY TOOK HIM IN AND DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING YOU SAID THESE PEOPLE DID TO YOU. I DID NOT GET TO BE IN THE EXAMINING ROOM WITH HIM! THEY CLAIMED THEY HAD TO SEDATE HIM AND RUN ALL OF THESE TESTS AND WHEN I RAN OUT OF CASH, THEY CONNED ME INTO APPLYING FOR A MEDICAL CREDIT CARD WHICH THEY RAN UP TO THE LIMIT FOR $500. TURNS OUT THE X-RAYS DID NOT LOOK RIGHT TO ME. THEY LOOKED OLD AND THEY WERE FROM AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT BREED OF DOG SHOWING TWO LEGS BROKEN INSTEAD OF JUST THE ONE AND THE VET WAS ANGRY AT ME. SHE WAS A YOUNG LADY VET AND NOT A VERY GOOD ACTOR. I DEMANDED THAT THEY GIVE ME MY DOG AND THEY DID AND WHILE THE KENNEL ATTENDANT WAS TAKING HIM OUT TO MY CAR, SHE SAID THAT MAYBE I SHOUOLD JUST GIVE THEM MY DOG SINCE I COULD NOT AFFORD TO PROPERLY CARE FOR HIM AND THREATENED ME TO GIVE HIM TO THEM OR THEY WOULD GET THE ASPCA AND FILE CHARGES AGAINST ME FOR ANIMAL CRUELTY. THEY MADE NO EFFORT TO SET HIS LEG THAT HAD OBVIOUSLY BEEN BROKEN. I WENT BACK TO MY REGULAR VET WHERE I MANAGED TO PAWN MY DUTY BELT AND PISTOL AND MY REGULAR VET SET THE LEG FOR $200. HE SAID IT WAS JUST A MINOR BONE CRACK AND NOT EVEN FULLY BROKEN. NO OTHER DAMAGE! HE GOT HIS MONEY IN FULL, IN CASH. I LATER REDEEMED MY DUTY BELT AND PISTOL. THESE UNETHICAL VETS HAD TO MOVE FROM THEIR LOCATION. I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY LET ME PAY THE TREATMENT FOR MY BOXER IN FULL BUT THEY WANTED TO CON ME INTO THE FAKE XRAYS AND DID NOTHING FOR MY DOG THEN CHARGED ME $500 ON A CREDIT CARD THAT THEY MADE ME GET UNDER DURESS AND WANTED TO TAKE MY DOG TOO. THEY LIED AND THEY WENT OUT OF BUSINESS. I EXPLAINED TO MY LAWYER WHAT HAPPENED AND I ONLY PAID $100 ON THE CREDIT CARD AND DID NOT HAVE TO PAY THE CLINIC ANYMORE BECAUSE I PAID THEM WHAT I OWED. IT IS A VERY SAD DAY WHEN VETS BECOME SCAM ARTISTS.

As someone who is in the veterinary community, and someone who has discussed this case with the practice, I think it is appropriate to offer a much different perspective. As I understand this- the pet was brought in as an emergency for acute collapse following being out in the yard, where she had been scratching at her face and was observed vomiting. Double the dose of flea product was also applied in the past 24 hrs. Upon arrival the dog was immediately triaged to the hospital's treatment area where she was evaluated by the ER veterinarian and found to be in shock. An iv catheter was immediately placed, and treatment for shock instituted with iv fluids. An antihistamine injection had also been given to treat potential bee sting envenomation. The veterinarian discussed fully with the owner that this collapse event and shock might well be secondary to bee sting envenomation, but flea product toxicity, and a number of other causes (unrelated to the provided history) could be behind this. The veterinarian assessed the situation, and provided the owner an initial estimate of 600-800.00. The owner declined to admit the dog to the hospital. The veterinarian advised the owner that given the severity of this dog's clinical signs, she should be hospitalized. Because of financial constraints- the owner took her home- and against medical advice. As I see it- the doctor at this facility did everything right. She appropriately assessed the situation, treated this dog's clinical signs, and did so rapidly and without hesitation. Given the owner's decision to take her home- the veterinarian is indeed obligated to inform the owner that it is ill-advised to take the dog home. That is the meaning of AMA or against medical advice'. At the point in time that this was transpiring- remember that the dog remained clinically in shock- circulatory collapse, low blood pressure, and not responding. To have advised the owner that this patient was stable to be discharged to home would have been malpractice. Can you imagine anyone recommending against hospitalizing a patient in such condition? The irony of this entire case is that the owner's justification for being upset is that the pet in fact lived- and therefore has jumped to the conclusion that because she lived- she did not need to be in the hospital. Therefore the recommendation to admit the pet as a patient was a rip-off! Take a moment to think about that logic. Re-read this and digest it. As a very conscientious member of the veterinary profession- I am compelled to refute this accusation, and shed light on the subject. What the veterinarian did was appropriately evaluate the patient, appropriately treat the patient, and provide the pet owner with appropriate, sound, and defensible medical recommendations. Is that not what is expected of the veterinarian? To do otherwise would have been a problem. That the owner elected to take the dog home does not change the medical recommendation. That the dog survived does not change the appropriateness or merit of the medical recommendation, either- and that is a very important point to consider. This kind of thought process- one of assigning blame to others rather than to take responsibility for one's decisions or actions (including one's pet)- is in itself a malignancy that poisons too many people. If you want to take your pet home, having an understanding of the recommendations- then OK, fine. It is your decision to make. I'm very happy for you that your pet survived! Have you considered- if even for a moment- that what the veterinarian did for your dog was of benefit, and without that possibly she might not have made it? To the initial author with the complaint- I would suggest rethinking your position. Hey, everyone makes mistakes! In this case, however, the veterinarian did not. Own up, and retract your statement. Take the first step in ridding yourself of the malignancy you harbor. You will feel better for it, knowing you are true to yourself and others. In addition, you can model accountability and responsibility to those around you.

I think you neglected to state exactly what happened....Your dog was stung by a bee and then you applied flea/tick medication for DOUBLE the weight of your dog!!! She was suffering from shock....am I correct? I think you better state the truth and not make up silly lies about this facility that attempted to help you. CARES is an outstanding facility and cares for your pet like its their own. Are they expensive? Of course its an EMERGENCY facility and they must charge fees to keep the state of the art facility running. Next time use the correct dose of medication and care for your dog properly or deal with the fees that come along with pet ownership!