Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: Vets Removed Dewclaws Without Consent?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Inner West Sydney
    Posts
    164

    Default

    I don't know how it works with Vets, but I'll give my heads up with what I know.

    I'm studying B. Oral Health in the Dentistry faculty, so as a future health professional, it's been dug well into my head that WRITTEN CONSENT is the most important file before any procedure proceeds. Without written consent, the patient has every right to sue the dental practitioner if there are any complications with treatment/surgery, unnecessary treatment (in this case, the removal of dewclaws), or any results which were not told to them. It is ILLEGAL to proceed any surgical procedures without informing the patient and getting their consent. The written consent is necessary medicolegally if a patient decides to sue the dental practitioner.

    Anyway, what I meant was, it was illegal for the vet to proceed with any form of surgery without first informing the client. Especially if there were no health risks involved. If I decided to extract someones healthy tooth without telling them, I most likely won't be able to practice as a dental practitioner anymore.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Queensland
    Posts
    423

    Default

    Back dew claws are best removed, if you are going to be upset with a clean wound I would hate to see you cope with a half ripped off claw, true the vet ought not to have done it, but it is for the best if it is only the back ones, front dew claws ought never to be taken off, dogs use them like fingers to hold stuff, if it is front dew claws I would complain, if it is only back ones, the vet has done you a favour like it or not.
    And right or wrong no need for tears for goodness sake.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    New1

    Theoretically you could sue for the cost of having to go to another town for vet services... But legal cost of doing that could be outside what you'd get back.

    I don't think my dog has dew claws at the back. Nope - nothing.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    2,388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    New1

    Theoretically you could sue for the cost of having to go to another town for vet services... But legal cost of doing that could be outside what you'd get back.

    I don't think my dog has dew claws at the back. Nope - nothing.
    Yea neither have either of mine...

    What determines if a dog has them? My friends dog has them at the back and I find it a bit weird

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    melbourne australia
    Posts
    3,082

    Default

    Without consent, this is assault on a animal. That's the charge.
    You dont want the fame of 'trouble maker' so suck it up, change your vet if you wish, but i too think that removal is best.
    Having had a dog's dew claw rip, i now have them taken off during desexing. Back dew claws only.
    The front is removal of bone, it IS the dogs finger. Ive once had a vet remove both, when i only requested the back. The dog was asleep, felt nowt, bandages came off as he took them off, nice clean wound that healed fast.
    That ripped dew claw took 3 months to heal, with multi infections.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lala View Post
    Yea neither have either of mine...

    What determines if a dog has them? My friends dog has them at the back and I find it a bit weird
    Genetics I would think.

    There are some breeds, who are rock climbers and such, who have double dew claws on both front and back!
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Regional NSW
    Posts
    94

    Default

    I work in Medical Records and any procedure has to have consent. Just like the dentist dude said.

    My other job is in a library and check this link out, there is a page in here on vets and negligence.

    http://www.lawsociety.com.au/idc/gro...ers/420246.pdf

    I too would be cross, very cross.

    Gigha is going in to be desexed next week and if they do anything other then what they have said I would be FURIOUS.
    Last edited by kerriek_99; 08-18-2011 at 02:01 PM. Reason: URL didnt work

  8. #18

    Default

    Okay.

    So DH had a side word with the technician, whom brought out the vet.

    The vet turned out to be the other vet in the practice, so not the person I normally see.

    She explained thoroughly the reasons why she did it, I just wish they had explained in the first place rather than DH having to actually ask what happened to her legs.

    In researching today, i decided, had I had time to research, I would of come to the same conclusion, and I think the vet did the right thing with the removal.

    It wasn't both front and rear, as I thought, but just the hind ones. I understand why the Vet chose that time to do it, and am actually glad she did, as I have a little mischief maker, and I could honestly see them being torn in the future.

    I just wish the other vet or anyone had mentioned the dangers that went along the the nice shape of Roxy's hind dewclaws. I never knew anything about them being dangerous and although I had the odd thought of it from time to time, I never actually saw anything about torn dewclaws until I looked into it.

    Next time, I am going to triple check with hubby that the phone records listed are the correct ones!!!

    No-one mentioned anything on the bandages (the orange sticky bandaid bandages) on her legs, when should they be removed? I wouldn't think that they should be left on it till the stitches are removed as they would get too grubby, or are they supposed to stay on?

    So far, so good, she hasn't touched them apart from the odd glance, and is bright & sparkly (too much so, only way I got her to rest was to lock her in the bathroom away from any sights/sounds/light, fun trying to keep the stitches dry though, especially with it raining out and her wanting to go pee in the middle of the yard! And whenever I need to use the facilities she does this whole mad happy dance, so I spend half my time on the toilet trying to calm her down ROFL.

    Thanks for everyones advice, and if anyone has any experience about the sticky bandages, that would be great. Also, specially with dewclaws as well, shouldn't she have gotten some pain meds? They never gave her anything (or me) apart from the surgery anaesthetic.

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by New1 View Post
    Okay.

    So DH had a side word with the technician, whom brought out the vet.

    The vet turned out to be the other vet in the practice, so not the person I normally see.

    She explained thoroughly the reasons why she did it, I just wish they had explained in the first place rather than DH having to actually ask what happened to her legs.

    In researching today, i decided, had I had time to research, I would of come to the same conclusion, and I think the vet did the right thing with the removal.

    It wasn't both front and rear, as I thought, but just the hind ones. I understand why the Vet chose that time to do it, and am actually glad she did, as I have a little mischief maker, and I could honestly see them being torn in the future.

    I just wish the other vet or anyone had mentioned the dangers that went along the the nice shape of Roxy's hind dewclaws. I never knew anything about them being dangerous and although I had the odd thought of it from time to time, I never actually saw anything about torn dewclaws until I looked into it.

    Next time, I am going to triple check with hubby that the phone records listed are the correct ones!!!

    No-one mentioned anything on the bandages (the orange sticky bandaid bandages) on her legs, when should they be removed? I wouldn't think that they should be left on it till the stitches are removed as they would get too grubby, or are they supposed to stay on?

    So far, so good, she hasn't touched them apart from the odd glance, and is bright & sparkly (too much so, only way I got her to rest was to lock her in the bathroom away from any sights/sounds/light, fun trying to keep the stitches dry though, especially with it raining out and her wanting to go pee in the middle of the yard! And whenever I need to use the facilities she does this whole mad happy dance, so I spend half my time on the toilet trying to calm her down ROFL.

    Thanks for everyones advice, and if anyone has any experience about the sticky bandages, that would be great. Also, specially with dewclaws as well, shouldn't she have gotten some pain meds? They never gave her anything (or me) apart from the surgery anaesthetic.
    It is still unacceptable that a vet performed a procedure on someone elses animal without consulting them. It wasn't a life or death situation so not being able to contact you should have just meant it didn't happen.

    And I am sorry just because you have now done some research and feel the removal is good doesn't mean it shouldn't be reported.

    And the fact that they never mentioned to you that the surgery had been done until your OH asked or the fact that no after op care info was given is just neglectful.

    So far nothing this Vet has done has been right.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern NSW
    Posts
    3,782

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minibulls mum View Post
    Back dew claws are best removed, if you are going to be upset with a clean wound I would hate to see you cope with a half ripped off claw, true the vet ought not to have done it, but it is for the best if it is only the back ones, front dew claws ought never to be taken off, dogs use them like fingers to hold stuff, if it is front dew claws I would complain, if it is only back ones, the vet has done you a favour like it or not.
    And right or wrong no need for tears for goodness sake.
    If I had a dog with dew claws I would get them removed. One of our working kelpies still had his and he got them caught on something and gave him an agonizing injury. I also know of several other dogs that had similar things happen. I agree you should have been asked. But i would think that the vet tried to prevent another anaestetic........I know there are a couple of breeds where the dew claws are required for breed Standard, but most are better of without. And a lot of breeders get it done before the new owner even has a choice or is aware.
    It was a painless procedure done with the wellness of your dog in mind i think
    Pets are forever

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •