Where would you file a complaint against a veterinarian? - Page 3

Thank you, Crys, for understanding the point, as a few here have missed in this fairly straightforward thread. I, too, skip around from vet to vet, but as my animals are just about NEVER sick, I didn't know about their "policy" and would've expected to have to  sign any consent forms, as I did for the blood panel, surgery, anesthesia, etc.

You got it, Keith. This is my concern, and the real reason I'm upset. He's not OLD, but he's not super young, either. Not that age matters much, but no one can tell me in all honesty that they think this is the way to vaccinate. When I vaccinate, it's against a real threat, and it's done in a manner conducive to protecting from a disease without causing long term damage. Vaccinate one at a time, when the dog is in optimal health and as free from stress as possible. Then, wait months to make sure there is no reaction you can see before considering vaccinating for anything else. Maybe a lot of people think I'm nuts, but I don't care. Never hurt a dog by doing it this way, as opposed to the cocktail approach. Better safe than sorry.

To those who are belittling me and disagree...this thread wasn't started to spur a discussion about vaccinating or Haiti or anything else that's been brought up. I WAS SIMPLY ASKING FOR A POINT IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I don't need your permission or verification of my right to be upset. I am upset. It's my right. It's my dog. END OF STORY.

THANK YOU TO THOSE WHO CONTRIBUTED WORTHWHILE ADVICE.

Did you ever clarify if it's the vet who is Incarnate Evil, or just a stupid, wrong-headed tech?

IOW, is it just possible that the vet never even heard of your mandate to not vaccinate because the tech never told him?

"Skipping around from vet to vet" unfortunately often leads to things like this, as there is no established relationship where the practice knows you, knows your knowledge, and staff knows your views and is less likely to screw up.  Again, the tech was wrong, but I'd want to know for certain if the vet overrode what the tech said, or if it was the tech who wrongly made an executive decision to vax because it was "hospital policy."  Since this is becoming an official complaint, yes, the vet needs to tech his techs better, and complaining officially IMO is the only way to make sure this happens.  I'd just want to know.

 

Like I said, they are aware of my policy on vaccines. We go through this with every puppy I bring in for a health certificate. They sigh, and bitch that I really need to start at 4 weeks, or 6, or whatever...but as I am doing nothing illegal, they can't say much.

My animals so rarely need medical attention that it is hard to establish a relationship with ANY vet, plus I just moved here.

Like I also said, I don't know who is the guiltier one- the tech or the vet, because neither of them were there. I still think they should SEEK permission to vaccinate, as they do with humans. Also, for sure, the tech is guilty of not informing me there COULD POSSIBLY be an issue w/my instructions and "hospital policy." I think the vet should at least call and ask anything that might have been unclear before making executive decsions about MY DOG. If they want to play Russian roulette w/their own dogs and shoot them up with whatever the latest vaccine fad is, that's their prerogative. But as long as we still pretend to be a free country, client wishes need to be respected, especially when they are in line with the law, and when the suggested procedure is against AVMA policy.