• Forum/Server Upgrade If you are reading this you have made it to the upgraded forum. Posts made on the old forum after 26th October 2023 have not been transfered. Everything else should be here. If you find any issues please let us know.

its the rabbits fault if it dies from anaesthic undergoing neutering!!!

this is what i was told at the pdsa. i was shocked.

vets are sometimes bad and sometimes really bad at neutering. its just not always their forte.

anaesthetic combinations are different at different vets.
too and one vet will swear against using for example ketamin another will swear for it.

an anaesthetic can be ok for a rabbit one day. the same anaesthetic can kill that rabbit on another day.

under no circumstances could it possibly be conceived to be any doing or fault of the rabbit.
 
What a load of brown stuff - not the rabbits fault at all! Stupid vet!!!

GA is risky for every animal - humans included. The vet/surgeon can only reduce those risks as much as possible. Some humans react badly to GA - some are fine. Some with animals - what suits one, doesn't suit the other. It's one of those things. But having a decent good vet is one of those things that reduces the risk.
 
They probably just meant the vets were in no way at fault. Which is usually the case as sadly some rabbits don't cope well with the anaesthetic, usually because of underlying conditions.
 
what i mean is i am looking at the language being used.

and seeing how it operates in conversation and why.

this determines outlook of situation and feelings.

there are no real statistics to make any real informed decisions.

there is no real reporting of adverse drug reactions. this is disturbing.

anaesthetic kills 1 in 100 for a hypothetical example.

then which anaesthetics?

are some more risky less, risky - are some vets opting for more risky anaesthetics because they save time and give more profit (i happen to know yes is that answer)

and what are the individual vet death rates for example- not available :(

i realise the line

'must have had an underlieing condition' is used but this is not based in fact.

see how again this places blame or responsibility onto the rabbit and away from the vet and anaesthetic -

also the 'rabbit reacted poorly to the anaesthetic'

not the anaesthetic hurt that rabbit - responsibility on the anaesthetic -

so what did the rabbit exactly do wrong in not coping- how could she have better prepared herself to 'cope'?

why are we so reluctant to acknowledge responsibilty that the anaesthetic killed that rabbit?? and it was not the rabbits fault it is just what anaesthetic does to an unknown percentage of the
population because we are all different.
 
The reasons for a GA being higher risk in rabbits in comparison to dogs and cats are multiple. Each Vet will use the best anaesthetic combination for each individual animal as no Vet wants to loose an patient under GA.
 
The reasons for a GA being higher risk in rabbits in comparison to dogs and cats are multiple. Each Vet will use the best anaesthetic combination for each individual animal as no Vet wants to loose an patient under GA.

there are some vets that dont care if they lose an individual animal so long as their overall record is ok and it doesnt reflect badly on them.

but one does hope for the best in vets.

i have never come across a vet to taylor make an anaesthetic to an individual rabbit for example - only they have developed their own anaesthetic regime and the rabbit undergoes it.
 
I do appreciate there are some bad Vets but I stand up for the majority. Every animal is dosed according to weight and considerations such as age, pre-anaesthetic blood tests and existing medical conditions are used to determine drug choice. There are standard protocols that work well in the majority of animals but these may be adjusted according to the latter. I assure you that no Vet wants to loose an animal under anaesthetic. It is absolutely devastating.
 
i was in the operating room with at least one vet who really didnt care. this was a dog who needed his leg removing and should have been straight forward and he was careless and not in the slightest bit bothered that the dog died because of it.

i dont know the majority of vets.

no-one does.

vets have individual reasons for entering the profession.
money and status being some of those reasons.

some who have amazing charismatic personalities too and you leave your animal there with them feeling great really dislike animals!


i have found a small core of vets however over the long years and they are genuine.

my main issues are just how difficult it is to really know.

its hard enough in hospitals with patients voicing all the neglect they have endured on the wards by the nursing staff.

:)
 
People at the PDSA in general I think aren't used to being questioned. They think you should just be grateful you are getting free vet treatment at all. I have particularly found that with some of the receptionists who are often volunteers and whilst most are lovely you get the odd self righteous one who look down their noses at you because you're having to use a charity for your animals.
I would imagine the receptionist has just come out with it because she didn't know the answer to your question and has no concept of the problems with vets not understanding rabbits very well. To her, one qualified vet will be as good/ the same as the rest and you should stop asking difficult questions and just be grateful. I can also understand why the routine preventative treatment that they offer isn't any cheaper than a normal vet, they need to make some money somewhere.

My personal experience of the PDSA would be that I wouldn't use them for a rabbit's treatment unless in an emergency where I had no other choice.
 
i realise the line

'must have had an underlieing condition' is used but this is not based in fact.

see how again this places blame or responsibility onto the rabbit and away from the vet and anaesthetic -

The statement bolded most probably is true and in most cases will be fact. If the vet cares enough to do a postmortem (something my vet will aways do if given permission by the rabbit's owner) then this can be deemed to be fact but if they don't do PM for whatever reason then they make the assumption.

I lost a rabbit recently under GA (he'd had two previously) and a PM showed he had 'an underlying condition', one which clearly made him not a good candidate for GA - sadly we couldn't know that without looking in his abdomen and would have needed a GA to do that! I don't want to misquote my vet on it but my memory/understanding was that she said if she lost a rabbit under GA there was always an underlying health reason.
 
The statement bolded most probably is true and in most cases will be fact. If the vet cares enough to do a postmortem (something my vet will aways do if given permission by the rabbit's owner) then this can be deemed to be fact but if they don't do PM for whatever reason then they make the assumption.

I lost a rabbit recently under GA (he'd had two previously) and a PM showed he had 'an underlying condition', one which clearly made him not a good candidate for GA - sadly we couldn't know that without looking in his abdomen and would have needed a GA to do that! I don't want to misquote my vet on it but my memory/understanding was that she said if she lost a rabbit under GA there was always an underlying health reason.

oh i am sorry to hear that, it is tragic. :(

i can say 100% that you do not need an underlieing health condition to die from any drug including anaesthetic.

you rightly say that in your case it was fact via a PM.

and this highlights to me that really we cant always know before agreeing to an operation - the full facts - as you say in your case it would have needed a GA to investigate if a GA could safely be given.

i am glad you have shared it because there is a deafening silence.

on a wider scale vets often do the thinking for us. they weigh up what they think is best and then try to minimise any distress by saying there was an underlying health condition. they may even say this after finding nothing in a pm to bring swift closure to the incident.

there is nothing inherently wrong with this - doctors used to do this with cancer patients by saying to the family she has cancer - best not tell them- some people do in fact prefer this-

personally, i want neutral translation of full scientific fact from credible studies which i have found is disturbingly lacking simply because there is nothing better yet to replace it.

we will see when something better comes into place - they will be more willing to talk of all the cons of current procedures.
 
i was in the operating room with at least one vet who really didnt care. this was a dog who needed his leg removing and should have been straight forward and he was careless and not in the slightest bit bothered that the dog died because of it.i dont know the majority of vets.

no-one does.

vets have individual reasons for entering the profession.
money and status being some of those reasons.

some who have amazing charismatic personalities too and you leave your animal there with them feeling great really dislike animals!


i have found a small core of vets however over the long years and they are genuine.

my main issues are just how difficult it is to really know.

its hard enough in hospitals with patients voicing all the neglect they have endured on the wards by the nursing staff.

:)

I assume you reported him.
 
oh i am sorry to hear that, it is tragic. :(

i can say 100% that you do not need an underlieing health condition to die from any drug including anaesthetic.you rightly say that in your case it was fact via a PM.

and this highlights to me that really we cant always know before agreeing to an operation - the full facts - as you say in your case it would have needed a GA to investigate if a GA could safely be given.

i am glad you have shared it because there is a deafening silence.

on a wider scale vets often do the thinking for us. they weigh up what they think is best and then try to minimise any distress by saying there was an underlying health condition. they may even say this after finding nothing in a pm to bring swift closure to the incident.

there is nothing inherently wrong with this - doctors used to do this with cancer patients by saying to the family she has cancer - best not tell them- some people do in fact prefer this-

personally, i want neutral translation of full scientific fact from credible studies which i have found is disturbingly lacking simply because there is nothing better yet to replace it.

we will see when something better comes into place - they will be more willing to talk of all the cons of current procedures.

How do you know 100%? :? Surely all the animals that died under GA would have to have a comprehensive PM to rule out any underlying health condition. Is this from personal experience (you talk as you've been in theatre) or is there some statistics on it somewhere? I suspect that a lot of rabbits that die under anaesthetic are just put down to statistics and nobody bothers with a PM. I know my vet is in the minority on that as she wants to understand if a bunny has died unexpectedly whilst in her care.
 
Back
Top