ITV's Tonight programme broadcast last night portrayed a veterinary profession in which overcharging is commonplace.
Researchers for the programme took three healthy animals (a cat, a dog and a rabbit) to a number of different vets, telling them that the animals were off their food. The advice they were given varied. In the case of the rabbit from no treatment necessary, to dental work under general anaesthetic.
TV vet Marc Abraham then looked at each animal and told viewers that the correct advice in each case would have been the least expensive.
The programme also highlighted the substantial savings that pet owners can make by buying drugs online, and questioned whether the penalty meted out to a vet that had committed malpractice was sufficient (the vet had been struck off for 14 months, where presenter Jonathan Maitland argued it should have been for life).
Veterinary business consultant Mark Moran said: "So often, vets rely to a large degree on what owners are telling them, and the degree to which they insist the animal is ill, or off its food, will affect the advice and treatment given. Marc Abraham had the luxury of being presented three animals that he knew to be perfectly fit and well."
However he agreed wholeheartedly with the response from RCVS President Jill Nute this morning, that the thing both vets and pet owners need to learn from the programme is "the importance of communicating with each other".
Mark said: "It's a question of managing people's expectations. There'll always be a variance in the advice being given, but being up-front and open will help mitigate the risk of being accused of overcharging".
Click here to watch the programme. Click here to read the reactions to Marc Abrahams' blog
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vets.
I agree with a lot of sediments here. An hour of recording for then just a few minutes of the RCVS interview to be show. I guess it's to be expected with media using what they want.Perhaps a written statement would be better as is often the case with larger organisations?
I personally have had rabbits whose teeth have looked ok on auroscope but who are still not eating well and GA has revealed problems I could not see.
History is alot of our job and to bring animals in with a person who lies about the history is a little unfair- we don't actually see how well the 'act' is played out.Did that lady really lay it on heavy about the off food rabbit? And if we hadn't taken such a case seriously and the animal had died from ileus we would be up in front of RCVS asap!
I am personally writing a letter of complaint to ITV and looking into whether off com should be involved because I feel that strongly. I find it a slap in the mouth when the only 'nice' comment is made right at the end. I shall remember this programme next time I postpone dinner to perfom a c section late in the evening with a sad shake of my head!
At the end of the day there's cowboys everywhere in whatever profession- there probably should not be but it happens. It's a shame that it brings down the whole profession at what is to become i potentially finacially challenging time.
Rant over!