HomeCat HealthdrugsWoman believes her veterinarian negligently killed her dog with Buprenorphine

Comments

Woman believes her veterinarian negligently killed her dog with Buprenorphine — 11 Comments

  1. Off-label use of drugs is inherently risky. Any time the owner needs an understanding of a treatment to the level of a medical professional is risky, and too often they find out the hard way. As I read this I thought it was also risky to give the dog any fluids in that condition out of fear of aspiration, but also because I knew ahead of time that this went bad so I was looking for trouble. However I think the root cause was overdose. Vets make mistakes and we have to watch out for them all the time. It’s hard for me to trust anymore, and I go to the very best available within 100 miles.

    • Yes, I agree with you again. It is a mistake and the consequences are tragic. I have a feeling that vets can become a little blasé about their patients. They take more risks than doctors do with human patients.

      • The consequences from our SVB was a slap on wrist and a 250 fine along with being ordered to take 4 extra hours of continuing education.
        Pets are still largely viewed as personal property not living beings or even living property with any special rights. Lawsuits are rare because it’s almost impossible to recover damages. Your pet has not value unless expensive pedigree but the law will make you put on a medical malpractice suit. Quite literally veterinarians can get by with murder.

        • Lawsuits are rare because it’s almost impossible to recover damages.

          Hit the nail on the head and the same applies to med neg for doctors because vets are allowed to make mistakes. It’s human to do so. This is why cat owners should be politely vigilant and demanding.

  2. Continued. There are very few animal specific drugs almost all of the advanced treatments our pets receive are through the use of drugs intended for human use but veterinarians have found effective in treating our pets. Bup is the only pain reliever I allow my cats to have. That was per my own research.
    Remember than enrofloxacin a drug made specifically for animals killed our Kitten and has caused endless suffering in pets even when given in correct doses.

    • Does it seem to you that this vet administered to much of this drug for this dog? I guess that is common sense as the dog died. It looks like carelessness to me.

      • Probably. I hope the veterinarian has been reported so that an investigation can happen.
        They would also need to submit their pet for a necropsy to determine the most likely cause of death especially since there is no firm diagnosis for the dogs original issues.

        • It would have been nice to know what she did other ask for her money back. I am not sure she got it back. And I would doubt she followed up on it and made a formal complaint etc.. Complaints and stuff like that can extend the emotional upset.

          • No kidding. However allowing a veterinarian that makes that kind of mistake to continue unchallenged means there will likely be more victims. We paid a heavy emotional price pursing our BAD VET. No regrets.
            Legally it’s very hard to make a claim the drug killed her dog without either a conformation from another vet and in a case like this a necropsy. No one in the legal world is there to help you and they would bear the full burden of finding ways to pursue it. As long as pets are property the murdering veterinarians continue to practice with little fear but a slap from the nearest board regulating them.
            A complaint to a state veterinary board however is free and forms can be downloaded online all you have to provide is the information. They can also make a formal complaint to their state Attorney General. I was approached by many people about the monster we encountered but I’m not the person who can do something.

  3. https://www.fda.gov/animalveterinary/resourcesforyou/ucm380135.htm
    I cut and paste the next part since it is on an FDA website for public use. The rules for pet and food animals are different and pet owners need to understand them-
    General Conditions for Extra-Label Drug Use

    The purpose of FDA’s requirements for extra-label drug use in animals is to limit this use to situations where an animal’s health is threatened or where the animal may suffer or die without treatment. In addition, one of the following general conditions must be met before you can legally prescribe an approved human or animal drug for an extra-label use:
    •There is no animal drug approved for the intended use; or
    •There is an animal drug approved for the intended use, but the approved drug does not contain the active ingredient you need to use; or
    •There is an animal drug approved for the intended use, but the approved drug is not in the required dosage form (for example, you need a liquid dosage form, but the approved drug is only available as a tablet dosage form); or
    •There is an animal drug approved for the intended use, but the approved drug is not in the required concentration (for example, you need 5 mg, but the approved drug is only available at 50 mg); or
    •You have found, in the context of a valid veterinarian-client-patient relationship, that the approved drug is clinically ineffective when used as labeled.

    In companion (non-food-producing) animals, you can prescribe an approved human drug for an extra-label use even if an approved animal drug is available. This is not the case for food-producing animals. For these animals, FDA’s requirements for extra-label drug use prohibit you from prescribing an approved human drug if there’s a drug approved for food-producing animals that you can prescribe instead. For example, if a drug approved for chickens is available, you must first use that drug to treat a sick cow before reaching for a drug approved for people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.