 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Health and Behavior / March 2006Why I think Scottie died
I don't think Scottie's esophageal stricture was caused by cancer. This is what I think happened and how I inadvertently had a hand in sealing my poor cat's fate. As you may recall, Scottie was hospitalized for a week with a fever of unknown origin, lethargy, and inappetance. He was on IV and oral antibiotics but his fever did not respond. After a few days, the vet wanted to put him on baytril. I had read about the possibility of baytril causing blindness in cats and expressed my concerns so the vet, instead, put him on oral doxycycline. Now, after the fact, I have read that oral doxycycline can be a caustic agent in cats which can lead to esophagitis and that, in turn, can lead to a stricture (narrowing). I have several cites to this effect. It should either be administered in liquid form or followed by a water chaser. I was there once when he received his oral meds. No chaser was given and it was not in liquid form. When we took him home, still with a fever, a week later, I was given oral doxycycline to give him. Almost immediately upon getting home, however, he began his regurgitating so I never gave him any. A couple of days later we began the steroid treatments which really didn't help much either. He began exhibiting his odd difficulty in swallowing and regurgitating, symptoms he never had prior to his hospitalization. I initially thought he might have gotten a throat/esophagus irritation from the feeding tube he had in while hospitalized but that was before I read about the doxycycline. Now, admittedly, he had something before he was hospitalized because of the fever and the fever never responded to antibiotics. That can be an indication of cancer but I first noticed him gulping a little while he was hospitalized. It got progressively worse upon his discharge. I told the vet to not bother sending the sample he took out to the pathologist so I will never know for sure if it was cancer. I feel awful about this. These vets have been in practice for 30 years, they have a good reputation, they are very kind, and I hate the thought that their negligence might have contributed to his condition and ultimate death and also that it was me who did not want him on baytril, thereby causing him to be on doxycycline. Yet they did apparently give him doxycycline without a chaser so he could very well have developed esophagitis from this. How could they not know this could happen? I never heard this about doxy before but I'm not a vet. It seems a little coincidental that he was given this drug and then developed a condition that can be caused by it. Nothing can bring Scottie back. I don't know whether to bring it up to them. I consider that these guys were instrumental in Abbey's recovery 9-10 months ago. But should they not have known this? I also have a huge vet bill now and no cat. Maybe he would have fully recovered if I had never taken him there and/or if I had let him be on baytril all along. I feel that I set a chain of events in motion that caused Scottie to die and to experience some suffering prior to his death. I know it's normal to start second-guessing after something like this but there are veterinary references to this all over the internet when you look for them. Candace (crossposted to vet board) > I don't think Scottie's esophageal stricture was caused by cancer. > This is what I think happened and how I inadvertently had a hand in > sealing my poor cat's fate. > >[...] Candace, it all makes sense from the point of view of someone who knows nothing at all about veterinary medicine--but honestly, do you have this little faith in your vet? I am not saying that you may not be right. But please, make an appointment and go in and talk with him. I would not do it on the phone, I would do it face to face. I think you could tell better from his reaction what really went on. You could bring the material from the web that you found. I know it seems odd to make an appointment and just go and talk, but I really would. I don't know if you are right or wrong, but I do think a phone call is not the way to go. If what you suspect is right, then this vet has got to be set straight before he hurts another cat. If it is wrong, you need to know. Hang in there, kid. >> I don't think Scottie's esophageal stricture was caused by cancer. >> This is what I think happened and how I inadvertently had a hand in [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Hang in there, kid. I agree. You need to get more information to set your mind at rest. If the medication was given incorrectly, your vet needs to know about his so that someone else doesn't suffer the same consequences. And if there is a reasonable explanation (such as a different formulation), then you need to give your vet the opportunity to clear the air. Above all, please don't beat yourself up over this. I know that's much easier advice to give than to follow through, but you loved Scottie and did everything you could for him. Even with love and the best of care, sometimes it just isn't enough. But the important thing is that you did your very best. MaryL > I don't think Scottie's esophageal stricture was caused by cancer. > This is what I think happened and how I inadvertently had a hand in [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > there are veterinary references to this all over the internet when you > look for them. Candace, I didn't want to add to your grief yesterday so I didn't post my doubts. I was pretty much convinced the vet caused the stricture by improper placement of the feeding tube, but I didn't know Scottie was also on doxycycline. I think your suspicions are right- in fact I'd bet on it. It also explains why the vet didn't suggest balloon dilation- which has a success rate of about 90%- to resolve the stricture. Sometimes accidents can't be forseen or prevented. But in this case, I think the vet was grossly negligent. All pills should be followed by water or canned food *especially* doxycycline since its *well known* for causing esophagitis and strictures in cats. The warning is even published in Plumb's- the leading veterinary drug handbook: "Oral doxycycline has been implicated in causing esophageal strictures in cats. If using oral tablets, be sure that "Pilling" is followed by at least 6 ml of water. Do not dry pill.". p315 There's not much you can do about now other than never go back to that vet again. Vets are only human and make mistakes- but this was an easily preventable death and he has no excuse whatsoever. Its not your fault. Again, I'm sorry. Phil > There's not much you can do about now other than never go back to that vet > again. Vets are only human and make mistakes- but this was an easily > preventable death and he has no excuse whatsoever. Its not your fault. On second thought, there's a lot you can do about it. Doxycycline-associated esophageal stricture in cats has been reported in veterinary medical journals since 1980- 26 years. I think your vet agreed to euthanize Scottie because he wanted to destroy the evidence of his negligence and malpractice. That's probably why he failed to mention balloon dilation to resolve Scottie's esophageal stricture. Even though you can't prove your vet caused Scottie's esophageal stricture you can prove he failed to instruct you in the proper administration of the medication. If I were you I'd consult a lawyer. I think your case is strong enough for a lawyer to take the case on a contigent basis. If you don't want to sue him for the money- do it to avenge Scottie and donate the proceeds from the suit to an animal shelter, and also so other cats won't suffer from his negligence. The below journal citations should be of interest to your lawyer. J Feline Med Surg. 2005 Feb;7(1):33-41. Oesophageal strictures in cats associated with doxycycline therapy. German AJ, Cannon MJ, Dye C, Booth MJ, Pearson GR, Reay CA, Gruffydd-Jones TJ. Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK. ajgerman@liv.ac.uk Four cases of oesophageal stricture subsequent to doxycycline administration are reported. All cases were young to middle age (median age 3 years; range 1-7 years), and either domestic shorthair or domestic longhair breed. In all cases the predominant clinical sign was regurgitation, which developed at variable times after doxycycline administration. In all cases the reason for doxycycline use was treatment or prophylaxis of suspected infections (Mycoplasma haemofelis, Chlamydophila felis or Bordetella bronchiseptica), and the duration of therapy was variable. In one case the stricture was definitively diagnosed at post mortem examination, in the three other cases, definitive diagnosis was by endoscopy. Balloon dilation was successful in the three cases that were treated. This is the largest case series, to date, of oesophageal disease in cats associated with doxycycline administration. Caution should be exercised when administering oral medication to cats, especially doxycycline, and should be accompanied either by a water or food swallow. J Small Anim Pract. 2002 May;43(5):221-3. Oesophageal stricture in a cat due to oral administration of tetracyclines. McGrotty YL, Knottenbelt CM. Department of Small Animal Clinical Studies, University of Glasgow Veterinary School, Bearsden. A three-year-old, male neutered domestic shorthair cat was presented with dysphagia and regurgitation following treatment with oral doxycycline and oxytetracycline for Haemobartonella felis infection. Fluoroscopy confirmed the presence of multiple strictures along the entire length of the oesophagus. Balloon dilatation was performed successfully on two occasions and the symptoms resolved. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first report of oesophageal strictures associated with oral administration of tetracyclines in a cat in the UK. Laryngoscope. 1983 Feb;93(2):184-7. Tetracycline induced esophageal ulcers. a clinical and experimental study. Carlborg B, Densert O, Lindqvist C. Medication with oral drugs has not been considered as a cause of esophageal lesions in the general literature of esophageal disease. This study demonstrates 40 patients with complaints of sudden onset of intense retrosternal pains and odynophagia during treatment with oral tetracyclines. All patients had distinct circumferential ulcers in the esophagus. Medical history, barium swallows, esophagoscopy, biopsies and esophageal manometry revealed no other apparent etiology but a local corrosive effect of the tetracyclines. Experimental tests on the esophagus of the cat verified a severe local corrosive effect of the tetracyclines. Another tetracycline, lymecycline, not reported previously to induce esophageal lesions in man, was significantly less ulcerogenic than doxycycline and oxytetracycline. Drug induced esophageal ulcerations are likely to be more numerous than previously suspected. The experimental model used appears to be sound for investigating ulcerogenic potentials of orally administered drugs. J Vet Intern Med. 2001 Sep-Oct;15(5):467-70. Evaluation of esophageal transit of tablets and capsules in 30 cats. Westfall DS, Twedt DC, Steyn PF, Oberhauser EB, VanCleave JW. Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins 80523, USA. We have reported tablet-induced focal esophagitis and esophageal stricture formation in cats. The proposed mechanism is thought to be abnormal esophageal tablet retention resulting in focal esophagitis with subsequent stricture formation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the passage of tablets and capsules when given alone (dry swallow) and when followed by a water bolus (wet swallow) to determine if this could, in part, explain the esophageal stricture formation we have observed in cats. Fluoroscopy was used to evaluate tablet or capsule passage after administration. The percentage of dry tablet swallows that successfully passed into the stomach was 0.0% at 30 and 60 seconds, 6.7% at 90 seconds, 13.3% at 120 seconds, 26.7% at 180 and 240 seconds, and 36.7% at 300 seconds. Wet tablet swallows successfully passed 90.0% of the time at 30 seconds, 93.3% of the time at 60 seconds, and 100.0% of the time thereafter. The percentage of dry capsule swallows that successfully passed was 16.7% at each time interval. Wet capsule swallows successfully passed 96.7% of the time at 30 seconds and 100% of the time thereafter. For each time interval, wet swallows achieved significantly greater percentage passage into the stomach when compared to dry swallows (P < .05). This study shows that tablets or capsules given by dry swallow have prolonged retention in the esophagus compared to those given by wet swallow. On the basis of this study, we recommend the routine administration of a water bolus to cats receiving tablets or capsules PO to facilitate esophageal clearance. This practice may help prevent medication-associated esophagitis or stricture formation. Eur Surg Res. 1980;12(4):270-82. Esophageal lesions caused by orally administered drugs. An experimental study in the cat. Carlborg B, Densert O. This article presents an experimental method using cats for investigation of the local ulcerogenic properties of oral drugs in the esophagus. 15 drugs in current clinical use were tested. The drugs were placed in esophagus and the animals were sacrificed after 5--8 h, 4--7 or 21 days. The esophagus was cut open, photographed macroscopically and sectioned for light microscopy. Several drugs, e.g. doxycycline, alprenolol, propranolol, ferrosuccinate, ferrosulfate, and emepronium bromide showed marked ulcerogenic properties, whereas indomethacin and betamethasone did not cause any lesions in the cat esophagus. The results seem to be in accordance with the local effect these same drugs exert on the human esophageal mucosa. In order to predict and prevent drug-induced esophageal lesions in man we suggest that oral drugs should be tested concerning their local ulcerogenic properties in the esophagus. > On second thought, there's a lot you can do about it. > Doxycycline-associated esophageal stricture in cats has been reported in [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > proceeds from the suit to an animal shelter, and also so other cats won't > suffer from his negligence. I totally agree that she has a case. If she approaches the vet with the evidence and discusses malpractice, it may be enogh for him to fold and clean her bill. Wouldn't be the first time such a thing has occurred. Like I said before, it won't bring Scottie back but it will help her financial burden and teach the a.shole vet a lesson. -L. > > On second thought, there's a lot you can do about it. > > Doxycycline-associated esophageal stricture in cats has been reported in [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Like I said before, it won't bring Scottie back but it will help her > financial burden and teach the a.shole vet a lesson. Absotively. Some risks can't be avoided- but I'm certain this was clearly a case of negligence. Who knows how many other cats this vet has harmed and the owners never knew? Phil > Even though you can't prove your vet caused Scottie's esophageal stricture > you can prove he failed to instruct you in the proper administration of the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > proceeds from the suit to an animal shelter, and also so other cats won't > suffer from his negligence. That's exactly right. I have indisputable evidence that I was not instructed in the proper use of doxycycline and that my cat died of the number one cause of esophageal stricture in cats. I am definitely pursuing this, don't worry. I know I'm right. I'm not positive I will need a lawyer but if I do, I will get one. This is not going to go unnoticed. A beautiful cat died before his time and it's something I cannot get over...it's my first waking thought everyday and the last thing I think about at night. I am soooo sorry he died and sooo sorry he was hospitalized for a fever for 7 f.cking days and meanwhile was being made more ill from the doxy. The poor little animal, it's heinous. I feel so much that I let him down. One of my friends told me that I did what I was supposed to do, I took my sick cat to a vet, paid him a huge amount of money, and he is the one who failed at his job...not me...but it doesn't matter, I feel culpable and I am the one who will always have the vision of him sitting in a cage, hospitalized, while he was getting a caustic agent rammed down his throat twice a day. I cannot even grasp it. And the worse thing is, even if the vet gives me way over my expenses (which I know is very unlikely), it's not going to assuage my guilt and sadness one bit. Thank you for the additional citations, I did not have all of those. Candace Candace <maccandace@aol.com> wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav: >> Even though you can't prove your vet caused Scottie's esophageal >> stricture you can prove he failed to instruct you in the proper [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Candace I hate to play devil's advocate here, but you have to work out the scenario had you not aborted your vet's decision to administer baytril in favor of something else. That is precisely why I leave things in the hands of my vet, who has more education that I can gleen from the net, to decide what medications are best for my cat. I mean, I actually trust mine the two years since I move more than I did my previous vet. She prescribes baytril every time we need an antibiotic over clavamox. The fact remains that EVERY drug has side effects. EVERY drug has risks. You never know what's going to happen in a particular case, but you know what can be expected generally by the results of clinical trials and anecdotal evidence. How many cats have you heard of who suffered the various affects of improperly administered doxy over whatever you heard about baytril? I sympathize with your situation and your loss, and trying to find a reason for why it happened, but in our sue-happy society we simply have to remember that sh.t happens. You suing your vet for using another med at your insistence is what raises vet prices for the rest of us. I don't like--I think it's stupid. Scottie died. I'm sad, the whole thing is sad. You did your best. The vet did his best. Cry, and then move on.  SignatureMargarita Salt "...practically no one in the world is entirely bad or entirely good... motives are often more important than actions." -- Eleanore Roosevelt > I hate to play devil's advocate here, but you have to work out the > scenario had you not aborted your vet's decision to administer > baytril in favor of something else. That is precisely why I leave > things in the hands of my vet, who has more education that I can > gleen from the net, to decide what medications are best for my cat. I didn't abort the decision, I *questioned* him about the possibility of baytril causing blindness. It's my perogative to question either my own medical care or my cats' veterinary care. I wish I hadn't but that doesn't excuse his ignorance about doxycycline. In fact, about 2 days later, he did put Scottie on baytril with my permission since neither the clavamox or doxy seemd to be getting rid of his fever. It doesn't excuse the fact that he improperly administered the doxy or the fact that he didn't figure out that the esophagitis and stricture were caused by the doxy and could have been possibly cured by balloon dilation of the esophagus. Nor does it excuse the fact that he said it was "probably cancer." He should have known it was from the doxy and taken steps to correct it. Doxycycline is the number one cause of esophagitis nad esophageal stricture in cats. One would think he would know that and put 2 and 2 together. I don't know if he didn't know about doxy being caustic or if he was covering something up. Personally, I feel it was ignorance and not malice. But...sorry, I paid him about $4,000; he should have known how to administer a drug and/or recognized the side effects when my cat developed them. That's a lot of money to pay and only have your cat get sicker and die. > How many cats have you heard of who suffered the various affects of > improperly administered doxy over whatever you heard about baytril? Well, I've never heard of doxy causing anything bad in cats. If I had known about this I would have questioned him about its use, too. I have heard a lot of negative stuff about baytril, though, on this newsgroup. I wish I hadn't because my cat might be alive if I hadn't but, don't you see?, the vet is *supposed* to know this stuff. I can ask questions; he's still supposed to know the answers. It's kind of a basic thing to know how to properly administer a drug before you give it. It's listed as a warning in the most widely used veterinary handbook, Plumb's, and I know they have a Plumb's there, I saw it. I would think he would have read it at some point. It wasn't really a side effect, in my opinion, it was a medication error, the kind of stuff that humans can sue doctors for in a heartbeat. > I sympathize with your situation and your loss, and trying to find a > reason for why it happened, but in our sue-happy society we simply [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > sad, the whole thing is sad. You did your best. The vet did his > best. Cry, and then move on. I did not insist he use doxycycline. I *questioned* the use of baytril, he then suggested doxycycline, and I didn't question him about that. I can hear things, question things, but when it comes down to it, I didn't go to vet school, and I'm not making a living at being a vet; he should know something as basic as drug administration. It's like if your doctor suggested you take hormones. Those drugs were in the news a lot. You have a right to ask a question, that's all I did about the baytril. Believe me, I feel a responsibility because I did that...things could have unfolded so differently if I had not questioned it but I still had a right to do so and he had an obligation to know what he was prescribing, how to administer it, and to recognize a side effect when it developed. It was a greivous error, in my opinion. Candace > -- > Margarita Salt > > "...practically no one in the world is entirely bad or > entirely good... motives are often more important than > actions." -- Eleanore Roosevelt > I didn't abort the decision, I *questioned* him about the possibility > of baytril causing blindness. It's my perogative to question either my [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > was "probably cancer." He should have known it was from the doxy and > taken steps to correct it. I suspect he knew it was from the doxy and knew he was in deep sh.t. At that point it was easier to euth the cat and get rid of the evidence. > Doxycycline is the number one cause of > esophagitis nad esophageal stricture in cats. One would think he would [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > a side effect when it developed. It was a greivous error, in my > opinion. I am so glad to hear you are persuing this, Candace. Please keep us updated. I'm pissed off about it, and hurt for you. Feel free to Email me if you need an ear. -L. > I am so glad to hear you are persuing this, Candace. Please keep us > updated. I'm pissed off about it, and hurt for you. Feel free to > Email me if you need an ear. > > -L. Thank you. Candace Candace <maccandace@aol.com> wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav: > I did not insist he use doxycycline. I *questioned* the use of > baytril, he then suggested doxycycline, and I didn't question him [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > prescribing, how to administer it, and to recognize a side effect > when it developed. It was a greivous error, in my opinion. I didn't say you wanted Doxy, I am acknowledging you question baytril and also acknowledging that you snipped the part about me REQUESTING bayril over clavamox based on prior experience. The fact remains that if you hadn't questioned your vet who knows more than you do, this may not have happened. I mean, what are the incidents of doxy and structure versus baytril and blindness? I can point you to HUNDREDS of website laying out horror stories about how horrible LASIK for vision correction is. The facts, however, indicate that there is a 3% severe side effect rate that does not mean that 97% percent of people will not be ecstatic with the results. (Similar to the behavioral problems with declawing.) I will still, with all my heart, recommend LASIK to people as long as they do the research and ask the right questions educating themselves FULLY on every aspect of the procedure. Mind you, I said I was playing devil's advocate. I'm not taking a stance one way or the other, and I certainly don't mean to put you on the defensive. I'm simply trying to be another voice trying to temper those of the people who are screaming for you to sue the vet. Are you SURE that given what a vet knows about the level of risk that he didn't take proper care of Scottie? As I said, LASIK carries a 3% risk, and still ophthamologists perform the procedure. Does that make them negligent somehow? I'm only asking you to calm down and think about it. What until the grief passes and look at ALL of the facts. You can get plenty of people to preach on your side, but is it the correct route to take? Was it foreseable? Have you asked other vets how they administer the drug? And so on... Ad I mentioned, I only thought of this because I ask for baytril where you have questioned it. Could I inadvertantly cause Kami hamr? Absolutely! But to me, it's worth the risk because she has always done well with baytril and totally crappy with anything else. It is a crap shoot. SignatureMargarita Salt "...practically no one in the world is entirely bad or entirely good... motives are often more important than actions." -- Eleanore Roosevelt > Candace <maccandace@aol.com> wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > baytril and also acknowledging that you snipped the part about me > REQUESTING bayril over clavamox based on prior experience. Its not about which drug was used, you f.cking moron, its about the vet failing to administer the drug properly and also failing to instruct the client how to administer the drug. The safest drug in the world can have severe adverse effects if its not prescribed and administered properly. The fact > remains that if you hadn't questioned your vet who knows more than > you do, this may not have happened. What an utterly asinine statement! Are you high on crack or cocaine again? We have not only the right- but the responsibility to question *any* treatment with which we're not comfortable. If you actually believe vets never make mistakes or never use poor judgement then you're even more ignorant than you appear. Just think: If you would have questioned your vet about declawing a cat that had an owner-induced biting problem, you might have learned that declawing biters usually increases the frequency and intensity of the biting behavior-- and maybe you wouldn't have deprived Kami of the pleasure and need to scratch and you would have spared her the trauma of 10 separate amputations and unnecessary surgical and anesthetic risks Just think: if your vet told you not to encourage Kami's bitting behavior when she was kitten you wouldn't have punished her for it when she became an adult and when the biting was no longer cute; she might have had a happy life instead of miserable life of abuse. I mean, what are the incidents > of doxy and structure versus baytril and blindness? You don't get it, do you, bimbo? How would you go about determining the incidence of adverse effects of a medication when its prescribed incorrectly, huh? > Are you SURE that given what a vet knows about the level of risk > that he didn't take proper care of Scottie? He didn't tell her to follow the doxy with water or canned food, did he? Does that answer your question or aren't you that perceptive? > Ad I mentioned, I only thought of this because I ask for baytril > where you have questioned it. Don't you remember Candace said Baytril wasn't working? or has all that crack and cocaine burned out your memory cells? > "Margarita Salt" <brandyalx@kittylittercomcast.net> wrote in message > The fact > > remains that if you hadn't questioned your vet who knows more than > > you do, this may not have happened. > > What an utterly asinine statement! Are you high on crack or cocaine again? I can't believe anyone could be this unfeeling and make such a statement. Brandy, you really are a moron. > We have not only the right- but the responsibility to question *any* > treatment with which we're not comfortable. If you actually believe vets [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > need to scratch and you would have spared her the trauma of 10 separate > amputations and unnecessary surgical and anesthetic risks Yeah, but I don't think Brandy WANTED to know. I think Brandy just wanted what Brandy wanted, and to hell with her cat. I think she couldn't wait to have her cat declawed. That's why she didn't bother to research it before she had it done. I think she has no regrets whatsoever. I don't think it's in her makeup to have empathy for anyone other than herself. >> The fact >> remains that if you hadn't questioned your vet who knows more than >> you do, this may not have happened. Jeez. You know I've defended you more than once from people who think your (former?) profession meant you were "trash", but I can't comprehend why you would say something like this to Candace. Why in the hell would you try and blame her for this? She's not the vet. She has every right to question why and how a medicine or treatment is being used. To blame someone for wanting to know more about a treatment is beyond comprehension. You sound like you were just being mean. >We have not only the right- but the responsibility to question *any* >treatment with which we're not comfortable. If you actually believe vets >never make mistakes or never use poor judgement then you're even more >ignorant than you appear. Unfortunately, doctors of all kinds make mistakes. I just quit my vet of 10 years after finally realizing she wasn't making little mistakes, she was making big ones, misdiagnosing and making mistakes in medical procedures, and it was hurting my cat Reggie. You *have* to question a doctor, and the sooner, the better. If I'd questioned my vet earlier my Reggie wouldn't have had suffered as long as he did. Candace was right to question her vet, for Scottie's sake. The problem is the vet made a mistake, a horrible one. Stacia > > I hate to play devil's advocate here, but you have to work out the > > scenario had you not aborted your vet's decision to administer [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > a side effect when it developed. It was a greivous error, in my > opinion. Although I have always thought the minute risk of blindness associated with Baytril use has been blown all out of proportion on this newsgroup over the years and caused undue paranoia, I don't think you should blame yourself for questioning the vet about it. IMO a good vet should have explained to you why he felt Baytril was the best choice in this case. When my cat was very ill a few years ago and prescribed Baytril, I did ask my vet about it and he explained to my satisfaction why he was choosing to treat her with this particular drug and why he felt the risk of blindness was somewhere between negligible and non-existent. His professional judgment was correct, and our cat recovered. There are instances when Baytril may be the best choice of antibiotic but that's something your vet should know, not you. There are also instances in which Doxycycline would be the treatment of choice but again, that's a judgement your vet should have been trained to make. And yes, even if a potential risk is rare, he ought to know about it. -Yngver > I sympathize with your situation and your loss, and trying to find a > reason for why it happened, but in our sue-happy society we simply > have to remember that sh.t happens. This wasn't a case of "sh.t happens" and in fact demonstrates WHY we should question our vets. The vet was CLEARLY negligent in this case - he administered a drug imporperly and killed the cat. It's a open and shut case. > You suing your vet for using > another med at your insistence is what raises vet prices for the > rest of us. Too f.cking bad. This vet was negligent and needs to be called on the carpet for it. <snip> > Cry, and then move on. Remember those words when you do lose Kami, you c.nt. How f.cking insensitve can you be? -L. > > I sympathize with your situation and your loss, and trying to find a > > reason for why it happened, but in our sue-happy society we simply [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > -L. Do you realize now that your well-intended compassion was wasted on a gutter trash? When Kami is finally released from her life of abuse, the bimbo will probably plaster Kami's death all over the internet to get attention and sympathy. She better not come here looking for sympathy. > Do you realize now that your well-intended compassion was wasted on a > gutter trash? yep. Silly me! > When Kami is finally released from her life of abuse, the bimbo will > probably plaster Kami's death all over the internet to get attention and > sympathy. She better not come here looking for sympathy. I know she already got all she will ever get from me. -L. >> > I sympathize with your situation and your loss, and trying to find a >> > reason for why it happened, but in our sue-happy society we simply [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > probably plaster Kami's death all over the internet to get attention and > sympathy. She better not come here looking for sympathy. She's already started - read the post about urns. It's like she sitting back and rubbing her palms together anxiously awaiting the death of her poor abused cat so she can garner some more attention to herself. SignatureHugs, CatNipped See all my masters at: http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped/ > >> > I sympathize with your situation and your loss, and trying to find a > >> > reason for why it happened, but in our sue-happy society we simply [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > CatNipped LOL...!! IBen > She's already started - read the post about urns. It's like she sitting > back and rubbing her palms together anxiously awaiting the death of her poor > abused cat so she can garner some more attention to herself. Isn't that sick!?! I was appalled when I read that! -L. > > She's already started - read the post about urns. It's like she sitting > > back and rubbing her palms together anxiously awaiting the death of her poor > > abused cat so she can garner some more attention to herself. > > Isn't that sick!?! I was appalled when I read that! > -L. Her need for attention is actually pathological- she'll do anything and use anything to get it- even her cat. She's a true sociopath. <snipped ignorant, insensitive sh.t> Brandy, I usually don't mind a good troll, I even get a kick out of the outrage they can generate (like "Nomen's" male chauvinist pig troll). The one place I draw the line, however, is when it comes to using a greiving "parent" - at which time it becomes sickening. Inhumane doesn't cover it - inhuman is more like it. But I guess you can't expect anything else from a dried up old ex crack whore. Candace, I hope you consider the source and ignore the c.nt's pathetic, attention-seeking, acidic spew. Remember that this is coming from someone who considers caring for a cat to be having it's toes amputated for her convenience. >> Even though you can't prove your vet caused Scottie's esophageal stricture >> you can prove he failed to instruct you in the proper administration of the [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > >Candace I don't think conventional legal action -- filing a civil claim -- is necessarily the best way to go. Lots of people put up web pages alerting fellow pet owners about dangers to their pets... I looked at quite a few of them after Tweaker developed lesions in the wake of his one and only vaccination. I doubt if your vet wants to be Exhibit A on your prospective web site. But he could be, right? Unless he gives you back your money and promises not to treat future cats in the same manner. The trick is to communicate your concerns and proposed solutions in a non-confrontational, non-threatening manner. Good luck. Charlie Charlie > I don't think conventional legal action -- filing a civil claim -- is > necessarily the best way to go. > > Lots of people put up web pages alerting fellow pet owners about > dangers to their pets... I looked at quite a few of them after Tweaker > developed lesions in the wake of his one and only vaccination. What the hell happened? > doubt if your vet wants to be Exhibit A on your prospective web site. > But he could be, right? Unless he gives you back your money and > promises not to treat future cats in the same manner. That's blackmail, and illegal. Not a good way to approach it. > The trick is to communicate your concerns and proposed solutions in a > non-confrontational, non-threatening manner. Absolutely. I would do everything via certified mail. -L. >> I don't think conventional legal action -- filing a civil claim -- is >> necessarily the best way to go. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >What the hell happened? I posted a picture of it last year. A big lesion, about two inches long, opened up on his shoulder after he got his vaccinations. Then he had a series of smaller lesions, lasting for a period of months. He's fine now, but I still wonder if he isn't at a higher risk for cancer down the road because of this. They add "adjutivants," i.e., toxic chemicals, to get the same immune response with a smaller dose of cultured material. That's how to make a cut-rate vaccine, which these companies do, except it ain't cut rate for the customer. I learned all this (after the fact) by reading web pages published by people who are concerned about feline vaccinations. >> doubt if your vet wants to be Exhibit A on your prospective web site. >> But he could be, right? Unless he gives you back your money and >> promises not to treat future cats in the same manner. > >That's blackmail, and illegal. Not a good way to approach it. Forget the legal issues for a second and think about it in practical terms. If she expresses it as a threat, or an attempt at blackmail, it's bound to lead to make the guy defensive and lead to a poor result. Subtlety is key. >> The trick is to communicate your concerns and proposed solutions in a >> non-confrontational, non-threatening manner. > >Absolutely. I would do everything via certified mail. No. Certified mail is exactly how one sets the tone for confrontation. It's an expensive, time-consuming way to deliver a message that the person will get anyway. I would start in a friendly, informal manner. Lay out the concerns, acknowledge that vets can't possibly know everything, but here's what the subsequent research shows, and hey, I paid for what has been shown, after the fact, to be disasterous care, and that doesn't really seem right. Let's find a solution, one that involves some restitution for me and a better treatment of future, similar cases that come through the door. And, BTW, I'm working on a web site to educate the public about this issue so other pet owners won't have to go through the grief I have experienced. Make the relevant points, and let the vet draw the lines between them. If the friendly, informal approach doesn't work, one always has recourse to civil law... but not the other way around. Charlie <snip> Sorry about Tweaker. That sucks! It sounds almost as if the vax was contaminated with a hemolytic strain of Staph or something. I almost lost both my dogs in two separate incidents, to vaccines. Now my dog Tessa only gets rabies vax because of the risks. > No. Certified mail is exactly how one sets the tone for > confrontation. It's an expensive, time-consuming way to deliver a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > If the friendly, informal approach doesn't work, one always has > recourse to civil law... but not the other way around. I agree with everything, except I would still send it certified mail. Otherwise some dumb-assed dingbat in the office may not give him the letter. It's the only way to ensure he actually receives it. When my dog died, I wrote a really nice personal letter to my vet, thanking him for his kindness and compassion in her treatment, and informing him that I had her euthanized at home by a vet that does home visits (I included a pic of her taken shortly before her demise). This was a vet I had extremely good rapport with, and considered a real asset to the community, and told him as much in my letter. The next time I visited with my other dog (9 mos later), he asked how Tosh was - he had no idea I had euthanized her. I was pissed! Stupid-assed dingbats in the office never even gave him the letter I sent. They probably freaking threw it in the trash. -L. > I agree with everything, except I would still send it certified mail. > Otherwise some dumb-assed dingbat in the office may not give him the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > -L. I delivered the letter in person today. I was going to wait until I went to get his ashes but they're not back yet and it was eating at me that I knew all this and the vet didn't have a clue: as far as he was concerned, I was thrilled with the vet care Scottie received. So I left the letter (after I got 2 months worth of Abbey's meds and returned an unused bag of fluids). I'm certain he will get it; it's a big envelope marked "confidential." The girl said he would be in at 5 tonight (he was out for the day at a seminar). I didn't want to ever have to go back to get the ashes or anything but I guess I will have to now. I just couldn't wait any longer. It's been almost 2 weeks and it was bothering me that the vet didn't know how I felt. So, we'll see. If I don't hear from him in a few days, I will send everything I gave him today certified along with another letter saying I am going to file a complaint with the state vet board if I don't hear from him within 5 business days. Then I will do that. They have a complaint form on their website and they review complaints once a month. I figure that once it goes that far, the vet won't willingly give me any reimbursement and my only course of action after that will be small claims court or a lawyer, as Phil said. But I don't know how to find a lawyer to take a case like that. From what I've read on the internet, punitive damages are seldom awarded in veterinary malpractice cases so it would just be for my costs and that isn't enough to entice any lawyer I know of. I wouldn't even know what sort of lawyer to approach, I guess just a general one, because no one has a veterinary malpractice specialty. I feel it all must be done for the principle of it but I don't feel it can avenge Scottie in any way or make it right. Scottie will still be dead and he will still have suffered and he still could have possibly been treated and survived. I'll never be able to forget how he wanted to eat, he was hungry, and then he would regurgitate it right back up. It was awful. I only hope there really is a heaven and they are all there and we can see them again and I hope he knows right now that I'm sorry I ever took him there or ever let him be hospitalized for all those days or that I didn't know there was a treatment until it was too late. My letter, by the way, is not particularly confrontational. I suppose the fact that I am mentioning it to him at all is confrontational in itself but the letter is very polite and matter-of-fact. I began it by saying I had always felt he was a compassionate man and that I had appreciated how his practice takes emergency calls and always fits patients in and how sad I was to have to write a letter like this and how I didn't feel I could trust any other animal's care to him. I didn't mention money or reimbursement or filing complaints or anything like that...just the facts on Scottie's symptoms, the doxycycline being administered improperly, the vial I have at home without proper instructions on it, the balloon dilation treatment that I was never informed of, etc. along with several articles included. I said I would welcome his response to all of this. Thank you for all your responses and support (except for 2 and one of those is a neo-Nazi inbred cretin that no one acknowledges anyway). The website is a possibility down the road if nothing else works and I imagine I will libel him all over the internet at some point if need be. Candace Hi Candace My sorrow for your loss and your grief If you get to a lawyer you need to find one that specializes in emotional suffer and grievance Depending on where you are More in likely you are going to find your self in small claims court with a max of 5000 claim and no lawyer present or allowed. If so I would contact one of the court shows such as People's court. It not only allows the public to see the problems but most TV judges will give the person a good lashing Seeking the advice of a lawyer is the best thing you can do most should do a consulate for about $200 But make sure you are emotional ready for it it is going to be a trying time >> I agree with everything, except I would still send it certified mail. >> Otherwise some dumb-assed dingbat in the office may not give him the [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] > > Candace "Matthew AKA NMR \( NO MORE RETAIL \)" <10 points a troll @linethetrollsup.com> wrote: >Depending on where you are More in likely you are going to find your self in >small claims court with a max of 5000 claim and no lawyer present or >allowed. If so I would contact one of the court shows such as People's >court. It not only allows the public to see the problems but most TV judges >will give the person a good lashing The problem with small claims court is that the Vet will give a load of medical jargon to the judge and will be deemed the expert (unless you brought a specialist of equal credentials). Since the judge won't have a clue he/she will probably side with the doctor. -mhd hamandche...@betweentheknees.com wrote: > The problem with small claims court is that the Vet will give a load > of medical jargon to the judge and will be deemed the expert (unless > you brought a specialist of equal credentials). Since the judge won't > have a clue he/she will probably side with the doctor. > > -mhd As far as an expert, I'm sure vets are like doctors and try to cover each other's a.ses, so no one would probably help me there. But I don't know, at least to me this case sounds very clear cut. I can say "esophageal stricture" and "improper doxycycline administration," too, and I have numerous documentation in the veterinary literature to support my case. I don't know what medical jargon he could throw around to dispute that. I hope he will see the light and just return my expenses on his own; maybe I'm being naive in thinking that is a possibility. Maybe he would feel that if he did that, it would be an admission of guilt. I don't know but the whole thing seems virtually indisputable to me. Regardless, I could not, in good conscience, take either one of my remaining cats to this practice again so I have nothing to lose...I'm already obligated to pay the money I owe, my cat is already dead. I might as well go for broke and stir up as much sh.t as possible...which I will do if he doesn't respond in an appropriate manner. Candace But I don't know how > to find a lawyer to take a case like that. From what I've read on the > internet, punitive damages are seldom awarded in veterinary malpractice > cases so it would just be for my costs and that isn't enough to entice > any lawyer I know of. I wouldn't even know what sort of lawyer to > approach, I guess just a general one, because no one has a veterinary > malpractice specialty. Candace, I'm so sorry you're going through this. If it does come to a point where you want to hire an attorney, you can check with your State Bar Association for a referral of attorneys whose practice might emphasize animal law. Your local county should also have a bar association with a referral service. About a month ago, I was emailing with an attorney who did specialize in animal law, and if you like, I can check with her. I'm glad to hear you sent a letter to this vet. I know that must have been very hard to have to deal with. Hopefully, this vet will be open-minded enough to communicate back with you, and to learn the effects of this drug so it doesn't happen to another patient. Hugs, Lauren > My letter, by the way, is not particularly confrontational. I suppose > the fact that I am mentioning it to him at all is confrontational in [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > informed of, etc. along with several articles included. I said I would > welcome his response to all of this. I think that's a very professional and admirable way of handling it. I would hate to have to do it myself, and can't imagine how betrayed you must feel. SignatureWeb site: http://www.slywy.com/ Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/ Journal: http://slywy.blogspot.com/ <snip> > Thank you for all your responses and support (except for 2 and one of > those is a neo-Nazi inbred cretin that no one acknowledges anyway). Thanks for the acknowledgment, Kandace! If there was any justice in this world, it would be you in the f.cking ash urn and Scottie would be the one still here and drawing breath. But some of us just can't seem to see beyond ourselves, now can we....? I might remind you of everything that you hate in a person (your father, perhaps?), but I can tell you this.... My little Chester will never fall because of my stupidity and the negligence that it obviously breeds. God help any other small helpless lives that you might be custodian over... IBen Getiner He still is a jerk ain't he Definitely group plonk <plonk> > <snip> >> Thank you for all your responses and support (except for 2 and one of [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > IBen Getiner > I delivered the letter in person today. I was going to wait until I > went to get his ashes but they're not back yet and it was eating at me [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > approach, I guess just a general one, because no one has a veterinary > malpractice specialty. Med malpractice will do. Many lawyers will take contingent cases for $3000 or more. Just call around, if it comes to that. Contingency fees are generally 25-33% if you settle without filing a case. -L. >> I agree with everything, except I would still send it certified mail. >> Otherwise some dumb-assed dingbat in the office may not give him the [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] > > Candace Candace, let me know if you need help getting the web site up. I have tons of disk space on my site and, since I do this for a living, I can get a site put up in a matter of hours. SignatureHugs, CatNipped See all my masters at: http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped/ "Candace" <maccandace@aol.com> wrote :> > That's exactly right. I have indisputable evidence that I was not > instructed in the proper use of doxycycline and that my cat died of the > number one cause of esophageal stricture in cats. I am definitely > pursuing this, don't worry. Candace, you're obviously right to do this. I have been quiet about it because it pains me to see you have to go through this on top of grieving Scottie's death. Has the vet answered your letter yet? I am interested in what he has to say. It is both terrifying and depressing that we cannot trust these people to do what they have been trained to do, and that we actually must protect our pets from them. > It is both terrifying and depressing that we cannot trust these > people to do what they have been trained to do, and that we > actually must protect our pets from them. Sadly, it's true of any professional, and any business, as well. -L. Candace, This is going to take some time. I can't even imagine what you're going through or how to come to terms with it. You do whatever makes you feel better. At the very least, this vet needs to know what happened, so I'm glad you are pursuing this. You need to find out for yourself. Everyone at that office needs to know what happened, because I'm assuming vet techs administered the drug. Hope you can find peace. Rhonda > That's exactly right. I have indisputable evidence that I was not > instructed in the proper use of doxycycline and tha > That's exactly right. I have indisputable evidence that I was > not instructed in the proper use of doxycycline and that my cat [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Thank you for the additional citations, I did not have all of > those. I hope you get results, Candace. Vets need to be held accountable. I'm still sorry to this day that I didn't persue it with Shadow's internist. Big mistake. After losing him, I didn't have the strength to deal with boards and lawyers, but it sounds like you do. SignatureCheryl > I hope you get results, Candace. Vets need to be held accountable. > I'm still sorry to this day that I didn't persue it with Shadow's > internist. Big mistake. After losing him, I didn't have the > strength to deal with boards and lawyers, but it sounds like you > do. It's amazing how much a battle will take out of you. I pride myself in thinking I'd fight for justice when in reality, when I was faced with a situation that could have been a major case, I just didn't have any fight left in me. I still kind of kick myself in the a.s because I know the perp is probably still committing the same violations. -L. > > I hope you get results, Candace. Vets need to be held accountable. > > I'm still sorry to this day that I didn't persue it with Shadow's [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > know the perp is probably still committing the same violations. > -L. I also was in a position where I should have pursued an action. Do I regret not doing it? Yes, but I also realize that in my state of mind at the time, it would have been just too much to bear. So don't feel bad, sometimes we just have to do, or in this case, not do, what we feel is best at the time. Lauren -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: "-L." <gentleboa@peacemail.com> > I pride myself in >thinking I'd fight for justice when in reality, when I was faced with a >situation that could have been a major case, I just didn't have any >fight left in me. So you pride yourself in having delusions of character. Very telling. Talk tough and run from a real life fight. You're exactly the type of person I always thought you were. All bark, no bite. > I still kind of kick myself in the a.s because I >know the perp is probably still committing the same violations. So your weakness has caused harm to others. No wonder you hate people who are willing to ACT..... It confirms your own ineffectiveness in the world. Yup, you're just a loudmouthed, arrogant, weak, delusional, nasty bitch. Little Johnny is going to be real proud of Mama when he gets older. > > Even though you can't prove your vet caused Scottie's esophageal stricture > > you can prove he failed to instruct you in the proper administration of the [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Candace Candace, You did nothing wrong- so, don't blame yourself. Please let me know how this turns out. Good luck, Phil > I don't think Scottie's esophageal stricture was caused by cancer. > This is what I think happened and how I inadvertently had a hand in > sealing my poor cat's fate. that's got to add to your hurt even more... If you don't mind me saying it...you appear to be very grounded...just an observation. don't pay them anything, tellem it's the least they can do for what they have done if they take you to court, then counter sue..as well as... seek punitive damages... im sorry...i don't mean to talk insensitive... > If you don't mind me saying it...you appear to be very grounded... Hope you have a nice day...just wanted to clarify my thoughts... i just mean you seem very strong... > I don't think Scottie's esophageal stricture was caused by cancer. > This is what I think happened and how I inadvertently had a hand in > sealing my poor cat's fate. <snip> I think you have a case for veterinary malpractice. I would gather together your evidence and write him a letter. Ask him to respond to your concerns and make it very clear you think he was negligent. You can't bring Scottie back, but you can possibly recover part of your vet bill (or have it cleared). If you do not get resolution, file a complaint with the state licensing board. I have never used doxycyline in felines and had no idea this was a problem. Thanks for posting this - you may have saved another cat by doing so. -L. Candace, I am so sorry to hear about this complication. This sucks. Please talk to the vet about it. If this really was the problem, you could be saving the next cat that the vet treats. This was in no way your fault. This is the vet's responsibility and something they are trained to catch no matter what conversation happened before using that drug. Rhonda > Now, after the fact, I have read that oral doxycycline can be a caustic > agent in cats which can lead to esophagitis and that, in turn, can lead > to a stricture (narrowing). I have several cites to this effect. Candace, I'm sorry too to hear about this. I completely agree with the others about it not being your fault. The vet should have known that this could be a complication from the medication. Pet owners should not be expected to know this information. We depend upon the veterinarian to be well-educated about any possible side effects when they prescribe a medication. Hugs, Lauren >I don't think Scottie's esophageal stricture was caused by cancer. >This is what I think happened and how I inadvertently had a hand in [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > >(crossposted to vet board) {{{{Candace}}}} All I can say is I am so sorry. Please try not to blame yourself. You aren't a vet, and there is just no way we can know every possible outcome of medications, tests, or whatever when we are not the experts. You did the best you could, and trusted a vet who sounds like they may have missed something important in terms of how to give the medication properly. My condolences are with you. Ginger-lyn Home Pages: http://www.moonsummer.com http://www.angelfire.com/folk/glsummer (homepage & cats) http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~summer/index.htm (genealogy) http://www.movieanimals.bravehost.com/ (The Violence Against Animals in Movies Website) > I don't think Scottie's esophageal stricture was caused by cancer. > This is what I think happened and how I inadvertently had a hand in [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > > (crossposted to vet board) YOU are an absolute f.cking IDIOT. The simple fact that this poor cat fell somehow into your particular hands prove that God is either extremely inept of a f.cking sadists with a very poor sense of humor.. Either way, you're cat's suffering was the end result (as anyone can see). You should be in f.cking jail for criminal negligence.... > I don't think Scottie's esophageal stricture was caused by cancer. > This is what I think happened and how I inadvertently had a hand in [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > > (crossposted to vet board) YOU are an absolute f.cking IDIOT. The simple fact that this poor cat fell somehow into your particular hands prove that God is either extremely inept or a f.cking sadists with a very poor sense of humor.. Either way, you're cat's suffering was the end result (as anyone can see). You should be in jail for criminal negligence.... |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.