The customer’s not always right
It used to be that the customer was always right. And even if they weren’t right, they were treated like they were. It was standard business, a way of guaranteeing the customer left satisfied and would return. I don’t think it’s that way so much anymore. In fact, even when the customer is right, I’ve learned they aren’t always treated that way.
Because I’m a bit of a mouse, I generally avoid conflict and seldom complain. The few times I have, it wasn’t apologies I received, but excuses.
Sadly, it isn’t just the big boys, the WalMarts and Exxons, with so many customers that losing a spattering of disgruntleds won’t make a dent. Now, even some service-oriented businesses are mumbling excuses rather than offering apologies. Recently for me, the excuses were with regard to questionable veterinary care.
Our saga began when I took our new pup to the vet and mentioned he’d been scratching his ears. The vet–one I’d admired and trusted for about 20 years–found a small spot of mange on the edge of his ears. Because mange is highly contagious, the vet said both our dogs would need immediate treatment, so my husband hurried our other dog in so both could be dipped.
Although I’ve had dogs all my life, I’d never had an encounter with mange. When this vet prescribed dipping, I deferred to her wisdom, even though I worried the pup was too young and too small and that Murry, who is terrified of baths, might hyperventilate and breathe in too much of the fumes. But the vet was aware of those things. And like I said, I trusted her.
When I arrived to retrieve my boys, they were both dripping wet. Without a word of caution, they were delivered to me, and into my car the saturated dogs went. By the time we arrived home, I was saturated as well. Still, I thought, how bad could it be if it was safe enough for a dog as little as ours?
Once at home, though, the dogs barely moved. They dropped by the door and there they remained. Not eating. Not drinking. I was scared they might die.
And then I got sick myself. In hindsight, I feel dumb that I didn’t connect my own illness with their chemical treatment. My dripping-wet boys had been in my car, had slept on me in bed. But I’d been having health problems already and assumed those problems were worsening. A doctor bill later, my problem was not identified until we visited a different vet a week later. (Yes, I was diagnosed by a vet. Stop snickering. It’s not funny.)
I made several calls asking vets about sarcoptic mange and whether it would be safe to dip a puppy so young and little (under four months and right at 9 lbs.). Each said–with varying degrees of anger and passion–that dipping is never appropriate in such a case. There are safer, less expensive treatments that not only get rid of mange, but also protect against heartworm and fleas at the same time. (The original vet sold us separate medications for those.)
Thankfully, both dogs survived, although both ended up battling a case of kennel cough, too. Once we were all healthy again, I began to stew over the idea that we’d paid so much without being told there had been other options, that we hadn’t been warned of the dangers to our pup (or to us), and that the bill had been stacked with medications we wouldn’t have needed had the most reasonable (and affordable) course of treatment been prescribed from the start.
But like I said up there at the top, I’m a bit of a mouse. I’m fortunate, however, that my husband is not. He went back to the vet seeking a refund, an apology, or an explanation.
Instead, he got an excuse. They stood firm on their course of treatment and refused to admit they may have been wrong. They wouldn’t even admit they should have told us about other treatment options in order that we could have decided which way to go.
It didn’t matter that the customer had product literature from the dip manufacturer saying it wasn’t safe for dogs the size and age of our pup–the customer was wrong. It didn’t matter that the customer had other vets who said our dogs had been given an expensive and irresponsible course of treatment–the customer was wrong.
And I suppose maybe they’re right.
The customer was wrong to have trusted them. Wrong not to have voiced her concerns at the start. Wrong not to have questioned the rationale behind risking the life of such a young, tiny dog to stop an itch.
And wrong to believe such a money-motivated business might do the right thing.
April 28th, 2006 at 9:53 pm
Karin-I use the same vet(s), and have for over twenty years. I was there with my Golden Retriever earlier this week, and I had a very distrubing conversation with an older, retired couple in the waiting room. They have an older dog with numerous health problems, the most serious of which requires treatments which sounded very much like dialasys (though that word was never used)every four to six days. They are on pension and Social Security, and the lady made reference to the cost of treatment and medication. Her husband laughed and downplayed it, but the situation really concerns me. Not only for them, but for their dog as well. And for any other pets/owners who may be in the same situation. I like to think the vets in this practice have suggested they consider euthanasia, but after reading of your experiences (and asking some questions regarding medications for my own dogs), I can’t help but wonder. I DON’T know all the facts here; perhaps this has been suggested, and the owners can’t bring themselves to put their pet to sleep. If so, that’s a different ballgame. Still, I’m having doubts. Now I think back to some charges for service and changes in medications that were more expensive than those previously dispensed, and I wonder if they were truly necessary. To the best of my knowledge, my dogs have always gotten good care there, but my confidence in them is starting to waver. I’ll be on my toes in the future, and if any more red flags pop up, I WILL turm elsewhere for my four-legged kids’ healthcare.
April 29th, 2006 at 9:38 am
Karin, I don’t know how much money you’re out, but if the vet is just stonewalling, it might be worth it to bring a small claims suit (if you think it’s worth the trouble).
April 30th, 2006 at 7:58 am
I have quit using a local vet’s services because of their requirement for a complete checkup/blood work each time I wish to purchase heartworm medicine. This is required even though my dog has never missed his monthly heartworm medication. Since a trip to the vet has proven on several occasions to be quite traumatic for him, I limit trips to only those necessary, like a rabies shot. I purchase the exact heartworm medication from another source.
After your visit with the vet, we certainly need to educate ourselves and question their decisions about our animals.
Thanks for brining this to our attention.
April 30th, 2006 at 10:19 pm
Karin, Thank you for standing up for our little friends who can’t speak for themselves. I have used my veterinarian (not the same one you used) for 33 years. Ever since I was 7 years old. Something that used to hang in the waiting room of this practice has stuck in my mind for many years. It was a quote by Will Rogers that read: “The best doctor in the world is the veterinarian. He can’t ask his patients what is the matter-he’s got to just know.” This is what we do when we take our little 4 legged family member’s to them; we put trust in them that they KNOW how to treat them. Not only to diagnose any problems, but to treat them with empathy, professionalism & always with their best interests at heart. Your article upset me to think of what not only you & your family went through, but what your 2 doggies endured. On the flip side, it makes so angry to think there is someone out there practicing veterinary medicine who is only thinking of the money & not the welfare of the animal. Isn’t there a law against that? Wouldn’t the average Joe have charges brought against them if they were to ‘dip’ an animal into some type of chemical creation with the idea it would ‘help’ them? I think so. Why is this doctor exempt? Years ago in restaurant management training, I learned, ONE customer who is dissatisfied, will tell at least 4 people. Those four people will tell four more & so on & so on & so on. I can promise that I will be discussing your article with friends who have beloved pets they consider part of their family or like me, their little furry kids. We CAN get the word out about this mockery of veterinary expertise & compassion. I also believe the situation deserves a call to the Better Business Bureau. Just my opinion
May 1st, 2006 at 5:51 am
I was surprised by the number of emails I received about this column, many encouraging me to sue, but I’ve complained so of ten about this lawsuit happy country of ours that I’d feel like a hypocrite going after them in court. I deliberately avoided mentioning this vet’s name because they have loads of money (much of it mine) and I could imagine them going after me, saying I’d damaged their business, regardless of (and unapologetic for) the harm they did to me and my dogs.
I’d always thought if I could watch a person with animals, see how they get their hands in the fur and give a good scratching, see how they related, that it was a shortcut to knowing what kind of person they were. A certain way with animals and I’d let my guard down. I would trust. That sounds childishly naive now.
I know there are doctors who don’t do what’s best for their patients, who order unnecessary tests and risky treatments, so why was I so blindsided by this?
May 1st, 2006 at 7:21 am
I’m against frivolous lawsuits, too, but I agree with Raging Red; this isn’t frivolous. Besides the cost of your pets’ treatments, you should also consider the cost of your own medical expenses due to exposure to the dip solution, possibly having your car decontaminated, etc. I not suggesting you seek damages for pain and suffering, mental anguish, and so forth, but you have had unexpected expenses as a result of your vets decision regarding your pets treatment options, and I don’t think it unfair to seek reasonable restitution. Frivolous is one thing, wrong is another. This was wrong, and their apparent cavalier attitude only adds insult to injury!
May 1st, 2006 at 11:10 am
First off… I am SO GLAD that you brought this to light in your column!! We put our trust in our vets hoping that they have the best interest of our furry babies at heart, just as we do. It seems the almighty dollar is the bottom line instead of giving the best possible care. I would hope this brings a little humiliation to their office but I seriously doubt it.
I agree with everyone that left a comment. From their negligence, you and your family (two and four legged) could have become gravely ill. Imagine if it were Celeste that had the reaction to the dipping instead of you! OR imagine if the treatment had caused death. I wonder if the vet & staff would have been so nonchalent to the outcome of their treatment?
I’m glad your husband put his two cents in but I’m VERY disappointed and outraged with the vet and their office… evidently, they can do no wrong. How sad that their pride comes first and the wellbeing of our furry kids barely makes last place.
I have been devestated since the loss of my furry baby, FeFe. I can’t imagine having a vet and the staff treating a concern or question of mine with anything other than the upmost respect. Those people should be more than ashamed! Hopefully word of mouth will take care of this problem!
May 1st, 2006 at 12:24 pm
I have to agree with maicomike, this isn’t a frivolous issue at all. You have accumulated unexpected expenses due to their carelessness. I also don’t think you were being childishly naïve at all. You had years of trust behind this person. Why would you question their ‘expert’ advice?
As I said in my original comments, I have used the same veterinarian for many years, I trust him explicitly. I have had many years of wonderful experiences with his practice. Just one example, I started going there when I was 7 years old with my first cat. She lived to be 17 years old and passed after suffering a stroke. This veterinarian allowed me to come to the hospital & stay in the back with her while she was in her cage receiving treatment. They allowed me to come before business hours the following morning to spend time with her; sadly she passed just minutes after I left her side that morning. The doctor himself called my house to let me know. A few days later, I received a sympathy card from this wonderful doctor! He understood & empathized with my situation. I am sure at one time; you thought you could say the same for your doctor. How sad to say, it was not so. It wasn’t too much to ask.
May 1st, 2006 at 1:06 pm
Actually, it was very difficult for me to write this column because about 15 years ago, I had a German shepherd who had terrible back problems. This vet (the one I’m upset with now) was so caring through it all. When my dog’s partial paralysis (where she felt nothing at all) progressed to where she was in obvious pain, and there was nothing that could be done to fix her, I was grateful this vet was the one who did what had to be done. She was so kind and compassionate. Even though that was 15 years ago, I still feel somehow indebted to her for the way she handled that situation–like I shouldn’t be upset now because of that long ago kindness.
But what if we’d had a baby in the house that was exposed to these chemicals? No one even asked. It was so irresponsible.
I’ve made fun of stupid warning labels before (like “For best results, remove belt before washing” or “Potential risk of drowning risk if head is submerged in bucket when full”), but when it comes to caustic chemicals, it’s a whole different ballgame.
May 2nd, 2006 at 10:10 am
Lawsuits are certainly not always worth it, even if you feel strongly that you were wronged (and I think you were). If you still feel some loyalty toward this vet even after this most recent incident, that’s totally understandable. It does seem like the vet was negligent, though - the manufacturer’s literature stated that this was an improper use of the chemical, the other vets strongly agreed that it was improper, and there were other alternatives that she did not even suggest. But the important thing is that you are now all okay, so it might be better to just move on. Obviously, you’re the only one who can decide what’s best.