View Single Post
  #44  
Old 28.05.2018, 14:27
meloncollie meloncollie is offline
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: na
Posts: 10,854
Groaned at 34 Times in 30 Posts
Thanked 25,398 Times in 7,915 Posts
meloncollie has a reputation beyond reputemeloncollie has a reputation beyond reputemeloncollie has a reputation beyond reputemeloncollie has a reputation beyond reputemeloncollie has a reputation beyond reputemeloncollie has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The importance of emergency pet funds.

Question for pet owners from the UK:

In discussions with my UK colleagues there seems to be a common perception that the steep rise in veterinary prices there seemed to occur at the same time as pet health insurance became the norm. Whether having insurance changed pet owner attitudes towards treatment - and thus pricing - is pure speculation, but nonetheless a good number of my colleagues have remarked on this.

(I alluded to this in an earlier post upthread.)

Now, we are talking about a specific subset of pet owners - many of my rescue colleagues are dealing with animals who came to them ill and thus have spent a lot of time and even more treasure helping their pets; their focus might not reflect the general consensus. (My colleagues are also of an age with me, doG knows a tendency to look back fondly on the 'good old days' comes with the territory. )

So I am wondering - how does this perception that insurance and higher prices might correlate square with your experiences as a UK pet owner?

I bring this up because the article referenced a dog experiencing seizures costing 30K GBP. Hooligan's epilepsy has been a factor since 2009, meaning I'd pretty much qualify for a veterinary care customer loyalty card if there were such a thing. But even with the recent incident in my previous posts, her bells-and-whistles veterinary treatment over the years hasn't come anywhere close that.
Reply With Quote