On Friday August 26, 2011, I called PetSmart Banfield Pet Hospital located in 11331 Causeway Boulevard, Brandon, FL 33511. It was to schedule a drop off for a check-up of my pet. Bailey appeared to be sad at times, but still active when I arrived home; nevertheless, I was concerned. I received the okay to drop him off at 8:30 on a Saturday of August 27, 2011.
On Saturday of August 27, 2011, the check in went well. In the check-in sheet, I listed the reasons I was bringing Bailey in. I listed that I thought he might be in pain (potentially his hips), and he needed to be checked out. I also listed that he was overdue for his heartworm medication, and when the intake specialist sneezed, it reminded me that Bailey had been sneezing also, so I asked for that to be checked, as well. I received a call from Dr. ** at 1: 35 PM advising me that she has checked Bailey out and he will need to x-ray him to determine the condition of his hips. She indicated that there were some concerns, and she could not accurately diagnose him without x-rays.
She indicated the x-rays would need to be done under anesthesia, and it is not covered under my current Wellness Plan which, by the way, was scheduled to be paid off on Wednesday. During the call, the staff was researching plans that would accommodate the services she recommended were needed. Also, during this call she said that the only plan that would fit was the neutering plan. She said that Bailey is not a breedable dog and needed to be neutered. She went on to tell me how I could be punished legally should I attempt to breed Bailey due to his congenital disorders. She advised me of the Lemon Law; which would penalize me (as much as $1,500.00 per puppy), if Bailey father any puppies. This issue was mentioned several times during the conversation-- how I could be held liable for Bailey breaking loose and mating.
For the record, Bailey has never mated. I did not want the responsibility of him mating, nor any damages resulting in him mating, such as puppies of which I may be responsible for should another owner not want any puppies. Based on what Dr. ** said about the necessity of the medical care that was needed, I agreed to the upgraded plan. To me that it was implied that Dr. ** was more interested in neutering Bailey, and trying to deter me from breeding him. I do not believe that she was concentrating on his hip issues. She was eager to proceed with the neutering process stating that she could do it today, and I could pick him up at 6:00. Dr. ** never mentioned what she thought was wrong with his hips, only the fact that he needed to be neutered.
When I arrived to pick up Bailey, I was called into a conference room. I was advised that Bailey had a fractured hip. At this point, the conversation revolved around money. Dr. ** showed me the x-rays that were taken. She advised that Bailey had a fracture and that his joints were not in the sockets properly on both hips. She further stated that they were rubbing and not clicking--that was a problem. She stated the fracture does not heal on its own; that he would require a $1,700 worth of surgical procedure, and it could not be done at Banfield.
She recommended that I keep Bailey in a cage for five weeks, so the fracture would heal on its own. Meanwhile, my poor dog has a cone on his head, stitches in his groin and is going to be forced to remain in a cage for five weeks. I asked what other options we had. She answered a surgery that will cost $1700, which is described as a FHO (Femoral Head & Neck Ostectomy). She wrote the name down on a piece of paper for my record. I feel that the fracture should have been addressed first. I was now on a neutering plan; neutering could be done any time after the hip issue is resolved. This is cruel to the dog and me. I don't mind keeping him in a crate for five weeks, but not with a cone on his head that increases his anxiety. Dr. ** was interrupted by a staff at least twice for what appeared to be non urgent concerns regarding other pets.
On my way home, I called Banfield back because I was still not sure of how the hip problem related to Bailey being neutered. A young lady came to the phone and was very rude. She told me how expensive the x-rays and anesthesia would have been in my current Wellness Plan, and the only other option was to upgrade my plan. She stated those (x-ray & aesthesia) services were not covered under the current plan. She reiterated Bailey needed to be neutered because of all of the legal issue that I would face if I bred him. She then ran down my cost for violating the law; the Lemon Law that I could be charged with, and the penalty for each puppy that was born. She was very rude; this call did not make matters any better.
At approximately 8:45 PM, I received a call from Dr. **, who was following up from my previous call, as I am certain the young lady expressed how concerned I was. Again, Dr. ** talked about money; if she had to do x-rays with my current plan how much my out pocket expense would be. She then stated that the neutering plan was the best plan to cover the hip x-rays she felt was needed to determine his hip problem. Again, she added how important it was for him to be neutered because of the Lemon Laws, and how I could be penalized if he had puppies.
I was still not satisfied with Dr. ** response. I was more concerned how she implied that I would mate Bailey; thus, neutering him. After discussing with her that I was so close to paying off my Wellness Plan, she said that it will no longer apply. I have a new Wellness Plan, and the monthly premium has increased. Again, I was in disbelief of how my visit to Banfield has resulted.
Now I am faced with my poor dog in a kennel and with a cone on his head. The kennel was suggested to reduce movement, so the hip fracture would heal. He is uncomfortable adjusting to the cone and is aggressively trying to get the cone off. This causes him to move more which is likely to cause a delay with the healing of his hip fracture. He was prescribed gloclosimine conjoint, which will not be available until sometime next week. I was not given the option of the heartworm medication that was prescribed. On his last visit, he was given the flea prevention medication that included the heartworm prevention. I advised that I did not want that medication. Worm Shield (Hannah Pharmaceuticals) was prescribed by Dr. ** in January of this year. This medication was more cost effective for me, and Bailey was well adjusted to it.
Dr. ** stated that Trifexis is what she is giving her kids, and she strongly recommends it. Well, if this is the same medication he got last month, he had a vomiting reaction. So, I spoke to someone at Banfield and was told that if his vomiting episode was one hour after taking the pill, he would be fine. This never happened on the other medication.
This was not my first visit with Dr. **. Previously, she indicated that Bailey had crystals in his urine. She prescribed dog food that would reduce the crystals in his urine. I asked her how long he would be on the special food. She said for the rest of his life. However true this was, I did not feel comfortable with her treatment; I called back several times to inquire about her diagnosis and prognosis. During this visit, she did not say anything about this issue, nor during our conference did she have knowledge of his history described above.
In addition to the concerns noted above, Bailey was recently groomed at Petsmart. After he had been groomed, he was to be taken to Banfield for his vaccination and heartworm medication. When I arrived to pick him up at Banfield, it was suggested that I try the heartworm medication that includes the flea protection. I advised at that time that I don't think this option will fit my budget, but I tried it.
After we have arrived home, I noticed Bailey was acting a bit differently. About an hour after giving him the new heartworm and flea medication, he began to vomit. I immediately called Banfield and was advised that he would be fine. He continued to act differently, so I picked him up. I discovered that he had been cut on his penis and testicles during his grooming session. A few days following, I received a courtesy call from their grooming department, and I advised the caller of my discovery of Bailey's penis and testicles being cut and all. They offered was an apology. They told me to put Neosporin on the irritated areas, and they asked if I sought medical attention with a Veterinarian. I advised I didn't know I could do that, but I did tell the gentlemen that Bailey was walked over to Banfield after he was groomed. I was totally surprised that this was not noted by Banfield, as a fecal exam was done for the heartworm check. I have pictures of the injuries.
This ordeal had implications that I wanted to breed my dog; not only was it not recommended by Dr. Merkel, but she took matters into her own hands. I am hoping that we can come to a mutual agreement to resolve to the aforementioned issues. Here, are a few of my recommendations:
1. Any issues with his hips should be paid for in full because of him being placed in a crate, with a cone for two of the five weeks he was required to remain inside the crate to heal, and the medication suggested to help in the healing will not be available until Monday or Tuesday of the upcoming week.
2. This should be a training issue, so that no other customer has to bear the emotional and physical effects of the above referenced ordeal.
3. A better communication approach regarding the Wellness Plan should be provided.