The cost of dog care: Where do you draw a line?

January 9, 2010

It’s peculiar and very unpleasant to be sitting and writing an article while listening to the proceeds of your work go down the drain. Literally.

It started with a leaky faucet in my kitchen. It would be an easy fix, I figured, an extra expense, sure, but a manageable one. The plumbers came, agreed it was a straightforward job that  could be accomplished within the one-hour minimum they charge for a visit.

That was before the old pipe broke (or, as I contend, before the plumbers broke the old pipe).

Three hours and a great deal of hammering and cursing later, I was left with a huge hole in my wall — “We don’t do drywall” — and a huge bill.

Kitchen sink -- or money sink?

True, the faucet doesn’t drip anymore.

What does this have to do with Frankie and guilt-free dog blogging, you may wonder? I always think of freelance jobs in terms of what they will pay for –  the utility bills, for example, or my health and car insurance payments. I try to budget, but can’t anticipate expenses like the aforementioned plumbing disaster. Or Frankie’s diabetes and the illnesses that suddenly strike him– and that the health insurance I don’t have doesn’t cover (see Health insurance for pets? Hell, yes!)

Which brings me to the topic of my last post, dental care. Can I really justify a professional teeth cleaning for Frankie, no matter how much I would like to provide it — and how important I think it is?

Yes, there are organizations that help out with expenses for people in financial straits –  my pal Mary Haight of Dancing Dog Blog provided several of them in the comments section of that post — but I can’t legitimately count myself among them, especially when it comes to prophylactic, as opposed to essential care. I have a savings account. I have a gym membership. I have cable TV.

Am I expected to dip into the former or forgo the last two for Frankie’s dental care? What’s a concerned dog owner to do?

Where do I draw the line? Where do you?

Posted by Edie Jarolim
Posted in Dog Health Care | Tagged , , , , | 31 Comments

November is Pet Diabetes Month. Oh, the irony!

December 5, 2009

[Originally posted November 8, 2009]

pdm-logoVia my alert pal Constance B. Riggs, a dietitian who focuses on human diabetes at her excellent Eating Soulfully blog, I just discovered that November is Pet Diabetes Month. I’d always wondered who comes up with those designations and now I know: Drug manufacturers who want people to use their products. Yes, the trail through various tweets and blogs led me to discover that the designation had been made by Schering-Plough, the manufacturer of Vetsulin which, the FDA announced in early November, is defective. I blogged all about it a few days ago; see The Vetsulin Crisis: Cold Comfort.

I guess once you publicly dedicate a month to a disease, you can’t take it back.

Also posted in Canine diabetes | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

The Vetsulin Crisis: Cold Comfort

December 5, 2009

[originally posted November 4, 2009]

On November 2, the Food and Drug Administration published the following notice about the drug that I depend on to regulate Frankie’s diabetes:

The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) and Intervet/Schering-Plough Animal Health are alerting veterinarians and pet owners that Vetsulin®, a porcine insulin zinc suspension used to treat diabetes in animals, may have varying amounts of crystalline zinc insulin in the formulation. Because this Intervet/Schering-Plough Animal Health product is out of specification it could cause a delay in insulin action and an overall longer duration of insulin activity. Products having significant problems with stability can affect the management of chronic diseases. Unstable insulin products can result in unpredictable fluctuations in the glucose levels of diabetic patients. Intervet/Schering-Plough Animal Health is unable to assure FDA that each batch of their product is stable.

While Intervet/Schering-Plough is working with FDA on resolving this issue, supplies may be limited. Therefore, veterinarians should consider transitioning their diabetic patients to other insulin products. In addition, FDA encourages veterinarians to report any adverse events with the Intervet/Schering-Plough Animal Health product to the company through the Technical Services Department at 1-800-224-5318.

My first response to the notice was, I’m embarrassed to report, a sense of vindication. I’d told one of the vets in the practice I go to that some bottles of Vetsulin seem to be more effective than others. She scoffed at me, saying I was the only one to report that, and that perhaps I wasn’t giving the shots uniformly. Ah, vets who question owners’ ability to deal with canine diabetes… we’ve been there before (see Showdown in the Canine Diabetes Corral).

But as the implications of the problem set in, that I might have to try to get Frankie adjusted to another type of insulin, I realized this was the kind of cold comfort I experienced with my recent robbery — I’m not crazy, I really was robbed — and akin to the old joke about the gravestone that reads, “See, I told you I was sick.”

Update 1: My vet suggested that I research the Canadian version of Vetsulin, called Caninsulin, to see if it was affected. After calling a Canadian pharmacy that was clueless — and discovering that, for some reason, Caninsulin doesn’t require a prescription — I went to the best resource for all things relating to diabetes in dogs: the forum at k9diabetes.com. The bad news: it’s a global problem with all products, including Caninsulin, coming from Intervet/Schering-Plough, based in Germany. I think that, for the time being, I’m going to stockpile Vetsulin, which has worked fine as long as I continue to do glucose testing. But, as I’ve often said, it’s not my intention to discuss medical issues here — and there’s no reason to, when k9diabetes.com does such a great job.

Update 2: From Natalie, administrator of k9diabetes.com.

I spent a fair amount of time this morning alerting clinics I’m familiar with regarding the Vetsulin issue. Many did not yet seem to be aware of it. Only one thought I was trying to sell something ;)

Your readers could do a great service to diabetic dogs and cats by calling to alert their own veterinarians regarding this issue in case they do not hear about it through other channels.

Also posted in Canine diabetes | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Frankie: The first five years

October 24, 2009

Yesterday was the fifth anniversary of adopting Frankie, my first dog, ever.  In honor of that occasion, I was going to write a paean to the joys of life with a dog. Not coincidentally, however, the day Frankie was brought over to my house –  in rescuer parlance, his “forever home,” a phrase I detest not only for its Hallmark soppiness, but also its inherent falsity; nothing, not even diamonds, is forever  — was also my birthday. Much as I love writing, it’s also work, something I was determined not to do on my birthday this year.

I also thought of spending the day with Frankie but he’s really not very sentimental  and wouldn’t have appreciated the gesture (except in the general sense of liking to have me around to cater to him).  He would, on the other hand, have been very annoyed to discover that I put on my other hat, food writer, and drove up to Scottsdale for an amazing lunch at Michael Mina’s Bourbon Steak (hint: Kobe beef and sirloin were involved) in which he didn’t partake. And hell no, there were no leftovers.

So the task of doing a retrospective fell to me today.

I then contemplated writing about what each year of our lives together would signify — you know, like kibble for the first year being the equivalent of a human paper anniversary — but soon started wondering whether I needed to factor in the seven dog years equals one human year formula, which has been modified anyway. This began to involve higher math.

More to the point, the idea of our anniversary described in human romantic terms began to seem a bit creepy. I also feel that way about the term “pet parent,” incidentally, with its implications of interspecies interbreeding. If I am Frankie’s “mom” — a term I never used to refer to my actual mother — who is his “dad”? What would I have had to do with him and why don’t I recall the occasion? And why doesn’t Frankie resemble me in the slightest?

So then it occurred to me that I addressed this question in — shameless self promotion alert — my new book, AM I BORING MY DOG.

2. Will getting a dog change my life dramatically?

Yes, and irrevocably– but in a good way. Unless you have a tiny, flinty heart, in which case you shouldn’t inflict your mean self on a dog or any other living creature.

It struck me that I used to worry that maybe I did have a tiny, flinty heart, that I was incapable of the sacrifice involved in caring for another creature. After all, I’d never wanted a human child (yes, I’m an unnatural woman; get over it).

I was wrong.

Not only did the depth of my feeling for this funny alien creature throw me for a loop; I was also surprised by my ability to cope with the day-to-day details of his care. To use an extreme example, when I discovered Frankie had diabetes first I threw myself on the floor and wept. And then I got on with the task of dealing with it.  Am I crazy about giving him shots and fussing over his diet? No way. But I sure am pleased to discover that caretaking is not beyond my capabilities.

Hmmm. Even if the term gives me the heebie jeebies, maybe I was cut out to be a dog mom after all.

Also posted in Am I Boring My Dog, Dog humor, dog rescue | Tagged , , , , , | 5 Comments

Showdown in the Canine Diabetes Corral

October 17, 2009

I’ve been stewing the last few days about a discussion that I became involved in on a veterinary blog. No point naming names. It’s a vet for whom I have a great deal of respect — which is why I read her site daily.

In this particular case, I felt that she had conflated canine and feline diabetes — which are very different — in an overly simplistic fashion, linking both to obesity. So I made what was, in turn, perhaps an overly simplistic comment: That canine diabetes is akin to Type 1 diabetes in humans, and thus not linked causally to obesity; whereas feline diabetes is similar to Type 2 in humans, which means that diet can be implicated as a source of the disease. I mentioned that I had a diabetic dog who was never fat and (more tangentially) that I had written on the topic.

Boy, did I get jumped on! I was accused of  being an owner who extrapolates from a single sample (my dog) to a larger — and dangerous — principle, i.e., that I was letting people off the hook for letting their dogs become obese.

Two things I should make clear before I go further: I later got — and accepted — an apology for the tone, if not the content, of the vet’s comments. And as an unknown poster, there was no reason she should have recognized me as an authority on anything.

As it happens, though, I know a lot about the topic and from genuine authorities: world experts in canine diabetes whom I had consulted for a story that I wrote for Your Dog, the newsletter of the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University. It’s coming out in the upcoming (November) issue. I wrote a little about my research — mostly about a great study for owners of diabetic dog owners being conducted in the UK — at this post, which features the gorgeous (and not fat, as far as I can tell under all that fur) Miss Jasmine.

Co-poster dog for canine diabetes (with Frankie)

Co-poster dog for canine diabetes (with Frankie)

And I never, ever condone canine obesity. There’s no excuse for endangering your dog’s health by overfeeding her.

On the other hand, this being a guilt free zone for good dog owners and all, people should know that there is a genetic predisposition for canine diabetes (as well as for feline diabetes, although it manifests differently). Yes, obesity exacerbates the condition, but doesn’t cause it. So if you have a diabetic dog and you’ve fed him good food, given him plenty of exercise, and kept him trim, don’t beat yourself up.

The other issue, which I obscured by mentioning obesity, is that dogs and cats are different. This should be obvious, but the vet’s post lumped the species together. I can’t tell you how many times people have told me “Oh, I had a diabetic cat and she was cured by diet” or “My friend had a cat with diabetes and he never got cataracts.” Such comments initially, i.e., before I read more extensively on the topic, gave me false hope about Frankie’s potential for a cure — and nonpotential for cataracts.

So let me be clear: Dogs must be on insulin, twice a day, no matter what diets they’re put on. And no matter how well regulated they are, they may get cataracts. That’s part of the way the disease manifests in dogs, but not in cats.

The discussion ended reasonably amicably, with me making the final points about the difference in cats and dogs and being assured, on the site and in the back channel apology, that it “wasn’t personal.”

That’s actually what I’ve been stewing about. It wasn’t personal to the vet, who wasn’t insulted on a major site, having her integrity as a researcher assailed. And who isn’t the owner of a diabetic dog who gets subjected to a lot of misinformed comments about her dog’s weight — or lack thereof — and its correlation with diabetes, as well as with lots of comments about cats that don’t apply to her dog.

Two good things came out of this discussion, however. I became re-aware of  k9diabetes.com because the creator of that site defended my position in the comments section of the vet’s blog. It’s a great site, which hadn’t been fully operational when Frankie was diagnosed. I highly recommend it to everyone whose dog has diabetes.

And (duh) I also realized that I have a forum too: This blog. It may not be as well trafficked as the one on which I posted my comments, but it has some loyal readers who know that I’m a thorough researcher and would never disseminate misinformation. And that it’s not my fault that Frankie has diabetes.

Update: Natalie, the creator of the k9diabetes.com site I mention above, weighed in on this discussion in the comments section; she had a similar experience with vets to the one that Susanne — the owner of the gorgeous pup pictured here — had. It’s hard to imagine that anyone would discourage home blood glucose testing — whatever helps monitor your dog’s health, I say! — and considered “not having accidents in the house” a criterion for being regulated. Yikes.

I also want to invite Natalie — and any owner of a diabetic dog who has a story that might help other owners cope — to write a guest blog. Early on, I posted that Frankie is a dog, not a disease, and that I don’t want to devote this site to illness. That’s still true. But I want others to know they’re not alone, especially when it comes to questioning the advice they get from “experts” who may not have expertise in this particular area.

Also posted in Canine diabetes, dog blogging | Tagged , , , , | 11 Comments

The scoop on poop eating

September 30, 2009

Frankie just came in from the back yard with a satisfied look on his face — and a little piece of dog poop caught in the fur around his mouth. This made me very unhappy for a variety of reasons, but not for the most obvious one: the fact that he was feasting on his own feces.

He’s done it before. And if I’m not careful he’ll surely do it again. But in the general scheme of canine health concerns, it’s no big deal.

As it happens, I discussed the topic with my vet a few days ago because we were trying to figure out what might have caused Frankie’s recent bout of intestinal distress. Frankie doesn’t graze on potentially dangerous stuff out on the trail — I would know, because I’m always with him — and the only thing he’d be likely to come across in my enclosed back yard, where he is allowed to venture unaccompanied, is his own poop. I didn’t think that was an issue; I hadn’t noticed Frankie with stink breath or with little shit snacks — yes, for a brief period he used to bring the “treats” into my living room to enjoy — in a very long time. And, anyway, my vet opined, “That wouldn’t have caused his stomach problems.” Which I knew.

It’s a fact that’s hard to accept. Many dogs — even cute little ones like Frankie — eat poop. Their own. That of other creatures. They would no doubt eat yours if they managed to get hold of it. There’s even a name for this taste for waste: coprophagia. It’s gross to us — but then again so is a dog’s habit of rolling around in dead stuff.

No one is entirely sure why some dogs do it and why some don’t. Perhaps it’s as simple as some humans having a taste for lobster, and some being disgusted by it. And it’s not always clear why some dogs like Frankie do it for a while and then lose interest. But, hey, I used to eat tuna fish sandwiches every day when I was in sixth grade. Now I can’t look at them.

What concerns most people about poop eating is how to prevent it.

I’ve heard solutions to the problem ranging from putting meat tenderizer in your dog’s food — apparently it makes the poop less yummy — or, on the same principle but post-digestion, sprinkling Bitter Apple on the turds.

This seems to ignore the obvious cure: cleaning up after your dog immediately.

I know, poop production can’t always be supervised and some dogs like to recycle their waste immediately. One friend admitted, shamefacedly, that one of her dogs used to stand with his face near her other dog’s butt, waiting for him to eliminate so as to get a steaming fresh feast. But the fact that my friend was around to observe this suggested to me that what was required was vigilance — and separate potty times for her pups.

Which brings me back to my distress over Frankie’s snack. He’s still on a semi-restricted diet, one that’s clearly not entirely satisfying. I know I’ll need to call my vet again to discuss introducing more or different food.  And that in doing so I’ll have to admit to him that I haven’t been very scrupulous about keeping my back yard feces free.

Posted by Edie Jarolim
Also posted in Dog food, Dog health | Tagged , , | 7 Comments

Cruel to be kind

September 28, 2009

I’ve just finished lunch. The point here is not the food — although my foodie friends would no doubt beg to differ — but the ‘tude. Frankie’s attitude that is. During the entire meal, he was in his traditional spot on a hemp rug about four feet away from the dining room table, staring at me.

Sometimes he sits straight up, head cocked perkily, expectant. Other times he’s in a down stay but with his head lifted. Today, he rested his head on his paws, the picture of despondency.

Did he know that this was the optimum position to inspire guilt and therefore to achieve a treat? I would bet on it.

After all, it’s worked in the past.

I’m about to start researching and writing a story for the Your Dog newsletter about how dogs read us. I don’t like to go in with preconceptions about what my research will yield, but in this case I think I’m pretty safe in assuming that Frankie’s got my number — far more than I’ve got his. Yes, I study his tail position, his tongue flicking, and his yawns but I’m still not entirely sure what everything means. In contrast, I’ll wager that he’s got my brow wrinkle, dejected head tilt, and shoulder slump of resignation sussed to the point that he knows when I’m going to succumb.

Not this time.

I’ve been writing a lot about dominance theory, about how positive techniques and rewards are not only less harmful and smarter ways to train a dog but based on better science. But the flip side of that is allowing ourselves to be manipulated by our dogs to their detriment (and therefore to ours). I’m always railing about how there’s no reason for dogs to be obese when their owners are in control of their food intake. I should remember my own advice.

Frankie is not fat, but he’s diabetic, which means he’s not supposed to eat between meals. I nevertheless give him a little nosh whenever I eat — just a wee bit of dried chicken or beef — and, according to my twice-daily tests, it hasn’t raised his blood sugar. But Frankie’s just been through his second bout of intestinal distress that was not only costly and worrying but really, really messy.

I’m extremely glad he’s feeling better, that he’s got his appetite back. And I know the bland diet that the vet advised for him — which includes brown rice, metabolized faster than his usual grain-free kibble — likely makes him feel hungrier than usual. But my vet is not going to be in until tomorrow and until I get his approval to go back to the kibble and, possibly, the snacks, Frankie’s just going to have to be a little peckish. And I’m going to have to be a bit more resistant.

Which is why I ran to the computer to post this rather than sit at the table, catching the gaze, whenever I glance up, of a small but very persuasive pup.

Also posted in Dog dominance theory, Dog food, Dog health, Responsible dog care | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

Pet Insurance, Part 2: Jasmine’s story

September 8, 2009

Today I’m turning my blog over to Susanne Fritz, my Aussie pal who takes care of the lovely Jasmine. I’ve introduced Jasmine before; she’s the pup who is “diabetic and loving it.”

The lovely Miss Jasmine

The lovely Miss Jasmine

As I’ve mentioned, with 20-20 hindsight, I wish I had insured Frankie when he was young and before he was diagnosed with diabetes. You’ve seen my vet bill in my first post on this topic. And if you’re thinking you would have  set aside money each month for such emergencies as occurred with Frankie — well, you’re a better (or perhaps richer) person than I am.

Just so you know: I compared my own research in the U.S. with Susanne’s and policies/circumstances are very similar. I’ll add a few of my own things to look for at the end, based on the research I did for my new book, Am I Boring My Dog.

Susanne’s story

“Should I get pet insurance?” you may be wondering. Everyone’s circumstances are different, but from my experience I say YES! It is absolutely worth it. You see my dog Jasmine, like Frankie, has diabetes, but fortunately my insurance covers a large portion of the ongoing costs for her treatment. In the last two years since Jasmine’s diagnosis, I have definitely come out ahead.

I originally decided to insure Jasmine as a puppy because I knew she would grow into a very large dog (currently she weighs in at over 100 lbs), and realized if something went wrong it would be costly. I did not want to find myself in a position where I could not provide her with treatment she may need in an emergency due to expense.

When deciding if pet insurance is worth it, consider that the recent advances in veterinary medicine have been huge. Many treatments available in human medicine are also available to pets; in fact, they are often first developed using animal models. Your pet can get chemotherapy, MRIs, even kidney transplants, but these technologies are not cheap.

If your pet falls ill or has an accident and needs to go to an emergency vet hospital after hours, you could be up for over $1000 a night for intensive emergency care and monitoring. Could you afford this?

Vets would love it if more of their patients were insured, even though it creates additional paperwork for them filling in claim forms. They want to do what is best for an ill animal, but all too often they are limited in their treatment options, or have to euthanize a treatable patient due to the financial situation of the owner.

When I first insured Jasmine nine years ago, the pet insurance industry was relatively new and policies were generous, offering a lot for your money. Over the years the industry has evolved, and in the name of profitability companies have added deductibles and exclusions to their policies. This makes it important to carefully read the policy to understand what is and isn’t covered before signing up.

All policies will have good and bad points, so you will need to weigh these up, decide what you expect from the policy, and see if it meets your expectations.

Most companies offer various levels of insurance, such as accidental injury only, or accident and illness, or accident, illness and routine care. Routine care options provide some cover for routine veterinary expenses, like vaccinations, parasite control, microchipping, and neutering.

Among the questions you should consider when researching pet health insurance:

Does the policy have a deductible?

Most policies have a “condition deductible.” For example, my policy has a condition deductible of $50, so I cannot claim on the first $50 in vet fees for a condition. This is only payable once per condition, so if it recurs or is ongoing I do not have to pay the deductible again for the rest of the policy year. I do have to pay it again for any new conditions, and when I renew the policy each year the deductible is payable again. Often companies will offer lower premiums if you agree to a higher deductible; conversely, you can pay higher premiums to lower the deductible.

Are there exclusions?

Invariably the answer will be yes, and factors like the age and breed of your dog may determine what these are. Some policies do not cover breed specific hereditary diseases, and you will need to get more information from the company website or speak to an agent to find out exactly what this will mean for your breed of dog. For example, hip dysplasia may be covered for some breeds, but excluded in others, such as German shepherds, who are at high risk of developing the disorder. No insurer will cover you for a condition that existed prior to you taking out an insurance policy.

Other exclusions may include preventable diseases, that is, those for which routine vaccines are available. Pregnancy-related expenses and nonessential procedures are other common exclusions. An exclusion on my own policy is they will not cover stem cell therapy. This did not concern me a few years ago, but there is now a new stem cell treatment available here in Australia for treating arthritic dogs which looks promising. If it was something I thought Jasmine might benefit from in the future I would not be able to make a claim on it unless the insurance company changes its stance.

I can’t stress enough to be aware of exclusions; they will vary between companies and between breeds, so make sure you are not paying good money for a policy that covers your particular breed for very little.

Does the policy cover all or part of the vet bill?

Most insurers only cover part of the vet fees, say 70 or 80%. This is in addition to the deductible, and again you can often make this amount higher or lower by increasing or decreasing your premium.

What are the age restrictions?

Most insurers have age limits on new policies, and will not accept older animals — usually over 9 years old — as new clients. A pet insured continuously from a younger age, however, should be eligible to remain insured for its entire life. The company I have Jasmine’s insurance with has just changed its policy for illness claims: For dogs over 7 years old they will only reimburse 70% of vet expenses. For dogs younger than 7 they will continue paying 80%.

What are the annual limits and sub-limits?

Insurers have an annual limit on what they will pay out on a policy, and within this limit there may be sub-limits, such as condition limits – where they will pay up to a set amount for a single condition; and medication sub-limits – only a set maximum amount will be paid each year for medications.

Do they pay the vet directly, or are you expected to pay the vet and then the insurance company reimburses you?

What are the payment options?

Usually you will have flexible options allowing you to pay annually, 6 monthly, or monthly to make the premium costs more manageable depending on your circumstances.

There may be other extras included in policies, and these will differ between companies. i.e. Jasmine’s policy will pay for her to stay at a boarding kennel for up to two weeks if I am hospitalized.

My additions

Other things you should look for in a policy include:

Choice of veterinarian

Most plans let you see anyone you like; others are similar to HMOs, limiting you to certain health-care providers.

Waiting period

There’s usually at least a 10-day wait so that people don’t sign up immediately after their dog leaps off a precipice. Check and see when a policy will take effect–and watch your pup like a hawk until then.

Prescriptions

You often end up spending far more money on medicines than on office visits and services, so be sure your plan offers good coverage.

Specificity

You’ll find plans that say they reimburse you for “reasonable and customary fees.” That’s way too much wiggle room. You’re far better off with an insurer that provides a chart detailing what you can expect to get back for what you pay out.

Rate guarantee

Some companies adjust their premiums on a quarterly basis; that means if they pay a claim they can raise your rates in the next period. Make sure the company you choose offers contracts for at least one year, with no fee-rise adjustments if you submit a claim.

Renewability

You want a plan that doesn’t consider a condition diagnosed after you first contracted with the company as pre-existing, and thus as a reason for not renewing your insurance.

Posted by Edie Jarolim
Also posted in Canine diabetes, Dog health, Pet Health Insurance, Responsible dog care | Tagged , , , , , | 7 Comments

Health Insurance for Pets? Hell, Yes!

September 5, 2009

Pet health insurance is one of those topics that pushes buttons with people who think that pets are overindulged — you know, like the executors of Leona Helmsley’s estate who decided that they knew better where her money should go after she died than she did. Human health insurance is a hot button topic these days too, of course, and the two issues are integrally interconnected.

As I write this post, I have in front of me a bill for Frankie’s recent bout of “being a dog” — the diagnosis the vet ultimately came up with. I brought him in on a late Friday afternoon because he was throwing up endlessly. This was particularly problematic because of Frankie’s diabetes; I can’t give him insulin on an empty stomach. The vet gave him a quick exam, some in-house blood tests — again, because of his diabetes, major problems like pancreatitis were a possibility — and an anti-emetic shot. I brought him home where, instead of throwing up, he issued the rest of his stomach’s contents via his other end. He was in and out of the backyard all night long, poor little guy. By the morning, he was exhausted and still not eating. The result: Another visit to the vet, more tests, an IV hook up (including insulin stabilization), and an overnight stay at the veterinary clinic. He began eating the next day, and was sent home with antibiotics.

Here’s the resulting bill.

vet bill

So, that’s a total of $743 (a bit less if you deduct the $60.60, my standard insulin payment earlier in the month). I’m a little concerned about the “re-check exam” and its overlap with the geriatric exam and the exam of the previous day, but that’s another issue.

As everyone who reads this blog knows, I was extremely relieved that Frankie recovered well and that his problem wasn’t associated with his diabetes. And I know it could have been worse, that had I taken him to the emergency vet, the costs would have been about double, and I wouldn’t have had the assurance that came with going to a vet who knows Frankie and his medical history.

Am I happy to have racked up this “reduced” vet bill? Not bloody likely.

Business is bad for everyone these days, and freelance writing is no different. Every day, another newspaper and magazine bites the dust. I was kinda, sorta catching up nevertheless when this hit me.

This and, not so coincidentally, a letter from BlueCross/Blue Shield of Arizona stating they were raising my health insurance rates — not because I was moving into a new age category or anything, but because…. well, because they could. If I wanted to keep the same (still high) rates, I could raise my deductible from $5,000 to $10,00o dollars. What an option!

Did I mention I haven’t gone to the doctor this past year because I’m feeling fine and I know that I’m inevitably going to get hit with all kinds of extraneous costs — aside from the $35 co-pay — for a “wellness” exam: Cholesterol tests, bone density, etc. I regard my health insurance as an emergency fallback, so I won’t go into debt if I need to be hospitalized.

Pet health insurance is not yet broken, like human health insurance is. (Yes, I want a public option, all you loons out there disrupting town hall meetings. I want it bad.) My long-distance pal Susanne, who shares her home in Australia with a diabetic Alaskan malamute, naturally worries about her dog, Jasmine’s, health. In contrast to me, however, Susanne doesn’t worry about the vet bills: She has pet health insurance.

I’ll talk more about the various pet health insurance options, including what you should look for and what you should look out for, in my next post. This one has gone on a bit longer than I’d planned. I will try not to moan over the fact that I didn’t know in advance — that is, before he turned 9 and developed diabetes — that it was a good idea to get Frankie insured.

Also posted in Canine diabetes, Pet Health Insurance | Tagged , , , , , | 7 Comments