# PDSA Should I Go To Them?



## LauraJane9 (Oct 3, 2012)

Hi guys, Sully's vet bills are getting expensive, just recently a course of antibiotics for £65 and on Friday it will be £176 for neuturing and teeth extraction, a work friend of my OH pointed out that she got antibiotics for just £5 from PDSA and that my OH and I are eligible for PDSA treatment, is this something I should consider?


----------



## babycham2002 (Oct 18, 2009)

depends really
could you afford a dog and all the related health care when you got him and now you have fallen on hard times

they didnt 'cost' her £5, she donated £5 towards the cost of his treatment and antibiotics that day, it would have gone nowhere near what it had 'cost' the charity. 


personally I feel I cannot support the PDSA anymore, I used to take them many boxes full of items they needed (the put a sign up outside) but the one pedigree rule I feel is short sighted and wrong.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

If you're having a tough time sure, it is donation basis though so as babycham says not 'just £5', I would ask them how much the drugs actually cost and try to give that amount personally (we know vets add lots on themselves). Have you taken out insurance?


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

If you qualify then yes go but as said £5 doesnt come close to the true cost. Couple of my friends take their staffys there. And wouldnt of got the treatment they needed without them. I use vets4pets even tho i qualify for pdsa. I dont like using a charity unless its a last resort


----------



## LauraJane9 (Oct 3, 2012)

Yeah we have insurance, this time next year we will be able to cover these simple costs but things are difficult at the moment, I'm out of work (anxiety and panic attacks most of my life) but thanks to Sully I've gained the confidence to go back except I can't do anything about that until his separation anxiety is sorted, we have alot of extra expense with helping out our family's, just had to lend OH's dad £100 and we are spending a small fortune on travel costs to go to my Mum's to help her out as she has dystonia, we have also been given the responsibility of Christmas dinner for alot of people! It's all a friggin nightmare right now, there is a light at the end of the tunnel but it's a bloody fight to get there.


----------



## LauraJane9 (Oct 3, 2012)

Robnsacha said:


> If you qualify then yes go but as said £5 doesnt come close to the true cost. Couple of my friends take their staffys there. And wouldnt of got the treatment they needed without them. I use vets4pets even tho i qualify for pdsa. I dont like using a charity unless its a last resort


I hate to say I think we might be at last resort time, I hate the idea of using charity but with so many people relying on us right now I don't see another way, I hate this situation.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

LauraJane9 said:


> I hate to say I think we might be at last resort time, I hate the idea of using charity but with so many people relying on us right now I don't see another way, I hate this situation.


Everyone needs help now and again, so long as you've exhausted methods there's absolutely no shame in charity, it's there for a reason and I'm sure when you hit better times you'll remember it and you can make a donation or something.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

As someone who donates to PDSA - I would be happy to know that the money was spent on helping someone's pet whose owner was on hard times.

So yes, if you cant afford treatment and your pet needs it, you should go


----------



## LauraJane9 (Oct 3, 2012)

Phoolf said:


> Everyone needs help now and again, so long as you've exhausted methods there's absolutely no shame in charity, it's there for a reason and I'm sure when you hit better times you'll remember it and you can make a donation or something.


I've already told my OH that if we do have to take this route then we will be setting up monthly donations when things are how they should be. I know these things can't be helped but when we got Sully we were confident we could cover all these costs, before I ever get another dog I'm going to set up a savings account, regardless of whether we think we can afford it this situation has shown me you just never know.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Depending on which area you live in there are I believe schemes to help with the cost of spaying and neutering. Can't be sure but think this is done by the RSPCA -


----------



## babycham2002 (Oct 18, 2009)

Then yes I believe you are in a situation where the charity could be of help to you while you are in genuine need

As far as I am aware neutering has a fixed cost within the PDSA but is greatly subsidised. 
Give your local one a call and have a chat I would say.


Best of luck and I hope your health continues to improve


Vicki


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

LauraJane9 said:


> Hi guys, Sully's vet bills are getting expensive, just recently a course of antibiotics for £65 and on Friday it will be £176 for neuturing and teeth extraction, a work friend of my OH pointed out that she got antibiotics for just £5 from PDSA and that my OH and I are eligible for PDSA treatment, is this something I should consider?


Do you receive housing benefit or council tax benefit? Are you in one of the PDSA catchment areas?

If the answer to any of the above is not yes, then the question does not arise as they will not see you.

Were I in your position I would tell all the people who have invited themselves for christmas dinner that you cannot afford to feed them and if they want to come they will have to make a donation.


----------



## BoredomBusters (Dec 8, 2011)

I was with the PDSA for about 4 years, I took a 6 month career break which I saved for, but sadly turned into 2 year for family reasons - I couldn't work, then it took 2 years to build up the self employment enough to have a decent 'wage'. I found that if you pay anywhere near what things might cost, they get very funny with you. I paid £50 towards my Greyhound's dental because I wanted to pay as much as I could afford and their reaction was almost 'if you can afford to pay that much you don't belong here'. It was better when you could donate anonymously! In the end I just gave them a fiver like everyone else and put money in collection tins!

I also found that they were regularly an hour later with appointments, and although I was still entitled to treatment there up to April this year, I left about a year before that. I felt when you have to worry about fitting a 2 hour slot into your work day (because that's how long it took with travel) it was wrong to be there.

So, if you are entitled to treatment, and you need it, then take up their offer, but try not to stay longer than you need.

The one pedigree rule is a sham. If you get a second mongrel while you are registered with them, they'll allow that one. Yet my view is, if you can't afford the first one, for whatever reason, you shouldn't be entitled to a second. And I often saw people in there with second or third dogs. If they really wanted to save money they would only accept animals that already belonged to owners when they signed up. Sorry for the rant...


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

BoredomBusters said:


> I was with the PDSA for about 4 years, I took a 6 month career break which I saved for, but sadly turned into 2 year for family reasons - I couldn't work, then it took 2 years to build up the self employment enough to have a decent 'wage'. I found that if you pay anywhere near what things might cost, they get very funny with you. I paid £50 towards my Greyhound's dental because I wanted to pay as much as I could afford and their reaction was almost 'if you can afford to pay that much you don't belong here'. It was better when you could donate anonymously! In the end I just gave them a fiver like everyone else and put money in collection tins!
> 
> I also found that they were regularly an hour later with appointments, and although I was still entitled to treatment there up to April this year, I left about a year before that. I felt when you have to worry about fitting a 2 hour slot into your work day (because that's how long it took with travel) it was wrong to be there.
> 
> ...


What is the one pedigree rule supposed to prove anyway? Is it because of the ridiculous notion that they are not as healthy as a mongrel, or because they cost more? If the latter, what rule do they apply to the fancy designer crossbreeds which cost more than a pedigree in some cases? Do they class a labradoodle as a pedigree or not? Or any other of those sorts of dogs.

And what rule do they apply to pedigree cats?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

newfiesmum said:


> What is the one pedigree rule supposed to prove anyway? Is it because of the *ridiculous notion that they are not as healthy as a mongrel,* or because they cost more? If the latter, what rule do they apply to the fancy designer crossbreeds which cost more than a pedigree in some cases? Do they class a labradoodle as a pedigree or not? Or any other of those sorts of dogs.
> 
> And what rule do they apply to pedigree cats?


Is it ridiculous?


----------



## LauraJane9 (Oct 3, 2012)

newfiesmum said:


> Do you receive housing benefit or council tax benefit? Are you in one of the PDSA catchment areas?
> 
> If the answer to any of the above is not yes, then the question does not arise as they will not see you.
> 
> Were I in your position I would tell all the people who have invited themselves for christmas dinner that you cannot afford to feed them and if they want to come they will have to make a donation.


I've checked and we meet the criteria to be entitled, my family are on even harder times than me due to illness so I won't be asking them for a donation but I might tell my OH's family to contribute.


----------



## babycham2002 (Oct 18, 2009)

newfiesmum said:


> What is the one pedigree rule supposed to prove anyway? Is it because of the ridiculous notion that they are not as healthy as a mongrel, or because they cost more? If the latter, what rule do they apply to the fancy designer crossbreeds which cost more than a pedigree in some cases? Do they class a labradoodle as a pedigree or not? Or any other of those sorts of dogs.
> 
> And what rule do they apply to pedigree cats?


yes it does also apply to pedigree cats

no it doesnt apply to fancy crossbreeds
and yes it is due to the notion you mention

PDSA Vet Care - Changes To PDSA PetAid Hospital Service

also note the last quote
'91% of PDSA donors and supporters said that we are right to be concerned about the numbers and types of pets some people are acquiring and presenting for charitable treatment'

not sure that that equated to the changes that people had in mind when answering the question. I would imagine it was more like boredom busters comment about acquiring more animals when already in need of help


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I think you have to prove your on benefits to be treated by the PDSA.


----------



## babycham2002 (Oct 18, 2009)

Happy Paws said:


> I think you have to prove your on benefits to be treated by the PDSA.


I think op has already got that covered
But for anyone who may be reading here is the checker
https://www.pdsa.org.uk/pdsa-vet-care/eligibility


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Phoolf said:


> Is it ridiculous?


It certainly is in my experience, yes. Our first dog was a mongrel, accidental mating between a border collie/gsd and a retriever/some sort of terrier. He always had terrible problems with his anal glands, could never sit properly so I think he had a little bit of hip dysplasia, and despite being a size that should have lived longer, he died at the age of 11 from kidney failure.

Our second dog was a golden retriever, big dog for his breed. Never had a thing wrong with him till he was 12 when he developed a testicular tumour and was operated on. He lived to be fourteen and the only thing really wrong then was his legs had gone and he could no longer stand up.

Then there is Ferdie. The only time he was ever ill was when I lost Joshua. Joshua had arthritis at the age of only 16 months and it was the medication that ultimately caused his death. Arthritis cannot be tested for.

Unless you are referring to the dogs that have been bred out of all recognition and it has affected their health, like bulldogs, pugs, cavaliers, german shepherds, you take your chances no matter whether it is a pedigree or a mongrel.

The dogs that have had their health seriously affected by overbreeding are in the minority of breeds, not the majority.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

newfiesmum said:


> *It certainly is in my experience, yes*. Our first dog was a mongrel, accidental mating between a border collie/gsd and a retriever/some sort of terrier. He always had terrible problems with his anal glands, could never sit properly so I think he had a little bit of hip dysplasia, and despite being a size that should have lived longer, he died at the age of 11 from kidney failure.
> 
> Our second dog was a golden retriever, big dog for his breed. Never had a thing wrong with him till he was 12 when he developed a testicular tumour and was operated on. He lived to be fourteen and the only thing really wrong then was his legs had gone and he could no longer stand up.
> 
> ...


Well if we're going on anecdotal experience then every mongrel I know has been in great health and lived to a grand old age. But this doesn't prove anything and unless there's a study done either way then I don't think saying its ridiculous either way could ever be correct. Although this study here: http://www.rvc.ac.uk/VetCompass/documents/Poster_SVEPM_2012_DONeill.pdf would tend to say that crosses/mongrels do live longer/healthier than most breeds:










Soooooooo


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

We can all only go on our own experience, study or no study. Point is that all our dogs when growing up were crossbreeds, all lived to great old ages except one who died of a virus. Last two dogs mum had were a retriever who lived to be 13 and a rough collie who lived to be 12. That is study enough for me.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

newfiesmum said:


> *We can all only go on our own experience, study or no study.* Point is that all our dogs when growing up were crossbreeds, all lived to great old ages except one who died of a virus. Last two dogs mum had were a retriever who lived to be 13 and a rough collie who lived to be 12. That is study enough for me.


Isn't that an oxymoron?  Are you suggesting people can't accept researched, studied facts, only what they know in their limited life experience?


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Phoolf said:


> Well if we're going on anecdotal experience then every mongrel I know has been in great health and lived to a grand old age. But this doesn't prove anything and unless there's a study done either way then I don't think saying its ridiculous either way could ever be correct. Although this study here: http://www.rvc.ac.uk/VetCompass/documents/Poster_SVEPM_2012_DONeill.pdf would tend to say that crosses/mongrels do live longer/healthier than most breeds:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As far as I'm concerned if an animal is ill and needs treatment it should get it from the PDSA. You should not be turned away because your dog is a pedigree. That is discrimination.

Lets be honest, if people get a well bred, ie. health tested pedigree, generally speaking, those people also insure their dogs, they are responsible owners. Much more unlikely to need to use the PDSA.

People who get a pedigree from a puppy farm or byb, parents not health tested etc, are more likely to have an unhealthy dog, and IMO, being unaware of things like health tests are often unaware of things like the importance of insurance (mostly third party liability I feel is essential to every dog owner). Lets not forget how often cockapoos, labradoodles etc come into this bracket too. These people are IMO, much *more* likely to need to use the PDSA because they are less likely to have insurance to help.

And guess what! I have a pedigree, AND he has health issues. Dun dun DUNNNNN! But guess what, I have pet insurance and it is not a health condition that could be tested for, nor was it present in any of my breeder's lines before Rupert popped out with his issues. He was the last litter of golden retrievers she bred, and *her* line is now gone.

Just like the RSPCA, the PDSA is now someone I would make a note of in the back of my head to not donate to as well, treatment should be available for those who need it and are struggling, end of. People who take the piss (ie. when they do not need to or are being irresponsible in owning as many dogs as they do with no insurance) they need to look into.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

GoldenShadow said:


> As far as I'm concerned if an animal is ill and needs treatment it should get it from the PDSA. You should not be turned away because your dog is a pedigree. That is discrimination.
> 
> Lets be honest, if people get a well bred, ie. health tested pedigree, generally speaking, those people also insure their dogs, they are responsible owners. Much more unlikely to need to use the PDSA.
> 
> ...


I don't disagree with you, I don't think it's fair for the PDSA to discriminate against pedigrees. I just find problems with statements like: 'ridiculous notion that they are not as healthy as a mongrel,' when it's not ridiculous at all as fae as I know.


----------



## Muze (Nov 30, 2011)

Are there different rules in different areas?
I was told they would not help me as I had insurance, even though Diz's problem was not covered 

Have to admit, the 'catchment area' annoys me, I only moved two miles, but this postcode isn't covered, even though it is a council estate and most people are on low incomes 

I no longer donate to the PDSA, unfair that some people can be helped without even trying to pay themselves whilst those in genuine need have to take out expensive loans or the animals go without


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Phoolf said:


> I don't disagree with you, I don't think it's fair for the PDSA to discriminate against pedigrees. I just find problems with statements like: 'ridiculous notion that they are not as healthy as a mongrel,' when it's not ridiculous at all as fae as I know.


I don't really have an opinion on crosses vs. pedigrees. I'll be honest and say I like my golden retrievers. I love everything about them and the typical golden retriever personality. Hence I'm *probably* going to have another golden after or during Rupert's lifetime.

With crosses to be fair, in ways you are decreasing the risk of health issues, and in other ways increasing it. Depends entirely what the most common issue is within each breed and then which breed is bred to another breed. Regardless of this pedigrees are toooooooo closely related to each other and it does worry me how this is going to pan out in the future, because like I say, I love me golden retrievers! But I guess again with crosses you *know* are x and y, and a pedigree which you KNOW is z, you can be a bit more prepared and/or aware of what the issues may be.

To be fair out of my breeder's three goldens I met, none of them had ever had any issues. The only goldens I know in *real life* that I see regularly are my Rupert and Babycham's Willow, both of whom have health issues! Bit of swings and roundabouts I suppose as to who you know. My Nana and Papa had labs since my Mum was tiny and they never had any issues with any of theirs, we have Milo and touch wood at 3 years old he is fine too.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Phoolf said:


> Isn't that an oxymoron?  Are you suggesting people can't accept researched, studied facts, only what they know in their limited life experience?


Wasn't it a carefully researched study which chucked together and studied a pack of captive wolves and came up with the idea that they have a pack leader and are all fighting for the status? The truth is that wolves live in family units and the scientist who made that study has stated many times he was wrong.

Wasn't it a carefully researched study which told me as a young mother forty years ago to lay my babies on their tummies or they might choke if they are sick? Now a carefully researched study is telling us that we should put them on their sides because on their tummy causes cot death.

I am sure there are lots of other carefully researched studies which have been proved to be wrong and more which will be proved to be wrong in the future. My experience of a vast variety of dogs is not going to be proved to be wrong so I know which one I will choose to believe.


----------



## LauraJane9 (Oct 3, 2012)

OH has just managed to convince his boss to give him some overtime (a huge feat!) so we don't need to go down the PDSA route, such a relief!


----------



## WeedySeaDragon (Oct 7, 2012)

That study is interesting but it's a study on longevity not health and there is a difference. A dog can live to a grand old age and still be riddled with health problems that the dog would be far better off without.

I didn't manage to read the whole thing as it's playing up on my computer but they seem to have a very restricted list of dog breeds there, some pretty popular breeds who tend to have decent lifespans are missing. There are far more crossbreeds on the list than any of the pedigree breeds. I'd be interested to know their definition of pedigree as well. Did the pedigrees have to have papers or was the owners word enough to classify the dog as a breed? I'd have liked to see classification within the crossbreed category as well, with dogs with two pedigree (or at least breed) parents being separated from dogs of unknown parentage. Mongrels are not separated out by size either, which would be interesting as generally smaller dogs live longer than larger ones. There's no data on whether or not the pedigrees included were from health tested parents or not.

There's another study, also British (A. R. Michell, Longevity of British breeds of dog and its relationship with sex, size, cardiovascular variables and disease, Vet. Rec., 27 Nov. 1999, S. 625-629), which has different breeds (including two not on that list and Jack Russells) listed as living longer than the average mongrel.


----------



## 912142 (Mar 28, 2011)

Don't you have to be on benefits to use the PDSA?


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

LauraJane9 said:


> Hi guys, Sully's vet bills are getting expensive, just recently a course of antibiotics for £65 and on Friday it will be £176 for neuturing and teeth extraction, a work friend of my OH pointed out that she got antibiotics for just £5 from PDSA and that my OH and I are eligible for PDSA treatment, is this something I should consider?


You do pay for worming / flea stuff / neutering with the PDSA. It`s simply that it`s less than the vet because it`s subsidised. 
Be careful about cancelling insurance - the PDSA may not provide weekend / night-time treatment, and certainly won`t provide an ambulance / callout for accidents. 
Accidental and Public Liability is only £5 per month with Animal Friends. That way you are covered for what the PDSA don`t provide.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> I don't disagree with you, I don't think it's fair for the PDSA to discriminate against pedigrees. I just find problems with statements like: 'ridiculous notion that they are not as healthy as a mongrel,' when it's not ridiculous at all as fae as I know.


I only had a quick look but that study appeared to be quite limited in numbers and the pedigree breeds represented. So it's can't really be said to be an accurate comparision of anything other than crossbreeds and the pedigree breeds shown


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

My personal thoughts are, if 2 parents of a dog both have lets say heart issues you are highly likely to have a dog with heart issues pedigree or not. But if both parents are healthy and free of health issues your highly likely to get a health issue free dog, but of course things can happen with pedigree or not.
But back on topic of PDSA, no personal experience with them so cannot say.


----------



## flyballcrazy (Oct 6, 2010)

I think the pdsa won't treat the animal if you have insurance, a friend took her dog to the pdsa and the vet asked her if she had insurance, she said yes and the vet said if you can afford insurance then go to a normal vet.


----------



## tinaK (Jun 12, 2010)

I do have insurance for both girls, but I am also registered with the PDSA

The reason being is that if one of the girls had a big bill I couldn't afford it up front. None of the vets around here will claim direct from the insurers , and I can't afford to pay and claim back

In those circumstances I would use the PDSA.. right or wrong, if one of my girls need treatment I'd do it


----------

