Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Anthony Todd — Tue, 01 Jun 2021 15:43:48 GMT

[quote userid="9448" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/f/misc-case-discussions/29851/clarification-on-code-of-conduct-change-re-euthanasia-and-scanning-for-microchips/230550#230550"]I too carefully consider what may happen to the animal if it isn’t euthanased.[/quote]

Yes.... and sort of connected. A friend has an ancient cat and wants to get a dog [he didn't tell me he had an elderly cat....

I initially suggested my favourite dog, a Jack Russell, er, then said "after the old cat has gone, please"!!

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Julie Turner — Tue, 01 Jun 2021 12:24:51 GMT

I too carefully consider what may happen to the animal if it isn’t euthanased. Passed from rescue to rescue? Or worse. It’s not a clear cut decision unless the pet is irretrievably suffering or terminal. I’d prefer a pet, unawares, to be humanely made to die, than leave it with little chance of a decent life. This is a bit of an aside from the current microchip code/legislation/guidelines which do not help us much , to be polite, especially with regard to stolen animals.

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Bob Russell — Thu, 27 May 2021 16:48:10 GMT

Microchipping of cats is a good idea. Making it compulsory opens a can of worms. I was unclear.

Compulsory chipping will not work because some/many people will not get it done. Plenty of work for these mobile microchippers and their rubbish databases.

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Anthony Todd — Wed, 26 May 2021 13:14:24 GMT

[quote userid="6550" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/f/misc-case-discussions/29851/clarification-on-code-of-conduct-change-re-euthanasia-and-scanning-for-microchips/230497#230497"]The changes may be well meaning but they are as close to pointless as requiring all cats to be microchipped by law.[/quote]

Having had a lovely siamese cat claimed by someone as "her cat" I can't see why chipping cats is pointless?

Please elaborate

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Bob Russell — Wed, 26 May 2021 08:18:25 GMT

Occasionally the pet remains registered under the charity details. Not sure whether this is even legal now.

Over the lifetime of a pet many rescues will come and go.

The suggested system is pretty much unworkable. Anyone with an ounce of experience would have worked that out long before now.

The changes may be well meaning but they are as close to pointless as requiring all cats to be microchipped by law.

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 25 May 2021 15:09:38 GMT

[quote userid="4747" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/f/misc-case-discussions/29851/clarification-on-code-of-conduct-change-re-euthanasia-and-scanning-for-microchips/230460#230460"]I have never seen a rescue agreement mentioned on microchip number I have checked.[/quote]

Charlotte Marshall - I was wondering about that ... I had never heard of such a thing before now (not that there's much reason why I should have done). Suspect most likely in rescue dogs, where the rehoming charity remains named on the chip as happy to take responsibility.

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Charlotte Marshall — Sun, 23 May 2021 20:04:41 GMT

I have never seen a rescue agreement mentioned on microchip number I have checked.

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Anthony Todd — Fri, 21 May 2021 15:50:58 GMT

[quote userid="6550" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/f/misc-case-discussions/29851/clarification-on-code-of-conduct-change-re-euthanasia-and-scanning-for-microchips/230449#230449"]The real question is whether we should automatically euthanase healthy pets at the request of a carer. I don't believe we should and I will fight for the pet very hard.[/quote]

Owners make the "disposal" decision for all sorts of reasons but usually their last option is euthanasia, which is a comparatively painless procedure and much less distressing for the animal than any other "discarding" procedure, which will almost certainly follow anyway, as the only other option!

I know elderly cats hate any change in their broad "environment" and I suspect many elderly cats disposed of into "We never put any cat down" must really suffer psychologically and crouch fearfully in a corner of "their" compound for the rest of their life.

Of course I explored other options, and even used the old trick of a cage full of lovely kittens "without a home" which sadly had to go "if no home was found by 7.00.00pm exactly.... [never failed!!]

I therefore usually complied but I am sure this will not be popular.

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Bob Russell — Fri, 21 May 2021 14:58:45 GMT

Nope! Don't really care!

Unless we know the patient and owner well (most) we would check chip numbers to match our records. We get a consent form filled in particularly where we don't know the client well.

All euthanasias are performed on welfare or medical grounds already. We consider the situations where the patient is well with particular care to see if there are other viable options. In the history of the practice we have not put a healthy, younger patient to sleep without good reason.

It is not my job to police who actually owns a pet.

The real question is whether we should automatically euthanase healthy pets at the request of a carer. I don't believe we should and I will fight for the pet very hard.

The 'guidance' is not that onerous in theory but is a potential nightmare in the making. Rescue agreements do not appear on microchip registrations in most cases. We are not Hercule Poirots or Jane Marples.

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Bibs — Fri, 21 May 2021 13:54:16 GMT

Thanks Bob. Do you have a clear understanding of what the code and the guidance really mean for us? How much flexibility there etc.?

RE: Clarification on code of conduct change re euthanasia and scanning for microchips.

Bob Russell — Fri, 21 May 2021 13:44:13 GMT

A lot of chips are implanted by people that have little qualification to do so. These chips are rarely on reliable data bases that can be readily accessed by us directly.

Not many weeks go by without a puppy coming in with a chip registered on yet another 'back-bedroom' database. Many are not registered on any database at all.

Until such time as these near cowboy implanter s and databases are brought in check it is not practical to identify many dogs.

It seems that the replacement of the guide to professional conduct with a 'code' of conduct is to be gradually replaced with bits of a guide and bits of a code.

We always look at alternatives where a healthy pet comes in for euthanasia. The RCVS has previously suggested that we should agree to euthanasia in these circumstances in order that animals are not just dumped or taken to another vet that will agree. Is this reversed?

This is not a job for the RCVS to become involved in really but we should thank our lucky stars that it was not made law!