Pet Insurance?

[TBF]

I decided to get pet insurance when we bought our Lab last year and now I am re-thinking it. I bought it through the AKC when I re-registered him, but this is not something we've done in the past. Normally we just deal with the bills as they come. The coverage we bought seems kind of pricey and is designed towards accidents or serious illness - not wellness visits and that sort of thing. I'm thinking of dropping it but I'm posting on a couple of forums to see if there's actually anyone out there who has had good luck with any particular Pet Insurance before I completely give up on it. Any thoughts on this?

[Coyote_Bandit]

1. I spent a lot of time

investigating the possibility of getting pet insurance a few years back.

At the time I had two small dogs. One dog was five years old and had no known or documented medical issues. The other dog was about three and a half years old and had experienced kidney issues as a pup. Those issues had resolved and were controlled by diet. He had three years of quarterly blood testing with normal values. The premium would have been about $35 per month for each dog. Both were denied coverage. Seems that five years of age was considered too old for new coverage to be initiated and that the puppy kidney issues were an absolute disqualifier for any kind of coverage.

Since I couldn't get pet insurance I started setting aside the funds I would have otherwise paid in pet insurance premiums in anticipation of their need for future care. I did not use those fund to pay for routine care - about $125 a year for shots and an annual exam here plus regular flea and heartworm preventative.

I had to euthanize the older dog about 5 years later. During the last 6 months of his life he did require considerable care. At that time I had set aside $2,100 for that care. After having him euthanized and cremated there were funds left over.

In the last 6 months the younger dog has become a renal failure dog. I have just under $3,000 set aside for his care. His monthly expenses for vet care and medication to date have averaged just under $200 a month. He is fairly stable and currently in early stage 3 renal failure. Renal failure is progressive and when his quality of life deteriorates to a certain point I will have him euthanized rather than permit him to suffer. It is likely that I have already set aside sufficient funds to provide the care he will require for the remainder of his life.

My experience is that if you pay for routine and preventative care - and are disciplined to set aside that pet insurance premium then you will likely have sufficient funds to care for your dog even without pet insurance.

I'll never consider buying it again.

[TBF]

4. That's been my experience as well so far -

I had two other labs before these two. The first rescue lived approx. 10 years and had diabetes/pancreatic problems at the end. The other was a younger rescue but the heartworm he had prior to adoption seemed to weaken his heart/kidneys (at least that was the Vet's guess and/or he may have been older than we thought). With both of those cases there wasn't much hope of keeping them alive without pain or extraordinary care so we decided with the Vet when euthanasia was appropriate. So we didn't have any drawn out cases of cancer or anything like that. It seems that when the organs start failing there are really very few options.

We do have savings so I think I may just go back to doing it that way. The AKC was really too expensive, I was considering possibly VPI, but not sure that is even worth it.

[get the red out]

2. We have pet insurance

We have VPI, my workplace offers a group rate. I watched a close friend go through a long illness with her aging dog right before we got our puppy. I know hearing about the bills she had influenced us. We also have a plan with the vet for a monthly charge we get free visits and various routine services and discounts on other services, so what one doesn't cover the other does somewhat cover. We got about $35 back on what ended up being an $80 bill when Layla got the equivalent of a doggie cold a couple of months ago. That was ok. We may be overinsured right now but as long as it's within our price range we will keep it just in case. I hear horror stories of people having to make decisions on what care they can afford for their pets, guess I get paranoid.

[TrogL]

3. I'm thinking of discontinuing mine

$100 per month for six pets but maximum $500 per problem and $75 deductible.

[Paper Roses]

5. Pet insurance is expensive but not as bad as this bill:

My daughter has a Yellow Lab, getting old and developed a cyst on her leg.
Her half-sister Lab had one removed and it was malignant.

As a caution my daughter had the cyst removed on her dog's leg. The procedure was fine but the medication given to the dog caused a reaction that ended up with the dog in emergency Vet care hospital for 28 days. The medication is now on one of the caution lists. Who knew?
Check the drug treatments given to your pet after any medical procedures.

She settled with the maker of the drug, for $5,000.00. Did not begin to cover all the costs but she had no other options. Just keep in mind that the final bill for treatment to save the dogs life was $24,000.
I promise I'm not kidding.

Labs seem to be prone to reaction problems I am told. True or not, I would never let my pet be treated without knowing if there was some kind of controversy about the drug.

If she had pet insurance, the bill would not have been anything like it was. She did not. Lesson learned. If you can afford it, buy it after checking all it will and will not cover.

[TBF]

6. Holy Cow! That is the sort of thing I was worried about --

one of my friends has a Pug that she kept alive for a long time with chemo treatments. I'm not sure I would go to such lengths, but sometimes these bills are just crazy. I dunno, still mulling it over.

[Coyote_Bandit]

8. If that hapened to my dog

I would be finding a new vet ASAP - and demanding that the previous vet forego many of the charges.

It seems that the treating vet likely used a relatively new on-patent drug on a breed predisposed to medication reactions. There may well have been some anecdotal reports of similar reactions - or research detailing them before the meds were administered. That risk should have been disclosed before using the drug - and an option presented for another alternative drug treatment. If the risks were not disclosed then there was not informed consent. In all likilihood there was an older off-patent medication available - probably cheaper - whose effects were well known that would have done a satisfactory job.

[KathyS]

7. insurance etc.

Did you think about discount programs? Try United pet Care (here's a link) or Pet Assure, maybe in stead of pet insurance. Usually alot cheaper than standard insurance, and no exclusions ect. but they'll only pay about 25% .. depending on if you have big surgeries and such, it might be worth it. Also here's an article from consumer reports i found on the topic.