Why 1 star
Why 1 star — or, if I could, even less — has everything to do with Dr. Natalia Perez Betancourt. We have taken our dog to this animal hospital several times, and we had consistently good experiences with the previous veterinarians. They understood our dog’s special situation and worked with us to find solutions that were medically appropriate while putting as little stress on him as possible. Unfortunately, our experience with the current veterinarian has been completely different. To understand our criticism, you need to know our dog’s history. We rescued him from being euthanized when he was only about seven months old. At the time, he was severely malnourished, weighed only around 8 pounds, and had numerous bite wounds and scars. He had previously been beaten, kicked, and starved. Because of these experiences, he still has severe anxiety around certain types of touching and movements, particularly when someone moves their feet or objects near him. Today, he is fully grown and weighs approximately 47 pounds. He is not an aggressive dog. He is a traumatized dog who may react out of fear in certain situations. Because of his extremely strong bond with my wife, his behavior with her is also very different from his behavior with me. When I am with him, for example, he will allow other people to touch him. The veterinarian who previously treated him understood this and worked with us on the issue. She tried to gradually get him accustomed to examinations and treatments without sedating him every time. Unfortunately, she no longer works there. Then our dog was involved in an incident with another dog. Our dog was bitten and required treatment for his injuries. We went to this hospital because we assumed our previous veterinarian was still working there. Unfortunately, she was not. Our dog was sedated for the treatment. He was also sedated again for the follow-up examination. After that, we specifically spoke with the staff and asked whether, for a future appointment, I could bring and handle our dog instead of my wife, and whether the examination could then be performed without sedation. We were explicitly told that this would be possible. At the next appointment, we were suddenly told that this had been a misunderstanding and that our dog is routinely treated only under sedation. The initial explanation was that the veterinarian and her staff considered his behavior to pose a significant risk to their safety. Our dog would have been wearing a muzzle and I would have been holding him. Later, we were also told that the area being treated was a sensitive part of his face and that he could not be allowed to move while the stitches were being removed. What was especially upsetting to us was that our dog was sedated three times within only two weeks. We completely understand that sedation can be medically necessary in certain situations. That is precisely why we would have expected an individualized approach and a reasonable assessment of the situation — especially with a dog who has a known traumatic history. Instead, we increasingly got the impression that the clinic was more interested in following its own rules and, from our perspective, making money than in working together with the owner to find the best possible solution for the animal. We were also extremely disappointed by the way our concerns were handled. We were told that our behavior had to be documented in our dog’s medical record because we allegedly had not behaved appropriately. All we did was question and criticize how our dog and the situation were being handled. We asked questions and expressed our concerns. In our opinion, that is exactly what should be part of a responsible and respectful relationship between a veterinarian and a pet owner. Ultimately, we decided that we would no longer return to this clinic. What happened afterward was particularly disappointing. The receptionist was apparently even instructed by the veterinarian to remove us from the computer system. After our experiences, we can no longer recommend this hospital. Our biggest concern is not that sedation was used when it may have been medically necessary. Our concern is the lack of willingness to consider our dog’s individual history, discuss alternatives with us, and work together toward a solution that would minimize unnecessary stress and sedation. For us, this was a complete loss of trust.