As vets we always advise that owners get their pets insured, there is nothing worse than having to make medical decisions based on finances rather than on what is best for the pet.

Interestingly, one reaction I get a lot to the suggestion of insurance is - “well, I would not put my pet through anything that was too invasive or complicated because it would be unfair so I do not need insurance”. I find this a very interesting response because there are so many situations in which a pet may need costly treatment which is not “putting them through too much” but can save their lives.

Let me give you an example – a happy three year old dog is running through the woods chasing a stick which they run onto “mouth first”, they become impaled and a shard of stick becomes lodged somewhere beyond their throat. This now presents a life threatening condition – we take a look in first opinion practice but we do not have the sort of imaging equipment needed to pinpoint this foreign body (a CT or MRI scanner) we therefore refer this dog to a specialist centre that has this equipment.

They scan and operate the same day, this is very tricky surgery but the damage is repaired and two weeks post op your dog is on the mend and heading back to a normal life. This whole referral will probably have cost at least £4000. It was not cruel to carry it out, it was an effective treatment carried out by experts with the right equipment. I know I could not afford a £4000 vet bill – and that is why I insure my dog.