10/14/2024
Vote NO on prop 129. Here’s a little bit about why it’s a terrible idea:
Though the intent of the proposition is to provide additional medical care for pets (especially in underserved areas), creating a quickly, insufficiently trained "mid-level veterinary practitioner" or "Veterinary Professional Associate - VPA" is a dangerous and deceptive concept at this time. NO on 129
1. Minimal Proposed Training: Animal doctors (aka veterinarians, DVM's or VMD's) dedicate a MINIMUM of 7 years and up to 12 years - or more to learn the anatomical and physiological nuances (and how they relate) to each other.
Proposition 129 is asking to circumvent the credentialed veterinary technicians we already have and create a new veterinary position: With only 1.5 years of mostly online courses and a few WEEKS of clinical training, anyone at least 18 years old would be allowed to perform some surgeries and treat your pets. Such an individual would not be limited to shelter medicine or underrepresented communities, rather, be allowed to work in any practice - even where you take your pets.
2. A VPA is NOT the same as human PA's. Most pets are seen by General Practitioner Veterinarians. This means your DVM has a high working knowledge about wellness, eyes, ears, GI, dentistry, brain, heart, hormones, cancer, skin of dogs, cats, horses, pocket pets, cows, etc. etc. Your veterinarian then diagnoses, prescribes, initiate treatments, and performs surgery by putting all this together for the best options for each patient's individual needs. Less than 2 years will not provide adequate training for this and puts patients at HIGH RISK of misdiagnosis and mistreatment.
3. Veterinarians would be 100% liable for what these VPA's diagnose, prescribe, initiate treatment and perform surgery on. Veterinarians I have spoken with and myself included are very fearful of repercussions on patient safety and our already stressed livelihood. Our state's veterinary (Colorado Veterinary Medical Association and veterinary technician associations (Colorado Association of Certified Veterinary Technicians ( CACVT ) are also opposed to 129. Please vote NO 129!
More details AGAINST 129:
- There is NO/ZERO data or incentive for these VPA's to focus on shelter or underserved communities, so the original purpose of the proposition is already under scrutiny
- Veterinary Technicians just received state-credentialled recognition in their title beginning this year. They are doing a magnificent job expanding their career growth and newer options. Why is this being taken away from them?
- Imagine your pet getting neutered under anesthesia and has a complication with either anesthesia or the procedure... . The doctor is in a totally different place at the time (which this Proposition is allowing!). Complications often require treatment within seconds or the patient may die. VPA's would not have the knowledge how to adjust or provide life-saving treatment with the myriad of other medical conditions your pet may have. ..now what?
- Students for such a program will face high tuition and minimal returns.
- Long term implications - higher mistakes lead to higher liability to DVM's which, in turn, lead to higher liability insurance costs (which, of course, get passed on to you and/or lower DVM income). So now we have more veterinary burn-out, and, paradoxically, LESS professionals to care for pets.
MORE info on this site:
https://keepourpetssafe.com/?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw9p24BhB_EiwA8ID5Bh6OZluUoIFdDiSunrP-u3LEV9Scdauq6L2HE6brANmpJVcOMUITwBoCDtgQAvD_BwE
129 - NO
Veterinarians in Colorado are opposed to Proposition 129 and they are speaking out about it. Hear a local vet explain why adding a mid-level position will endanger animals and not result in better clinical outcomes for animals. Gain a new perspective on this critical issue and understand what is at....
