Corporate Ownership of Nova Scotian Veterinary Clinics
Samantha Flynn 0

Corporate Ownership of Nova Scotian Veterinary Clinics

55 people have signed this petition. Add your name now!
Samantha Flynn 0 Comments
55 people have signed. Add your voice!
6%
Maxine K. signed just now
Adam B. signed just now

Concerns Regarding the Corporate Acquisition and Ownership of Locally Owned Veterinary Clinics in Nova Scotia

More and more Nova Scotians are becoming concerned over the growing trend of corporations acquiring locally owned veterinary clinics in Nova Scotia. This shift from community-based ownership to corporate control raises several issues that could negatively impact both pet owners and veterinary professionals in our province.

The Problem: Profit over Compassion

Corporate acquisitions often lead to increased service fees for pet owners. Unlike locally owned clinics, which prioritize community needs, corporate entities frequently operate with profit maximization as their primary goal. This shift results in higher costs for essential veterinary care, making it less accessible to families with limited financial resources.

The term “economic euthanasia” has started to be used to define a situation where a pet could be saved, but is instead euthanized when an owner can not pay for life saving care. This is a terrible and heartbreaking situation for anyone to be placed in, especially when a child may lose a pet, or a senior may lose their only source of comfort and companionship.

An example of an exorbitant price increase is for basic bloodwork. What used to cost $90 a few short years ago has gone up to $350 in some clinics!

A second example is a routine neutering of a male cat. In 2020 it was $110 (before taxes), where the same procedure in 2024 is $160.84 (before taxes), a more than a 46% increases in price in a short period of time. If taking into account the rate of inflation over the same period of time, the cost should be closer to $129.

Veterinary clinics are increasingly forcing pet owners to book complete health care check-up appointments for basic necessities, such as flea and tick preventative care, de-worming medications and other simple healthcare necessities. These basic preventative medications never used to require a full health exam. This adds to the financial strain many pet owners already face. For example, obtaining routine flea and tick prevention now often requires an annual clinic visit. At a local, corporate owned veterinary clinic, the cost of this mandatory appointment is $110, on top of $37 per one-month dose of flea and tick medication. Over the course of a year, treating just one cat amounts to $554 for prevention alone. These essential services should not be so costly, nor should accessing basic preventive treatments require an expensive clinical visit. Such practices place an undue burden on pet owners and risk discouraging some of the most basic, necessary care, ultimately impacting the well-being of pets and their families. This also does not take into account the sky-rocketing increase in Lyme disease and other tick born health implications that Nova Scotia is facing. Both dogs and humans can contract Lyme disease. Denying preventative care to pet owners who can not afford, or do no want to pay for expensive, unnecessary health exams, can lead to increased risk of human contraction of Lyme disease when pets transport ticks into the home environment where the tick can also bite other humans in the home.

The Solution

  1. Implementing regulations to ensure that veterinary clinics prioritize patient care and affordability, regardless of ownership structure.
  2. Encouraging local ownership through grants or incentives for independent veterinary practices.
  3. Monitoring corporate acquisitions to assess their long-term impact on accessibility, affordability, and quality of care. Limit how many clinics can be corporate owned.
  4. Implementing legislation to limit the percentage of corporate ownership allowed in the province. Many states in the USA have enacted laws which prohibit the “corporate practice” of veterinary medicine. While nuances exist between the different states, the doctrine generally prohibits a non-veterinarian or an entity, such as a general business corporation, from owning an interest in a veterinary practice or employing veterinarians for the purpose of practicing veterinary medicine. These laws generally are designed to prevent non-clinicians from interfering with or influencing the veterinarians’ professional judgment.

Also, basic preventative medications such as flea, tick and worming medications should be made available over the counter, and not require expensive, annual medical exams to acquire them.

Problem: Lack of Transparency

Locally owned clinics are deeply rooted in their communities and often build long-term relationships with their clients and patients. Often when a local clinic is bought out by a corporation, the clients of the clinic will not be informed of the change in ownership, nor with the clinic re-brand itself to show in any outward appearance that the clinic is now corporate owned. The result is that the corporation preys on the good will built up from years of service to the community and rarely announces the change in ownership to that community.

Solution: Public Facing Transparency

Clinics should be required to display in prominent locations if they are corporate owned through signage and avenues. Many clinics once they are bought out by corporation interests do not change the clinic name to reflect that they are no longer veterinary owned. The public should know if a clinic is corporate vs veterinary owned.

Problem: Veterinarians Selling the Drugs They Prescribe

In human medicine it is considered a conflict of interest for doctors to sell the medications they prescribe to their patients. As a result, pharmacies exist where people can shop around, price check, take their prescriptions to be filled.

In the veterinary world, the veterinarian both prescribes and sells the medication to the client. This is a HUGE conflict of interest for obvious reasons. Not only is this a conflict of interest, but often the corporations that own a clinic will limit the selection of medications to those from drug companies that provide the greatest profit margin on the drugs offered. The veterinarian does not have the freedom to choose the medication that might best suit the situation but must use the ones corporate headquarters mandates to the clinic. The pet owner has no way of knowing if there are better alternatives, more effective drugs available, or more cost effective options to choose from.

Solution: Allow Pharmacies and Online Retailers to Sell Pet Medications

Require veterinarians to provide prescriptions upon request. Also to inform clients that this is a option.

License retail pharmacies or online platforms to dispense pet medications. If pharmacists can learn the dispense human medications, they can also learn to dispense pet medications. Often medications used for humans, are also used for pets.

Expanding the availability of over the counter pet medications.

Introduce regulations to ensure pricing transparency and prevent monopolistic practices by corporations.

Other Important Points: The Burden on Animal Rescues and Government

The rising costs of veterinary care, often associated with corporate ownership of clinics, will certainly lead to significant negative consequences for both pet owners and society. When veterinary fees become unaffordable, many individuals may forgo essential procedures such as spaying and neutering, which are critical for controlling the pet population. This can result in overpopulation of stray animals, placing additional burdens on animal shelters and rescue organizations, many of which rely on government funding or community resources. Furthermore, high veterinary costs may lead to an increase in pet abandonment as owners struggle to afford care, exacerbating the strain on public services. The economic impact of managing overpopulation, including the costs of sheltering, euthanasia, and public health risks associated with stray animals, can far exceed the savings from cutting corners on preventive care. Addressing the affordability of veterinary services is therefore not only an issue of animal welfare but also one of economic and social responsibility. We need to look at taking proactive steps so we can preserve what’s left of the integrity of veterinary care in Nova Scotia and protect the interests of both pet owners and veterinary professionals.

Conclusion

Finally, the loss of locally owned clinics diminishes the sense of community that these establishments foster. Veterinary clinics are more than just businesses; they are trusted partners in the health and well-being of our animals. The transition to corporate ownership risks eroding this vital community connection.

Affordable veterinary care should be available to everyone. Being a pet owner should not be relegated to the rich and affluent only.

I urge the Nova Scotia government to consider measures to address these concerns.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Concerned Nova Scotians

Share for Success

Comment

55

Signatures