Some pets now get better medical treatment than their owners

Separate conversations with a couple of friends recently led me to a rather shocking conclusion about the provision of healthcare in the UK today.

One friend was bemoaning the experience of his mother, who is on an NHS waiting list, waiting for an operation on cataracts. The standard waiting time for this procedure, from referral to treatment, is 18 weeks, but she has already been waiting several months and has been told it could be up to a year before she receives her operation.

Meanwhile another friend told me how he had to take his Jack Russell Terrier, Bonzo, to the vet after noticing that the dog was having trouble opening one of his eyes. Despite it being a weekend, he secured an out-of-hours appointment and, by the end of the day, the dog had been referred to a specialist and operated on to remove part of his cornea.

The £4000 cost of the operation was met by the insurance company and, within a couple of days, Bonzo was back to his old self, chasing squirrels and barking at the postman. Meanwhile, my other friend's mother continues to struggle to see two feet in front of her, leaving her housebound and with little quality of life.

The two stories led me to the shocking, almost unbelievable, conclusion that in today's Britain, some animals receive quicker and better medical treatment than humans.

In short, if you are suffering from a serious, but not urgently life threatening condition, you are better off being a dog or a cat than a person.

While this claim might seem outlandish, a closer examination of waiting times, quality of care, and the cost/market dynamics of medical treatment for animals reveals some unsettling truths about the current state of British healthcare.

At the outset, I should state some important caveats. It goes without saying that human healthcare is inherently more complex, encompassing a wider range of conditions, ethical considerations, and regulatory frameworks.

The scale of the NHS, with its responsibility for the health of the entire UK population, dwarfs the veterinary sector, and it would be obtuse to draw wholesale direct comparisons between them.

Human medicine faces challenges related to an ageing population, increasing prevalence of chronic diseases, and the need for long-term care, all of which place immense strain on resources.

The ethical considerations in human medicine are far more intricate than in veterinary medicine. Issues such as informed consent, patient autonomy, and end-of-life care are paramount in human healthcare but less relevant in veterinary practice.

Nevertheless, while there are inherent differences between the two, animals in Britain are increasingly likely to receive more timely and readily accessible medical treatment than their human counterparts, albeit often at a direct financial cost to their owners.