
Suicides among veterinarians become a growing problem - pseudolus
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/suicides-among-veterinarians-has-become-a-growing-problem/2019/01/18/0f58df7a-f35b-11e8-80d0-f7e1948d55f4_story.html
======
petvetbr2
I'm a veterinarian and became a software developer because I saw that I was
going to become another number in this statistic. Low pay, long hours, abusive
clients, bad working conditions and compassion burnout are all factors that
combined with a predisposition for depression and anxiety (like I have), made
me think several times if life was really worth it.

Fortunately I was able to start my developer career and even when it has it
stresses and frustrations it is nothing compared to what happens with
veterinary medicine.

~~~
mikelyons
Damn maybe if I'd been a vet before becoming a developer I wouldn't be so
suicidal :( (not sarcasm, something I've struggled with for years and lost
multiple dev jobs because of)

~~~
david-gpu
Have you spoken with a professional about it?

------
perl4ever
"This mystery ailment — diagnosed years later as Bartonellosis, or cat-scratch
fever"

It seems perverse to me to give an example of someone who suffered from an
identifiable physical illness and then write a whole article about the
psychological pressures of being a vet.

Some believe that all mental illnesses are physical illnesses, but even if you
don't...

Here, it's acknowledged that there _was_ something other than nebulous
psychological stresses and pressures, so the article bewilders me. If there is
in fact an excess of suicide among vets, maybe the first, most obvious
hypothesis would be that there's an excess of similar illnesses.

~~~
8yt98z2b905o
Missed the point mate.

The combination of pressures is the stressor in this particular, individual
case. The article cites a study which found the suicide rate among vets to be
a significant multiple of the baseline populations rate. The factors that are
common to vets are high emotionalal stress, caring fatigue, financial stress,
time pressure and a workplace that normalises death as a means to an end of
suffering and crucially, have access to restricted euthanasia drugs.

~~~
perl4ever
If the point of the article is that vets have access to euthanasia drugs, then
I don't disagree, but I don't think it's worth writing - are we going to
change that somehow, as a society? And, the article could have focused on how
to control access to dangerous drugs, if that was its point.

------
grondilu
Do veterinarians always perform the actual euthanasia? Can't they tell their
clients : "I'll give you the seringe, I'll show you how to do it, but _you_
will do it" ?

If not, considering that indeed veterinarians probably chose that line of work
because they love animals, making them kill animals on a regular basis has to
be kind of a death by a thousand cuts.

------
burfog
I just want to know, how is it simultaneously:

1\. cruel to keep the suffering dog alive

2\. cruel to euthanize the suffering grandma or child

???

In either case, refusing to follow that norm can get you a prison cell.

~~~
csense
My own personal answer to that question is that it's never ethical to end the
life of a loved one.

But in the case of animals, ultimately they are lower ethical status than
humans.

Murdering a suffering pet so you don't have to see it suffer is a decision you
make for some combination of easing your own emotions so that you don't have
to see your pet's increasingly medically burdened life firsthand, giving in to
social pressure from others who believe the "cruel to keep the suffering dog
alive" line, and the practical logistical and financial burden of taking care
of a needy pet.

A lot of people have the reverse line, that it's actually not cruel to
euthanize a suffering person, and ought to be legal. I object to that on two
grounds.

First of all, who judges whether a person's suffering meets the criteria for
euthanization? I wouldn't trust potentially sticky-fingered relatives hotly
anticipating the reading of the will, a medical establishment that is paid for
its services, or a government bureaucracy.

Second, even simpler, I don't want to die; death has a huge negative score in
my utility function, I don't think I would ever accept my own death,
regardless of what it bought. If I was captured by some crazy super villain
gave me a choice between (a) let me go, but the super villain would torture a
million innocent people to death, or (b) kill me, but then the super villain
would commit suicide and will their entire $1 billion fortune to my family
(and I believed these threats / promises with no doubt). I'd have trouble
deciding.

If preventing a million other people's suffering isn't reason enough to make
me choose to die, why should preventing my own suffering be sufficient?

~~~
thanksDr
Would you submit to torture to prove your point?

You might consider volunteering at a hospice.

