Tapir on Nostr: It's funny how CO passed prop 129 (the law that allows a mid-level veterinary ...
It's funny how CO passed prop 129 (the law that allows a mid-level veterinary practitioner to prescribe drugs and perform surgeries) despite everything, and it will be interesting to see if other states follow suite.
They actually have a vet in their legislature that was very vocally against this law, and the governing body of veterinary medicine (AVMA) was also very vocally against this. All kinds of vets and techs were against this.
I guess prop 129 was brought to fruition by Best Friends Society, which does have a host of controversy behind their policies. On top of that, the governor of CO was also largely for the prop. I think there was a lot of advertising for it as well, promoting it as a way to lower vet prices, despite that not being the point of prop 129 - it is supposed to address long wait times due to the vet shortage, it shouldn't have any impact on prices. If anything it may be more expensive because you're paying for another employee.
Anyway, I just feel like the community was not well educated on the subject. Prop 129 would introduce a *new* mid-level position, when we already have a mid level position that is under-utilized; vet techs, whom can be LVTs, and even specialize and become VTS. These positions are already not used to their potential, and instead of adding to what they can do, they just added another position entirely
The governing body for vet med also was against this, however being that they are the GOVERNING BODY in the US, they ironically are going to have to come up with some kind of policy and procedure for these mid-level practitioners. Which is just funny. But this proposition did not discuss at all what requirements this new mid-level practitioner might require as far as education and credentials, so that will all lay on the AVMA.
They also really fucked with federal laws allowing these people to prescribe controlled substances. That will be a huge headache for pharmacies.
The single good thing I have heard about this is it might help with animal shelters and high volume spay/neuter. I kinda don't see this happening though. Working in animal shelters, I can promise you most of them will not look to hire a new employee to do spay/neuters, most don't even bother with having an LVT on staff let alone a vet. At best, they may make an existing employee get credentialed, but then said employee will likely be really over-burdened with work. The last thing I would want to do while working at a shelter is take up even more responsibility. I foresee a lot of burned out shelter workers accidentally killing animals.
But I guess time will tell. I honestly think this will just be another useless unused mid-level position.
Thanks for coming to my rant.
They actually have a vet in their legislature that was very vocally against this law, and the governing body of veterinary medicine (AVMA) was also very vocally against this. All kinds of vets and techs were against this.
I guess prop 129 was brought to fruition by Best Friends Society, which does have a host of controversy behind their policies. On top of that, the governor of CO was also largely for the prop. I think there was a lot of advertising for it as well, promoting it as a way to lower vet prices, despite that not being the point of prop 129 - it is supposed to address long wait times due to the vet shortage, it shouldn't have any impact on prices. If anything it may be more expensive because you're paying for another employee.
Anyway, I just feel like the community was not well educated on the subject. Prop 129 would introduce a *new* mid-level position, when we already have a mid level position that is under-utilized; vet techs, whom can be LVTs, and even specialize and become VTS. These positions are already not used to their potential, and instead of adding to what they can do, they just added another position entirely
The governing body for vet med also was against this, however being that they are the GOVERNING BODY in the US, they ironically are going to have to come up with some kind of policy and procedure for these mid-level practitioners. Which is just funny. But this proposition did not discuss at all what requirements this new mid-level practitioner might require as far as education and credentials, so that will all lay on the AVMA.
They also really fucked with federal laws allowing these people to prescribe controlled substances. That will be a huge headache for pharmacies.
The single good thing I have heard about this is it might help with animal shelters and high volume spay/neuter. I kinda don't see this happening though. Working in animal shelters, I can promise you most of them will not look to hire a new employee to do spay/neuters, most don't even bother with having an LVT on staff let alone a vet. At best, they may make an existing employee get credentialed, but then said employee will likely be really over-burdened with work. The last thing I would want to do while working at a shelter is take up even more responsibility. I foresee a lot of burned out shelter workers accidentally killing animals.
But I guess time will tell. I honestly think this will just be another useless unused mid-level position.
Thanks for coming to my rant.