It saddens me that this practice has apparently chosen profit over humane treatment of animals, and I have two personal, specific, and to me heartbreaking experiences to support my review advising peo... Read More
It saddens me that this practice has apparently chosen profit over humane treatment of animals, and I have two personal, specific, and to me heartbreaking experiences to support my review advising people to avoid this practice. First, after years of regular visits and always paying our bills at the time payment was due--and this has nothing to do with bills, so bear with me--our beloved pet became very ill and could not seem to swallow or control his tongue. Dr. Emmert saw him and said he didn't think there was anything wrong with him. We took him home, he tried to drink water and we thought he was drinking water, but he became sicker and sicker, so we took him back. Dr. Emmert told us, quite impassively and with no apology for missing it the first time--when he barely spent a minute with him--that our pet had a brain tumor, and this was why his tongue movement and swallowing were affected. Dr. Emmert referred us, business card and all, to a specialized practice in the suburbs, where the vet promised me--promised--that he could save our pet; he charged us $900 in advance for this treatment, whatever it was (and yes, I was a fool, but I still trusted Prairie View and their referral). The next day they told us there was nothing they could do to save him, and he was euthanized in my arms in that cold and remote clinic, and even that was done horribly, since he made a pained yelping sound right before he died. We were then charged $700. After that, I was ambivalent about continuing with Prairie View, thinking it really wasn't any fault of theirs that I'd been cheated and that my pet had been horribly treated, but wondering why Prairie View had sent me to a place that would do such a thing--unless perhaps, like other practices, such referrals might be lucrative. But when our remaining pet, a 6-year-old cat who would fetch balls and could even open doors (a cat we adored and would have done anything within our means to save), we took her to see Dr. Diemer specifically. He saved her. But a year later, when she began to show signs like before, Dr. Diemer wasn't in and Dr. Emmert REFUSED TO TREAT HER but didn't bother to tell us that until after we called and dropped her off, following the same procedure as we had the previous time when Dr. Diemer treated her. Dr. Emmert didn't bother to tell us that he wasn't going to treat her until she had been alone, sick and IN A CAGE UNTREATED for an entire day. Later in the day, he had someone at the desk call us at home and tell us that they weren't going to treat her--while we were imagining her (and by rights had reasonable expectations to imagine her) being cared for like before, receiving fluid treatment all day, and thinking we would go pick her up at the end up the day and we'd have another precious year or so with her. And all this time, they weren't going to treat her. She had been there all day. They didn't even give us the option of treatment but decided to let her sit there until it was convenient that afternoon to give us a call. We brought her home and she died a horrible death, thirsty and unable to walk, and I blame Dr. Emmert and will always blame him. I don't care what you, Dr. Emmert, or you, Dr. Diemer, write here: all logical signs point to the reality that you are both in this for wealth and not for the love of animals, and in fact you, Dr. Emmert, were severely negligent in the (non) treatment of our pet. I don't know what ever happened to good vets like Dr. Balster, the former vet at Bethany who was maybe the last of his kind, a true animal lover and a good man. He is sorely missed and his kind may not come again--and certainly has not come again to this practice. Read Less