Dr. Spencer, the new owner, refused to see my dying cat because I saw another vet. I consider this professional misconduct.After the first office visit, I repeatedly and diplomatically asked to see... Read More
Dr. Spencer, the new owner, refused to see my dying cat because I saw another vet. I consider this professional misconduct.After the first office visit, I repeatedly and diplomatically asked to see another, ANY other veterinarian there. It was the previous vet-owner, Dr. Stephen Jones, who built up the reputation of this clinic. Spencer misdiagnosed speckling on my cat's nose as precancerous lesions based on a nonchalant two-second examination, handed us the estimate, and let us know he was ready to do surgery. I had the distinct impression that he pretends to know things he does not.He generously told me that he could clean my cat's teeth and remove the lesion at the same time, provided that I submit the cat to an ultrasound cardiac screening ($500). He did not explain the risks involved in such surgery on a geriatric cat.This initial office visit was, to put it mildly, inadequate. Even the generally noncommittal cat's co-owner--on the faculty of the University of Washington--, turned to me and said, "He's [really] not very good, is he?"He examined my for a total of two minutes and showed no genuine interest in my cat. His approach can be described as "shooting-from-the-hip."He summarized the first office visit by saying that my cat was in terrible shape. The next day, however, after he actually looked at the lab results, he reversed himself. Then he stated that I could stop--cold-turkey-- the sub-cutaneous injections. This is advice that I strongly believe, in retrospect, harmed my cat and led to his premature death.His expertise on felines is frankly nil. Claiming that a cat with chronic renal failure, just based on numbers, is back in a "pre-crash" phase flew in the face of common sense--kidney function does not regenerate--and was misleading. And plain WRONG.Later on he refused to write a refill--a common refrain heard at this clinic. He also stingily prescribed only three tablets of a safe appetite stimulant widely used for felines with kidney disease.An illustration of his churlish telephone manners would one he left on my answering machine: "...and I'M TELLING YOU..."He also demanded--and later revealed, without my permission--sensitive personal information, which later he admitted, had not been actually necessary to have at all. To that say the other vet, Dr. Westerdahl, is mediocre would be to give her undue praise, notwithstanding her credentials, which look good, unfortunately, only on paper. Her guarded demeanor--piscine stare-- did not make communication exactly easy.She did the bare-bones minimum, evincing a grammatical infelicity but little interest, and then exited without even informing me that the office exam (all of 10 minutes) was over. When I informed an assistant that I had an unanswered question, Westerdahl returned, after having done the urinalysis, and spent another five minutes.I should have known better when, before deciding whether to go here or not, I interviewed the vet tech. We were suddenly pulled out of the room by a staff person who gave me a dirty look and had me presented with a bill for $40 (no one had even seen my cat!).They did not allow us to see our cat's blood being drawn, inventing a bit of nonsense for not doing so. (Who exactly is paying for this, by the way?).The vet tech Kay was of unfailing good cheer and decency. I am grateful to this sterling individual. The other staff--several with their best cosmetic smiles intact 9-to-6 and occasional insolence--do their jobs. One other positive note: they do write prescriptions so you don't have to feel ripped off buying medications from their limited dispensary (cf, Cat Clinic of Seattle).Not a good place to bring a cat, in any case. Note: Neither vet is a cat-owner, though the staff insists, a bit too strenuously, that they both "really like" cats. Read Less