Comments
ANIMAL WATCH - At the start of 2025, my beloved dog suffered a devastating degloving injury, an urgent condition requiring skilled veterinary intervention. On my veterinarian’s recommendation, as it was closing time for the clinic, I rushed her to a VCA emergency care hospital in Glendale, expecting a haven for animals in distress. The reality was a profound shock and, it turns out, not an isolated one.
As an ardent animal lover in distress, I was unprepared for the level of indifference I encountered as soon as I entered the lobby of VCA emergency animal hospital. From the moment I entered, it became clear this was not a sanctuary for healing. The front desk staff, ostensibly disengaged and lacking empathy, welcomed us with all the warmth of a bank teller at closing time. My dog, in agony and confusion, and I, desperate for reassurance, were met with cold professionalism and an air of transactional detachment.
While I was fortunate that my dog ultimately survived, the ordeal required extensive correction of the inadequate treatment administered by a VCA “vet” and resulted in a prolonged recovery period. This experience has left a lasting impact. Conversations with fellow pet owners revealed a disturbing pattern: stories of pets lost to mistakes, lack of communication and transparency, feelings of uncertainty and anxiety after what happened to our pets behind closed doors, and what many described as corporate-driven malpractice, and inflated billing. The emotional detachment I witnessed reflects a larger trend at VCA since its transition from a respected community institution to a corporate entity prioritizing profit.
Today, pet owners at VCA facilities across the state report inflated billing, opaque pricing, and a lack of accountability when things go wrong. Once known for compassionate, transparent care, the company is increasingly viewed with suspicion by those who expect veterinary professionals to put animal welfare above corporate financial gain. This is not just a personal lament, it is a call for renewed scrutiny and reform in corporate veterinary care, ensuring that compassion, not profits, lead the way in treating our most vulnerable companions.
VCA Animal Hospitals, once recognized for advancing veterinary diagnostics and compassionate care, abruptly shifted in 2017 when Mars Incorporated completed a multi-billion dollar acquisition. The deal, valued at over $9 billion, placed VCA within Mars Petcare’s portfolio, alongside other franchises such as Banfield and BluePearl. Despite assurances that VCA’s leadership and clinical autonomy would remain in place, complaints quickly multiplied about a radical change in priorities, as profit took precedence over patient care.
Recent disciplinary records from the California Veterinary Medical Board document a surge of complaints ranging from negligence, altered medical records, record-keeping failures, improper anesthesia procedures, and lack of proper supervision - including instances where veterinary assistants and interns performed emergency procedures, often with catastrophic outcomes. Multiple accusations indicate clinics operating unsanitary premises, failing to maintain and sterilize equipment, and even aiding unlicensed practice. Pet owners have demanded formal investigations and regulatory action, with petitions documenting avoidable pet deaths and stories of owners left traumatized and financially devastated.
VCA’s problems extend beyond medical errors. Across customer review platforms and the Better Business Bureau, pet owners report repeated upselling, emotionally manipulative record-keeping, and aggressive pressure to approve unnecessary tests or procedures, sometimes costing several thousand dollars and yielding no benefit. Some accounts describe situations where price gouging for basic care left families unable to afford life-saving treatment. Despite months of unresolved complaints, VCA often refuses or delays responses, leaving families in distress.
Numerous patients and even staff members report that VCA is increasingly reliant on interns and less-qualified staff to fill shortages, especially in emergency rooms. There is widespread concern about unsupervised interns handling critical procedures, with little transparency about how few board-certified veterinarians oversee cases at certain hospitals. Pet owners allege that they were not told their primary care provider was an intern until after their pet died or experienced complications. This lack of disclosure has sparked calls for regulatory reform, as many states - including California - do not require hospitals to specify the credentials of treating staff unless explicitly requested.
Lawsuits and petitions are accumulating. A recent class action accused VCA of unlawful debt collections and reached a $210,000 settlement, though VCA admitted no wrongdoing. Employee lawsuits point to predatory labor practices, unpaid overtime, and hostile work environments, deepening discontent among front-line workers. Hundreds of individuals have signed a petition on Change.org requesting state and federal investigations into alleged clinical negligence at VCA hospital locations in California. In addition, activists, pet parents, and animal welfare organizations are advocating for enhanced transparency requirements, such as mandatory disclosure of intern-to-licensed veterinarian staffing ratios and regulatory measures to address rising costs of animal medical care, which may be influenced by the hospitals' monopolized emergency status designation.
Initially heralded as an opportunity for progress in animal healthcare, the acquisition of VCA by Mars has instead become emblematic of corporate consolidation and greed, raising concerns regarding ethical and medical standards, transparency, accountability, care of helpless animals, and public trust. Amid escalating legal actions, public petitions, and increasing dissatisfaction from staff and pet owners, regulatory agencies in California are under intensifying scrutiny to impose accountability measures and ensure the restoration of quality care within VCA animal hospitals.
On the other hand, the California Veterinary Medical Board (VMB) taking up to three years or more to investigate complaints is deeply problematic and renders the Board ineffective. Such prolonged timelines mean the Board fails to serve its essential purpose of timely oversight and accountability. When it takes this long to address wrongdoing, filing a complaint feels like an exercise in futility and a waste of time for pet owners seeking justice. Similarly, the judicial system dismisses small claims against VCA animal hospitals because pets are legally viewed as property. Many pet parents strongly oppose this outdated law, as pets are integral family members or, for some, their sole companions, not mere property to be handled without regard by institutions like VCA. This legal stance undermines the seriousness of complaints and the respect owed to pets and their caretakers.
(Mariam Moore is an animal lover at heart and a passionate advocate for their welfare and kind treatment. She believes every animal deserves compassion and protection, and she works to promote positive change through volunteering and policy advocacy. Speaking up for animals who cannot speak for themselves is something she is deeply committed to, and she strives to make a difference in their lives every day.)
