Report a problem
Judy's Book takes violations of our Terms of Use very seriously. We encourage
you to read through our
Terms of Use
before filling report with us.
After careful review, we may remove content or replace a content warning page before
viewing content deemed offensive, harmful, or dangerous.
Additionally, we are aware that there may be content on Judy's Book that is personal
in nature or feels invasive. Please note that Judy's Book is a provider of content
creation tools, not a mediator of content. We allow our users express their opinions,
but we don't make any claims about the content of these pages. We strongly believe
in freedom of expression, even if a review contains unappealing or distasteful
content or present negative viewpoints. We realize that this may be frustrating,
and we regret any inconvenience this may cause you. In cases where contact information
for the author is listed on the page, we recommend that you work directly with this
person to have the content in question removed or changed.
Here are some examples of content we will not remove unless provided with a court
order:
Personal attacks or alleged defamation
Political or social commentary
Distasteful imagery or language
If we've read the Terms of Use and believe that this review below violates our Terms
of Use, please complete the following short form.
|
Businiess name:
Newman, A Scott, Dvm - Georgetown Animal Hospital
|
|
Review by:
citysearch c.
|
|
Review content:
Unfortunately, the old saying ""You get what you pay for"" does not apply in this case.
For 14 years, our beloved family pet was a patient under this clinic's care. When he started exhibiting symptoms that suggested a GI disorder, the clinic repeatedly blamed the issues on ""food intolerances"" and ""allergies"" without testing or an office visit.
When the problem exacerbated, he was taken into the clinic and we were repeatedly told his age was to blame for his condition. Over the course of 5 days, he was seen by three different doctors and received three different diagnoses and prognoses while we watched him deteriorate. One doctor insisted that normal peristalsis visible on an xray was indicative of a severe GI disorder and that food was not making its way to the rest of the stomach. (An ultrasound and further xrays at a different clinic showed his stomach was just fine). Their final recommendation was to euthanize him and they had the gall to ask if we'd like a ""paw print"" made after he was put to sleep (of course at an additional charge)!
We sought a second opinion and discovered there was absolutely no evidence of either diagnosis the three doctors at Georgetown insisted upon. Unfortunately, we made the decision to seek more competent care too late. A week later, our beloved pet had declined significantly and was put to sleep. An autopsy revealed end stage colon cancer - not even remotely close to either diagnosis Georgetown insisted upon.
I would not recommend this clinic to anyone who wants the best care for their beloved family member. I truly believe that what happened to our family was avoidable and our beloved pet suffered needlessly.These doctors watched our beloved family member grow up. I expected them to have shown a little more compassion and a LOT more competence.
|
Reasons for reporting (512 characters left):
|
|
Reasons are required.
|
|
or
Cancel
|