Dog put down because of computer error

[Catherine]

Cocco the dog bit another dog and was being held by Detroit Animal Control for the required number of days. Someone made a mistake in entering the data on the computer and the dog was then listed as biting a human being. That is not why the dog was being held, but the computer was told that was the reason. No one questioned the computer. The dog was therefore euthanized.
The owner is understandably upset.

http://news.google.ca/news/url?sr=1&ct2=...840&at=dt0


This started out as carelessness, but ended up in the tragic loss of a pet. Does no one check their work to be sure it is right?
This isn't accidentally putting sugar in someone's coffee. This mistake resulted in a death. When a dog is euthanized, does no one check to be sure it is the right dog and that it has done something for which it can be euthanized.
Worse, the way it was handled was cruel. No one informed the owner. It would be a hard call to make, but better than her finding out later that her dog had been dead for 6 days.

There should be some kind of checks in place before an animal can be euthanized. Maybe there should be a tag put on the dog when it is taken in identifying the dog and why it is there. Other shelters have made mistakes and put down a dog whose owner was on the way to pick him up because it looked like another dog that was scheduled for euthanasia. Euthanasia is permanent. Is it asking to much to double check before you do it?

[LPC]

Yes, double checking should be standard. But let's be clear about this tragedy: people often say, "It was a computer error". Computers only do what they are programmed to do. They can break down or malfunction, but not change data by themselves.

In reality, it was a human error when incorrect data were entered into the computer. Humans make mistakes. That is why double or even triple checking should be standard.

I feel very sorry for the poor lady who has literally had her dog taken away from her. This is a tragedy which should never have happened. I shall post this piece of news on another forum. The more critical publicity it gets, the more likely so-called "animal protection" is likely to act to prevent the same thing happening again.

[Tobi]

(10-24-2016, 04:09 PM)Catherine Wrote: There should be some kind of checks in place before an animal can be euthanized. Maybe there should be a tag put on the dog when it is taken in identifying the dog and why it is there. Other shelters have made mistakes and put down a dog whose owner was on the way to pick him up because it looked like another dog that was scheduled for euthanasia. Euthanasia is permanent. Is it asking to much to double check before you do it?

I absolutely agree Catherine. When there is a life at stake it should be triple-checked!
What is the matter with people who do this sort of thing? They couldn't be bothered to check? They are over worked? Too busy? Blaming the computer is like blaming a car for crashing into another car.
How would they feel if that had been a child's life at stake?
To that woman whose dog was needlessly put to sleep, that might be the only friend she has for all they know.

I think your idea of a tag identifying why the dog has been brought in....or a colour-coded collar or something, is a good idea.

And.....Good for you LPC for publicising this.

[Catherine]

I think this story should be out there for everyone to see.

Someone made the mistake on the computer. You are right, the computer did nothing wrong.
Someone actually killed the dog without double checking to be sure it was right.
Someone somewhere must have known there was a mistake. Lying to the woman and failing to call her right away are not the actions of a professional. That was totally unacceptable.

This is a mistake that can't be fixed. The dog is gone.

Quote:How would they feel if that had been a child's life at stake?

Sadly right now there is a case of a pharmacy filling a prescription with the wrong medication. The parents trusted the pharmacy, went home and gave the child his medication and in the morning they found him dead.

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&...tQfA6VSQBg


Pharmacies, Animal Shelters, hospitals, anywhere that deals with life and death issues should be held accountable. Clearly more caution needs to be taken by staff and records need to be kept of any errors made(even minor errors since the next error might not be so minor)

[Tobi]

(10-25-2016, 02:08 PM)Catherine Wrote: Sadly right now there is a case of a pharmacy filling a prescription with the wrong medication. The parents trusted the pharmacy, went home and gave the child his medication and in the morning they found him dead.

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&...tQfA6VSQBg


Pharmacies, Animal Shelters, hospitals, anywhere that deals with life and death issues should be held accountable. Clearly more caution needs to be taken by staff and records need to be kept of any errors made(even minor errors since the next error might not be so minor)

Oh that is tragic. Poor little boy. I can't even begin to imagine what his parents are feeling.

It shows that when dealing with life-and-death scenarios, whether with people or animals, there is a need for checks, double checks, and maybe even triple checks. We do things in far too much of a hurry nowadays. Humans do make errors. Humans are not perfect. What they do need is to be checked by others. It only takes a moment!

[Catherine]

There are more safety checks in a restaurant over food handling. This is a good thing because food poisoning is no joke.
However a better thing would be for people in every profession to be aware of what their actions can do for good or bad.
I know we are all in a hurry, but how long does it take to check a prescription against the label on a bottle. How much work is it to confirm that you have the right dog.

Years ago when I worked for a vet I was putting a post surgical cat back in a cage. I looked at it and it was fine so I turned away. Then I looked back one more time and really looked and the cat had stopped breathing. The vet was right there and I alerted him and we saved the cat. It was my job to make sure the cat was fine when I left him in the cage. If I hadn't double checked it would have been too late.

A quick double check would have been enough to save the dog.   We need to slow down and do the right thing. The wrong thing ends up causing way too much damage.

[Tobi]

Oh it's great that you saved that cat, Catherine.
It is nerve-wracking to have an animal in for surgery. No matter how fit they are, at the back of your mind is always the thought, "What if they don't make it through surgery?" Things like that can happen even to those who are strong. You saved the little cat, and the people who were waiting to hear from the vet, "It's all over now. He's fine and he's woken up. You can come and collect him at 4 o' clock."
All because you did a double-check!
The alternative message is unimaginable.

[Catherine]

I always remember the cat story because it was a teaching moment in my life. I usually pay attention to detail. That is just my nature. It affirmed that I was right to be so careful. Because I was cautious and attentive that cat lived, went home and lived out the rest of his life. It was a minor procedure so the cat should not have died from it, but the anesthetics do have risks. That is why after surgery they keep you in a recovery room. 

I wish they were more cautious with animals. No healthy animal should be euthanized without a careful check of the reasons.
The animal wasn't a stray so why wasn't the owner notified. Even if the dog had bitten a person there should still have been some paperwork from the owner. It is heavy handed to just kill the dog without consulting anyone.