Question

Don't get me started on some rescues.

Honestly, I probably wouldn't either, but it would depend on the dog (how heathly they were/active, etc.).  Its kind of like when my 96 year old granny's doc wanted to give her a mammogram...um OK what will you do if it comes back bad.  Needless to say, she didn't get one.

I think if I were to hospice care the 16 yo dog I wouldn't bother doing the test or the preventative.  I just wonder HOW overdue the dog is for the test.  If it's just months, that's silly from the rescue's point of view but if it's years, then I'd wonder.

I would definitely test the dog, especially if I was not using preventative.  The test won't harm the dog since it's just a simple blood draw.  If the dog tested positive, then I'd have to make some harder decisions.

As far as giving the preventative....I don't know, I don't know enough about how it works or the condition of the dog.  I use my HW preventative as a general de-wormer/parasite prevention.  If there was some good reason not to use the preventative b/c of the liver condition, then I probably wouldn't but I don't think I'd stop doing it just because the dog is old.

As far as the rescue....I guess I don't see why it matters since HW is not something that just passes from one dog to the next and there is no legal obligation like there is with rabies.

Jewlieee

Would you hw test and give preventative to a 16 year old dog? What if the dog was nearing the end of its life? (Assume medium sized dog and failing liver).

No, I definitely would not give meds.

Jewlieee

Someone recently told me that they were turned down by a rescue org to adopt because their 16 year old dog was over due for hw test. I thought that was kind of ridiculous.

Do not even get me started on the ridiculous reasoning of some "rescues". Some have the blanket rules that they will not bend nor tailor to adopters or dogs. It's sad because some dogs are missing out on great homes! We were turned down because we don't have a fenced in yard. I was very open to ANY dog that the rescue sought fit for us, I have great references (vet, personal, and professional), we're financially able, and I'm a DOG WALKER so the dog would be with me at work all day, everyday. Whatever. I just went a different route and rescued my own dog and we ended up with Apollo and I'm so grateful we did.

 I'd probably test the dog and as someone says probably question how long its been without

BlackLabbie

We were turned down because we don't have a fenced in yard

I think that answers will vary by region, & situation.

Because of where I live, where heartworm disease is very prevelant, yes I would test & continue heartworm prevention on my 16 year old dog.  I have a 12 year old dog, & I can't fathom not giving her prevention because she's old.  I've seen dogs die from complications arising from heartworm disease.  Congestive heart failure and/or caval syndrome are not things that I have any desire to deal with. 

As for the rescue that turned them down, to a certain extent, I can see their point.  From their perspective it looks as if, when the dog gets older, their level of care is going to dwindle.  That may not be what is actually happening, but from an outsider, that's how it looks.

I am going through this very problem with an 11 yr old and 10 yr old. I would test, and keep them on a prevention. Not the treatment.

I have 6 dogs, they have all been on prevention that has failed. Long story. 3 are positive. In order to keep them from turning into more adult worms, and to help keep the possibility of spreading lower, the dogs are on prevention. This has been a major ordeal.

I would also like to know if I were to adopt, if the dog was positive or not.

Jewlieee

Someone recently told me that they were turned down by a rescue org to adopt because their 16 year old dog was over due for hw test. I thought that was kind of ridiculous.

Because a SIXTEEN YEAR OLD DOG...has obviously been "neglected" and given horrible care by the home where it's aged to SIXTEEN YEARS. That is without the doubt the STUPIDEST reason to turn down someone I have EVER heard. IMO the ability to own, control, care for and love a dog for SIXTEEN YEARS...is all the testament I need to the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT part of dog ownership. COMMITMENT.

I agree, Gina.  To me it also shows that the owner has a knowledge of the dog's condition and has weighed the pros and cons vs. just following vet or rescue protocol.  What *I* would do I cannot say b/c I don't have a dog in that condition nor do I know much about the HW preventatives since all my dogs are young and healthy but I don't see how someone can be denied and condemned for their consideration for the dog as an individual and its quality of life.

juliemule

I have 6 dogs, they have all been on prevention that has failed. Long story. 3 are positive.

Just out of curiousity, which prevention failed, & at what frequency were you giving it?

I don't think it is ridiculous at all.

I would absolutly still get the dog tested. And, IMO, I don't think there is any reason NOT to. It is an inexpencive test, and fairly painless blood draw. 

Whether or not I would treat it, or continue giving prevention meds, would all depend on the situation. Just because the dog is older isn't a good enough reason for me to not give prevention meds anymore. But, if I knew the dog was nearing the end of their life because of a medical condition, then I would consider stoping prevention. If the dog is having medical issues already I don't think I'd want to give them pesticides and make it even harder on their bodies just to prevent HWs, that would take years to affect them anyways.

I don't see why they wouldn't just test the dog. I can see from the rescue's point of view why they would turn them down, and it makes sense IMO, because they don't know the reason why or how long the dog hasn't been tested/on prevention for. From the outside it just looks like a dog not getting medical care because it's getting old.

No, I probably wouldn't.

There are a lot of things I wouldn't do for a dog that age. Not that I'm mean or cold hearted, but I have to be realistic and honest with myself. At that point, some things the vet may recommend doing would be for my own benefit and not the dog's.

Spazzy

From the outside it just looks like a dog not getting medical care because it's getting old.

you say WHY do the test...and I say WHY do it? Worst case scenario? the dog is POSITIVE and IMO, you don't treat...because the dog is compromised due to age. Best case the dog is NEGATIVE and since MOST dogs dislike the vet and many even find car travel stressful you have taken your already compromised elderly dog to a place RIFE with infectious bugs. IMO, as someone who only takes newborn pups to the vet as a last resort and does her own vacc's to cut down on exposure...I see NO reason to subject a compromised elderly dog to stress, that has no point.

I would doubt this rescue even cares why...they just have their little policy and that's that. The only facts we have are the dog is SIXTEEN YEARS OLD. That to me doesn't point to people who are negligent.

If the dog was DEAD the same rescue would doubtless be LAUDING these people for having achieved such a good age on their previous dog. IMO that is hyprocritical behavior.

I might end up doing this test at some point...but I sure would not do it FOR this rescue, I'd go to the nearest shelter and adopt from there. Obviously the dogs "they" have to place are much too special for me...and not in any actual real need of placement.