Decision-Making and Moral Distress in Veterinary Practice: What Can be Done to Optimize Welfare within the Veterinary Profession?

Veterinarians stand in many contradictory positions, such as moral and ethical representatives of animals and their welfare and the clinic owner, which makes income for them and their families. The article will look at factors in decision-making significantly impacting veterinary professionals' mental health. Distress is caused by high societal pressure, as veterinarians must fulfill their profession's requirements. Together with working conditions, it negatively impacts their mental health. The article emphasizes the need for veterinary professionals and future veterinary professionals for proficiency in animal welfare, animal ethics, and primarily moral decision-making. Thus, critical thinking and ethical decision-making should be discussed more in the profession and veterinary education.

An evaluation of a veterinary-specific mental health service

BACKGROUND

Veterinary professionals are at increased risk of suicide and mental health difficulties compared to the general population. Vetlife Health Support (VHS) is a mental health case management service for veterinarians with mental health difficulties.

AIMS

To evaluate the VHS case management service from the service user's perspective.

METHODS

Service users (n = 98) completed questionnaires assessing their experience with VHS and current mental health status using the Kessler-6 Scale. A sub-sample was interviewed and the data qualitatively analysed (n = 14).

RESULTS

The results show that 97% (n = 95) reported a positive experience with VHS and 98% (n = 96) reported VHS staff respected and listened to them. Participants reported significant improvements in relationships with others after VHS (P < 0.001) and were significantly more likely to be in receipt of formal mental health care after VHS than before (P < 0.01). The main emergent themes from the qualitative interviews were (i) positive communication between clinician and service users, (ii) veterinary-specific mental health services were regarded as important to understanding service users' circumstances, (iii) knowing someone is supporting them positively impacted wellbeing and (iv) confusion with discharge status.

CONCLUSIONS

Most participants reported positive experiences with VHS. Quantitatively, data showed that participants reported significant improvements in relationships and access to formal mental health care after contact with VHS. Interviews with service users revealed that they felt speaking to a mental health professional with veterinary-specific knowledge was beneficial for their wellbeing. Further evaluation assessing whether VHS leads to a measurable impact on psychological wellbeing is recommended.