Blue Juice: Euthanasia in Veterinary Medicine

Appendix: Methodology

Appendix Methodology T his discussion draws on data gathered through approximately eighteen months of ethnographic research in two large veterinary teaching hospitals renowned for excellence in training veterinary professionals in the northeastern region of the United States. Because of the enthusiasm of key veterinary insiders regarding my research interests , I had access to multiple veterinary hospitals. My initial fieldwork consisted of three months in a veterinary teaching hospital in new york State. From that experience, I was invited to attend several classes at a new England veterinary college, including a half-day seminar on euthanasia . next, my fieldwork at a teaching hospital in Massachusetts coincided with their thirteen-month internship program. Last, I compared what I had learned in the northeast with fieldwork in an emergency veterinary hospital in Santa Barbara, California. Immersed in the day-to-day activities of doctors of veterinary medicine (dvMs), I observed their interactions with human clients, animal patients, technicians, and colleagues. Throughout my graduate school training I was fortunate to be able to go back and forth between analyzing the data I had earlier collected and spending time in the field among veterinarians. This allowed me to use the inductive process of grounded theory in my analysis .1 In essence, grounded theory attempts to reach a theory or conceptual understanding through inductive processes. Research questions begin the inquiry, and the researcher constantly compares themes that emerge from the data with earlier expectations and assumptions. After each set of interviews, 188 Appendix I modified the interview guide and developed questions for follow-up interviews based on recursive analysis of the themes that emerged from the initial interviews and field observations.2 In this way, the researcher’s own theories and insights are firmly grounded in participants’ narratives and observable experiences. One important criticism of ethnographic methods is that, because samples tend to be small and not chosen by randomized sampling techniques, the conclusions drawn from fieldwork cannot be generalized. Given that my study’s participants were not selected in a way to represent all veterinarians, I do not claim to offer an objective, broadly generalizable view of veterinary euthanasia as it is practiced everywhere in the United States. I limited my study to small-animal, or companion-animal, veterinarians focusing on the treatment of pet dogs, cats, gerbils, birds, reptiles, rabbits, and other animals ; however, between 65 and 70 percent of U.S. veterinarians’ earnings in 2008 came from treating small animals.3 While some veterinarians work in mixed-animal practices where they might see pigs, goats, horses, and sheep in addition to companion animals, less than 15 percent of veterinarians work exclusively in large-animal practices. Perhaps what sets the majority of my study’s participants apart from the typical veterinarian is that they practice in large, urban teaching hospitals. While the vast majority of American veterinarians practice in small, locally owned clinics immediately upon graduation from veterinary school, teaching hospitals host elective, advanced training programs that require many hours and intense dedication from students. With state-of-the-art technology and board-certified specialists, they usually offer clients the most sophisticated veterinary care available in their area, including emergency or critical care; ophthalmology, neurology, and oncology services; and cardiovascular and orthopedic surgery. In addition to these sophisticated services, however , teaching hospitals also provide the same preventive and basic health care offered by most small-animal clinicians. Thus teaching hospitals exposed me to a large number of clients seeking care for animal patients with a wide variety of medical conditions. Though teaching hospitals are somewhat atypical veterinary clinics, they advantageously exposed me to a large number of veterinarians. I captured a wide range of perspectives, from those of novices fresh out of veterinary school to those of skilled specialists with nearly forty years of experience, ranging in age from twenty-five to sixty-two. Although participants were 70 percent female, the demographics of my settings reflect the significant gender changes in the profession.4 Women make up approximately half of practicing veterinarians and nearly 80 percent of veterinary students. Given that Appendix 189 teaching hospitals host a large number of residents and interns who recently graduated from veterinary school, I expected to have a greater percentage of female participants. All told, my data consist of eighty-one formal interviews with fifty-four veterinarians and over six hundred hours of observation. Participants included veterinarians from many of the twenty-eight schools of veterinary...