Dog Owner Upset After Vet Removes Puppy’s Teeth During Neutering Without Consent

Taking your pet in for a routine procedure usually comes with a clear set of expectations. One dog owner dropped off his six month old Goldendoodle for a scheduled neutering, part of a prepaid puppy care package he had been following for months. He expected a straightforward pickup, some aftercare instructions, and a groggy but healthy pup.

Instead, he was told that additional teeth had been extracted without any prior discussion or consent. While the cost was minimal and the medical reasoning made sense, the lack of communication left him feeling blindsided and uneasy.

Was his frustration justified, or was he making a big deal out of a routine veterinary decision? Keep reading to see how this situation unfolded.

A dog owner is caught off guard after a routine neutering includes surprise tooth extractions

When a puppy has a mix of baby teeth (deciduous teeth) and adult teeth growing in, retained baby teeth can cause problems if they don’t fall out on their own.

Veterinarians often recommend removing those teeth while the puppy is already under anesthesia for sterilization because it avoids a second anesthesia session later, which increases risk and cost. This is a standard veterinary practice.

Persistent baby teeth can lead to misalignment, trauma to the mouth, periodontal disease, and difficulty chewing if left in place. Early extraction helps the adult teeth come in properly. (Vca)

Medical professionals also regularly advise that the six-month-old age is a common time for neutering, and removing retained puppy teeth at that same visit is often recommended to prevent future dental issues.

Veterinary dental sources highlight that evaluating and removing retained baby teeth during spay/neuter surgeries makes practical sense because the puppy is safely anesthetized and it avoids subjecting the dog to another procedure later. (Long Beach Animal Hospital)

However, medical justification does not override the importance of informed consent. Professional veterinary codes of conduct, such as those from veterinary regulatory bodies, clearly state that veterinarians must obtain a client’s informed consent before proceeding with treatment.

That means explaining the diagnosis or condition, presenting options (including risks and benefits), and ensuring the owner agrees before additional procedures are done. This is considered part of ethical veterinary practice. (Vetcouncil)

One guideline states that vets and vet nurses should provide sufficient information to owners so they can make decisions, including talking through options, costs, and potential outcomes, and should involve the client in the discussion rather than assuming consent because a procedure is “routine.” They are also expected to document consent, whether verbally or in writing.

Though vets and techs may see removing retained puppy teeth during a neuter as common practice, the ethical standard still calls for clear client communication beforehand.

The fact that this extraction is routine doesn’t replace the owner’s right to be informed about and agree to the procedure, especially when it goes beyond what was specifically discussed prior to surgery. (Veterinary Board of Victoria)

Ultimately, the dental work itself fits within standard veterinary practice, but the way communication was handled, doing an additional procedure under anesthesia without the owner’s explicit consent beforehand, is what understandably left the owner feeling uneasy.

Here’s what people had to say to OP:

This group agreed the extraction was medically normal but should’ve been clearly discussed or pre-approved

These commenters were angry about consent and poor communication, calling it unacceptable service

This group felt OP overreacted, saying vets acted reasonably to avoid extra anesthesia

These Redditors leaned YTA, arguing trust in vets and minimal impact made complaints excessive

This user took a neutral stance, explaining standard vet practice and emphasizing better future communication

Is trust in professionals enough, or should consent always come first, even for routine decisions? If this were your pet, would you feel grateful or frustrated? Share your thoughts below.