What the research tells us about pet insurance and economic euthanasia 

Most pet owners don’t expect to face a decision about whether they can afford to treat their pet. But in emergency situations, cost becomes part of the conversation. 

This is often referred to as economic euthanasia: when a pet is euthanised because treatment is financially out of reach, even when that treatment could offer a good chance of recovery. 

While it’s a difficult topic, research over the past few years has helped paint a clearer picture of how often this happens and what can influence the outcome. 

A matter of time 

A 2021 study^ led by the University of Melbourne examined dogs presenting with gastric dilatation-volvulus (GDV), a life-threatening condition that requires urgent surgery. 

The study reviewed 260 emergency cases where the dog’s insurance status was known.  

GDV is a useful condition to study because: 

  • It is severe and time-critical 
  • Surgery offers a strong chance of survival 
  • Delaying or declining treatment often leads to death 

This makes it easier to understand how non-medical factors, including cost, affect decision-making. 

What the study found 

The results highlight a clear difference in outcomes depending on whether a dog was insured. 

  • 90% of insured dogs went on to have surgery 
  • Around 63% of uninsured dogs received surgery  

Survival rates also differed: 

  • 80% of insured dogs survived to discharge 
  • 53% of uninsured dogs survived  

Further analysis found that uninsured dogs were significantly more likely to be euthanised before surgery, with the absence of insurance increasing the odds of euthanasia by more than seven times.  

Importantly, once surgery took place, outcomes were broadly similar. The difference wasn’t in the treatment itself; it was in whether treatment went ahead. 

Looking beyond the numbers 

Across multiple studies, a consistent pattern emerges. In many cases, deaths linked to conditions like GDV occur before treatment begins. 

In one analysis, a large proportion of non-survivors were euthanised prior to surgery rather than dying from the condition itself.  

This suggests that access to care is as much a financial question as a clinical one. 

Veterinary professionals are often placed in the middle of this, balancing what is medically possible with what is financially realistic for the owner. Surveys have shown that financial limitations can affect care decisions regularly in practice.  

Where pet insurance fits 

Pet insurance is one way some owners manage the financial side of unexpected care. 

In the GDV study, insurance was associated with a lower likelihood of pre-surgical euthanasia, indicating that reducing upfront costs can change the decisions owners are able to make.  

The research doesn’t suggest that insurance removes all difficult decisions. Some pets were still euthanised for reasons unrelated to cost, including severity of illness or welfare considerations.  

What it does show is that, in time-critical situations, financial support can increase the likelihood that treatment goes ahead. 

The broader financial reality 

More recent PetSure data* adds context to these findings. 

  • A pet of average health may incur over $30,000 in lifetime healthcare costs 
  • Around 1 in 10 pets exceed $100,000 in costs 
  • $3,000 is often the point where owners begin to consider euthanasia for financial reasons  

Emergency treatments can exceed this threshold quickly; ingestion of a foreign body or a broken bone can average over $5,000 each. This gap between expected and actual costs is where many difficult decisions arise. 

Planning ahead 

There is no single approach that suits every household. 

Some owners choose insurance. Others set aside savings or explore payment options through their veterinary clinic. In practice, many people use a combination of approaches. 

What matters is having some form of plan in place before an emergency happens. That way, the pressure of having to make an immediate decision with significant consequences is somewhat relieved. 

A considered view 

The idea of economic euthanasia is confronting, but it reflects a real part of pet ownership. 

What the research highlights is the importance of preparation. When financial barriers are reduced, more pets can receive treatment that could improve or save their lives. 

Understanding the options available, including pet insurance, is one way to approach that responsibility with a bit more confidence. 

FAQs 

What is economic euthanasia? 
It’s a situation where a pet is euthanised because the cost of treatment is unaffordable, even when treatment is available. 

Does pet insurance prevent euthanasia? 
Not entirely. Medical and welfare factors still play a role. However, research shows it can reduce euthanasia linked to financial constraints. 

Why was GDV used in the study? 
GDV is a severe but treatable emergency condition, making it useful for understanding how financial decisions affect outcomes. 

Is pet insurance the only option? 
No. Some owners rely on savings, payment plans or other financial arrangements. Either way, it’s important to have a plan in place before care is needed. 

When should I consider pet insurance? 
Many people look into it when their pet is young, before health issues arise that could be considered pre-existing conditions and affect cover. 

*According to PetSure 2024 claims data 

^Boller M, Nemanic TS, Anthonisz JD, Awad M, Selinger J, Boller EM, Stevenson MA, et al. The Effect of Pet Insurance on Presurgical Euthanasia of Dogs With Gastric Dilatation-Volvulus: A Novel Approach to Quantifying Economic Euthanasia in Veterinary Emergency Medicine. Sec. Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Medicine. Volume 7 – 2020 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.590615 

Looking for pet insurance? Compare brands and products here.