Gary Hill wrote:Rick, I never said train..I said handle,
Gary, I understand. So perhaps my question should have been, "if in the course of handling a horse, especially if you are doing something to alter its behavior if only for a brief time, the horse reacts and is injured or injures or damages someone else or something else, is your manner of handling going to be called into question and as a result, expose you to legal risk or defamation?
This, along with Bruce's list of things farrier's may, in the course of their workday, do, is the reason Care, Custody and Control Insurance exists. I note, for the record, that some of the things Bruce listed will probably result in a judgement against you or at a minimum, a knock on your reputation. I also note for the record that I am guilty of at least a few of the acts Bruce lists, much less so now than when I was younger and suffered from Testosterone Poisoning.
It is my considered opinion and experience that every time we interact with a horse one or more of the following occurs"
1. You train the horse
2. The horse trains you
3. You train each other.
I feel it is important to always bear that in mind as 'handling the horse' is always a form of one or more of those interactions and will have repercussions even if/when you are not negligent.
When someone retains my services as a farrier, I do my level best to stick to being a farrier in the strictest sense of the term. Bear in mind that the instant you put the halter on a horse or snap a lead on a horse or touch the horse to begin evaluating or working, that horse has come under your care, custody and control and you are legally responsible for everything that then ensues.
And, I think that any farrier who carries chemical restraint and/or the means to administer it, and then does administer it whether the farrier or client provides said chemical restraint and means of administration, is really foolish and had better have very, very deep pockets. Even insurance won't cover you if you are charged with and/or convicted of practicing veterinary medicine without a license.
Also, Bruce is correct regarding being sued for negligence. Its a tough charge to prove, but defending yourself against the charge can be a very expensive ordeal.
You can prick a hoof with a nail and be sued...so under the opinions of others are you just going to glue on shoe's from now on ?
Of course not. The plaintiff still has to prove negligence.
If you can always work on horses that are super to work on then you are either very lucky or have very few clients.
ALSO since animals are totally unpredictable, when this perfect animal you work on becomes upset or scared or urully for a number of possible reasons, according to what I have read, you all will just pack your tools and walk away...
Not necessarily. As with most everything equid related, It Depends.
And for the record, Bruce, I am not taking issue with either you or your methods. If that is the impression I gave, then I apologize. I think your methods are good and reasonable and if we, as farriers, routinely dealt with horsemen/women, my concerns would be much more mitigated. But the sad fact is that nowadays we deal with horse owners who on the best day of their lives wouldn't make a pimple on a horseman's butt. YMMV