Burnout Reframed: Why this isn’t a personal failure (#496)

Veterinary medicine has begun to talk about burnout openly.

That, at least, is progress.

We name compassion fatigue. We circulate wellness resources. We encourage resilience, balance, mindfulness, time off.

And yet, year after year, the problem worsens.

More veterinarians leave clinical practice. More technicians exit the field entirely. Morale erodes. Distrust deepens.

The profession feels strained in ways that no yoga class or wellness webinar seems able to repair.

Perhaps that is because burnout, as we are experiencing it now, is not primarily an individual problem.

Burnout is a structural problem.

When the Ground Shifts Beneath the Work

Most veterinarians enter the profession with a shared understanding of the implicit contract: work hard, practice good medicine, act ethically, and over time you will gain autonomy, respect, and a measure of control over your professional life.

For many years, that contract felt largely intact.

Today, it does not.

The work has not become less meaningful, but the context in which it is performed has changed profoundly.

Clinical judgment is increasingly filtered through productivity metrics.

Success is measured less by outcomes and relationships, and more by volume, speed, and revenue per appointment.

Decisions once made locally are now standardized, centralized, and justified by best practices that often originate far from the exam room.

None of this happens all at once. It happens incrementally. Quietly. A new benchmark here. A revised compensation model there. A shift in language from patients to units, from care to throughput.

At some point, many veterinarians notice something unsettling: effort no longer translates into agency.

They work harder, see more cases, stay later, care deeply, and yet feel increasingly powerless over how their days unfold, how medicine is practiced, or how success is defined.

That dissonance is exhausting.

The Illusion of Choice and Advancement

Associates are often told that opportunity is everywhere. Ownership pathways exist. Leadership roles are available. Advancement is possible for those who perform.

In reality, many of these paths are narrowing.

Practice acquisition prices have risen beyond the reach of most young veterinarians. Debt loads are heavier. Compensation structures reward caseload intensity rather than clinical judgment, mentorship, or community engagement.

Titles such as medical director or regional lead frequently come with responsibility but little real authority.

Even equity, when offered, may be structured in ways that provide financial upside without meaningful influence.

The ladder is visible, but the rungs are farther apart, and some have quietly disappeared.

When veterinarians begin to sense this, burnout often follows. Not because they are weak, but because they are perceptive.

The Middle Squeeze

Somewhere between the exam room and the boardroom sit those tasked with enforcing decisions they did not design: practice managers, medical directors, regional leaders.

Many entered these roles hoping to protect clinical standards, support teams, and serve as advocates.

Instead, they often find themselves translating corporate directives downward while absorbing frustration upward.

They are told to align teams with metrics they privately question. To explain compensation models they did not create. To maintain morale while having limited power to change the conditions eroding it.

Survival becomes the goal.

Rationalization becomes necessary.

This is just how things are now.

It could be worse.

At least we’re stable.

This is not moral failure. It is what adaptation looks like inside constrained systems.

Independent Practice Under Pressure

Independent veterinarians feel the strain differently, but no less intensely:

• They face rising supply costs, aggressive labor competition, and marketing ecosystems dominated by national brands.

• They negotiate with vendors from a position of reduced leverage.

• They operate under pricing and expectation norms increasingly set by much larger entities.

• They are told to innovate while lacking the scale that makes innovation financially survivable.

• They are urged to compete while playing by rules they did not help write.

Many describe the environment as hostile, not because they resist change, but because change now seems structurally tilted against them.

Burnout Is a Rational Response

Burnout, in this context, is not a failure of grit or gratitude. It is the predictable human response to sustained loss of control, voice, and reciprocity.

When people realize that no amount of effort will meaningfully change their position within the system, disengagement follows.

Sometimes quietly. Sometimes dramatically. Sometimes through leaving the profession altogether.

Labeling this as a personal resilience problem misses the point and risks compounding the harm by placing responsibility on individuals rather than on the structures shaping their experience.

Naming the Real Problem

Veterinary medicine is not broken because veterinarians care too much, expect too much, or lack coping skills.

It is strained because:

• Economic advantage increasingly confers decision-making power, and that power is concentrated away from the clinicians who live with its consequences.

• The rules governing work, compensation, and advancement are often set by those insulated from their downstream effects.

Until the profession is willing to examine who defines success, who controls governance, and whose voices carry weight, burnout will remain stubbornly resistant to individual-level solutions.

Wellness matters. Support matters. But they are insufficient on their own.

Burnout is not telling us that veterinarians are failing.

It is telling us that the system is asking too much while giving too little back.

And that is not a personal failure.

#bunyipsbooksbeyond