Vetnuus | May 2026 17 Article Further, there is no published study examining veterinarians’ experiences during depopulation events in Canada. Recognizing this gap, we used qualitative methods to i) explore the mental health impacts of depopulation on veterinarians and ii) identify ways to build their resilience to these stressful events. MATERIALS AND METHODS We conducted a qualitative study using descriptive phenomenology, which is an inductive approach to explore and describe an individual’s experience of a phenomenon without imposing preconceptions or interpretations (19). This method is often used when there is limited knowledge about a topic (19). Unlike interpretative phenomenology, which aims to understand the meaning of experiences within participants’ sociocultural contexts (20), this method aims to generate knowledge and provide an authentic portrayal of the phenomenon (20). Our sample included 11 participants (9 veterinarians and 2 industry experts) from Alberta. To be included, all veterinarians needed to have experience with at least 1 depopulation event. Five of the veterinarians had worked for or were currently working for CFIA. The industry experts were representatives from species-specific commodity groups and were part of an emergency response team involved in the coordination and support of depopulation events. Participants had been employed for 24.09 y (SD = 15.90), ranging from 4 to 44 y. They ranged in age from 36 to 67 y (M = 53.64, SD = 12.64) and had experience with cattle, swine, poultry, elk and deer, and/or sheep and goats. This research was approved by the University of Alberta’s (Edmonton, Alberta) ethics review board (Pro00126250). We recruited participants through notices posted to our study website and social media channels (e.g., Facebook, newsletters) between April 2023 and April 2024. Those interested contacted the principal investigator (PI) to schedule an interview. Participants completed an individual, semi-structured interview with the PI, either virtually or by telephone, lasting 40 to 90 min. Participants were asked 4 background questions (e.g., age, gender, job description, and animals they worked with) and 5 open-ended questions about their depopulation experience: i) Can you describe a depopulation event you were involved in? ii) In what ways, if any, did the experience impact you? iii) How did you cope during and after the experience? iv) Was there anything helpful that prepared you for the experience? v) Since being involved in depopulation, how has the experience changed your job satisfaction? Participants received a $50 gift card for an online retailer. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Before analysis, all identifying information was removed from the transcripts. Participant names were replaced with pseudonyms. Next, transcripts were independently analyzed by the 3 authors. Our analysis was guided by Colaizzi’s 7-step process (21): i) review the transcripts to become familiar with them, ii) identify significant statements and phrases relevant to the topic, iii) describe the meaning of the statements and phrases, iv) merge statements to create themes and sub-themes, v) provide a full description of the topic, vi) identify the core framework that characterizes the topic, and vii) validate findings with subject-matter experts. Although we acknowledge that new meanings can always emerge from data, our decision about when to stop coding and move to the subsequent steps in the analytic process was based on our interpretative judgments (22). Specifically, we ceased coding when no new ideas were being identified and we stopped analysis when the generated themes were relevant and coherent in addressing our research question (22). Three industry experts (1 veterinarian and 2 industry experts) reviewed our findings and provided feedback that our results reflected their experiences. As descriptive phenomenology requires researchers to generate knowledge without preconceptions and biases, we used bracketing (23). Bracketing involves acknowledging and setting aside one’s preconceptions to allow the topic to be understood more authentically from the participants’ viewpoints. For this study, 2 of the researchers (JD, DH) had limited knowledge of depopulation and veterinary practice, whereas the PI (RP) had been researching the topic for several years. All researchers discussed their personal and professional connections to the topic. All data were double-coded by the 3 authors, and we met regularly to review the goals of the study, compare interpretations, discuss differences, and reach a consensus. RESULTS Our analysis revealed 3 major themes and 6 sub-themes. Each theme is described below using verbatim quotes. Ongoing work-mental health tensions Initially, we identified 3 distinct work-related themes and 3 mental health strains. Upon deeper analysis, we observed how these themes were interrelated, reflecting a broader concept. Specifically, depopulation disrupted work roles and goals, imposing strains that spilled over into participants’ personal lives, affecting their well-being. Each sub-theme is described below. Professional bond versus emotional labor. Years of working closely with a farmer client had fostered a deeply trusting professional bond, whereby the veterinarian became a farmer’s “go-to source” for education and an important figure in their life. One veterinarian explained, “We’re part of the family. I’ve been invited to family dinners, weddings, and even funerals… It’s not like other professions, and that’s what I tell my students. We treat people, too”(Vicky, veterinarian). During depopulation events, the support they provided to their farmer clients intensified. Even if these veterinarians were not directly involved in the depopulation order, many felt they were “brought along for the journey.” For example, a veterinarian was often the first person their farmer client contacted when they suspected their animals were sick and was the one to deliver test results. Although many described wanting to support farmers and felt it was their duty, they acknowledged how this additional work made them feel emotionally extended and pulled away from whatever they were doing. As 1 industry expert explained, “These phone calls are happening any time of the day… You put yourself out there to support them, and you kind of live in this with them. And you’re in trauma when you leave the call because you’re going through this with them, you’re feeling their pain and it’s hard. It’s hard to go back to whatever you’re doing after that.” (— Ryan, industry expert) Most expressed genuine empathy for farmers going through depopulation. One veterinarian shared, “I was just at a conference with somebody who’s going through [avian influenza], and nobody sat next to him” (Chris, veterinarian). These veterinarians often called their farmer clients daily to check on how they were coping. Even veterinarians directing depopulation orders who did not know the farmers also provided this type of emotional labor. One participant explained, “If it was a really big case that took months to clear, you could be working very closely with a farmer, without having known them before, in an incredibly stressful personal situation… You’d be caught up dealing with them daily through probably the worst emotional crisis they’ve ever had in their life. So that was very intense… I was also the person who was one-onone supporting them through all of this.” (— Janet, veterinarian) Disease control versus moral distress. Participants described struggling to balance the satisfaction that came from controlling the spread of a disease and keeping people healthy with the moral distress of euthanizing animals. >>>18
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTc5MDU=