Nikki

I only have one set of neighbors close to my house, and we've gotten along well since we bought the house a year and a half ago but the problem is that they have a large number of basically feral cats that they consider to be theirs yet they refuse to get them fixed.

I don't have the slightest problem with cats, in fact I have two of my own, but this wild cat population is becoming a problem.

My neighbors feed them so their numbers continue to grow but that is the extent to which they care for them. None of them have been vaccinated or fixed, in fact they've never been to a vet at all.

Last winter one of their cats abandoned a litter of kittens in my shed and since I am not heartless I had to take them in and care for them. Kitten milk, flea and worm treatment, vaccines and spaying and neutering of five cats is not cheap and I was lucky to find them all good homes later on.

Now I just found two separate nest of kittens on our property but it looks as though their moms are taking care of them, but this just isn't working.

I have found a shelter that will fix feral cats on a pay-what-you-can basis and then let you take them back home, and I have offered to take the cats in and get them all fixed but my neighbor told me that she just loves kittens and won't "interfere with nature"?!!

I just don't know what to do! How can I convince her to let me get these cats fixed? I've already offered her a solution that wouldn't cost her any trouble or money and I don't know what else to do!

In every other aspect this lady seems perfectly normal but her attitude towards these cats just seems insane and cruel to me.

Has anyone been in a similar situation and if so, how did you handle it? Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

I have had a Bartholin abscess before which eventually needed to be surgically drained under full anesthesia and packed with gauze. Now, the thing is, two days before I was finally admitted to the hospital and scheduled for surgery, I had visited the ER because of serious pain. At that time there were apparently not any noticeable signs yet, so even though the doctor did perform a pelvic exam I was sent home with antibiotics (don't know why, since the doctor didn't see that there was anything wrong at all).

Less than 48 hours later (while on antibiotics) the pain had gotten so severe that I actually fainted when I tried to walk up some stairs, so I got a ride to the ER when I came to. By then the infection in the gland was clearly visible to the doctors and I was admitted and had surgery. However, I feel that I spent two days in severe pain unnecessarily and I wished I had gotten treated more effectively the first time around. By the time I was being prepped for surgery the abscess had actually started leaking profusely (and disgustingly) but I still needed the surgical draining.

Now, four years later, I am having exactly the same pain, in the same place - I don't think I could describe to anyone who hasn't experienced it - but no swelling or redness so far. The first incident happened in Europe and I am now in the US so if I go to the ER the records won't be easy to access.

My question is, will the doctors be able to help me now, before the swelling sets in? It seems idiotic to just suffer and wait for the problem to become worse, but the last thing I want to do is put myself through the discomfort of a trip (and a wait) to the ER just to be sent home again. I am as certain as is humanly possible that this is the same thing.

Thank you in advance for any advice.