'You're not a good vet if things go wrong': The dark side of veterinary identities.

Challenging professional norms around failure may reduce harmful self-blame and support veterinary wellbeing.

This qualitative study investigates how veterinarians construct 'feared identities'—negative self-perceptions arising from difficult cases and perceived clinical mistakes—within a UK-based multisite small animal veterinary organisation. Using semi-structured interviews with 39 participants across 51 sessions, the researcher employed thematic discursive analysis to explore identity processes. The study reveals that veterinarians draw on broader social discourses to engage in negative self-assessment, often framing themselves as flawed or failing professionals when adverse outcomes occur. While most participants used defensive identity work strategies—such as externalising blame or attributing errors to external factors—to restore more positive professional self-concepts, a subset engaged in persistent, unrelenting self-blame that maintained feared identities over time. This dichotomy between desired and feared occupational identities has significant implications for veterinary wellbeing, professional development, and organisational culture. The research highlights how entrenched professional norms and organisational expectations can exacerbate self-denigration rather than facilitate learning and recovery. The authors argue that critically examining these norms could foster healthier work environments where veterinarians are better supported to process difficult experiences constructively. Limitations include the single-organisation case study design, restricting generalisability. The findings contribute meaningfully to understanding veterinary mental health and professional identity, with relevance to ongoing concerns about burnout and wellbeing in the profession.

This summary was distilled by AI and may occasionally misinterpret data. Confirm critical details with the primary literature before clinical application.