Seven graduands from The University of Nottingham's School of Veterinary Medicine and Science have become the first from the new school to become members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons.
Nottingham is the first new veterinary school in the UK for over 50 years, and the process to recognise its degree for the purposes of RCVS membership is currently in its final stages. Following a visitation and audit process, RCVS Council unanimously recommended the degree's approval to the Privy Council, where the final decision lies.
Generally, veterinary graduates become RCVS members - which they need to be in order to practise in the UK - at a ceremony on the day of their graduation. However, sometimes they wish to start work before graduation and can therefore apply to register as graduands, as in this case.
Although formal Privy Council approval of the Nottingham degree is still awaited, RCVS external examiners have overseen the School's final exams during the last year of the course to ensure that they meet the required standards.
The Nottingham graduation ceremony will take place on 22 July, when a further 77 students will graduate, and those wishing to practise in the UK will become members of the College.
The RCVS 2010 Survey of the Veterinary and Veterinary Nursing Professions indicated that, on average, new graduates took one month to find work on graduating, with 63% going straight into clinical practice.
At the outset of the hearing, which was to consider evidence for a number of charges relating to the treatment of three colts at his former practice in 2015, Mr Denny made an application to the Committee that the hearing should be adjourned contingent on a form of undertakings being accepted. These undertakings were that his name be removed from the Register with immediate effect and that he never apply to be restored to the Register under any category.
The application was granted by the Committee, taking into account a number of factors. These include the fact that Mr Denny had now retired and closed his practice, his long and hitherto unblemished veterinary career and the fact that it would not be proportionate, or in the public interest, for there to be a lengthy hearing on the matter.
The Committee noted that there were several precedents for concluding cases in such a manner. The Committee also noted that the application was supported by both the College and the complainant.
Mr Denny was removed from the Register as of Monday 24 April 2017.
For the research, Which? conducted an online poll of 1,009 pet owners who had had an issue with their vet in the past two years.
It also conducted qualitative interviews with 14 owners who had complained.
The most common reasons for complaint were:
Of the 1009 pet owners who had experienced some kind of problem with their vet, 57% did NOT make a complaint, 33% because they did not want to fall out with their vet.
Pet owners who wish to complain about veterinary services have three options: to complain directly to their practice, to use the voluntary Vet Client Mediation Service (VCMS), or to raise a 'concern' with the RCVS.
The Which? report found that of those who did complain to their practice, 35% were not happy with the outcome and 31% with the way it was handled.
Which? found that although the VCMS reported a high resolution rate of 84% in 2022-23, its interviewees had found it a bit hit or miss.
Finally, Which? found the process of complaining to the regulator flawed by the fact that the threshold for the College to progress a 'concern' is set so high, because College has no jurisdiction at a practice level, and because it has no sanctions to use in enforcing consumer law.
The report recommends that:
Full report: https://www.which.co.uk/policy-and-insight/article/complaints-and-redress-in-veterinary-services-a5z611X9tZzf
CommentI loved the regal response from the RCVS to The Guardian about the case studies in the Which? report: “the facts presented in the case studies do not completely align with those reported to us”.
That aside, surely the big issue here is not so much that consumers have little way to complain effectively.
That is important, of course, but isn't it more important to consider what they are complaining about, which in the main is MONEY.
Driven by the advances in veterinary medicine, the innate desire of vets to provide the best possible care, anthropomorphising pet owners saying they want 'the best' for their fur baby (without necessarily having the wherewithal), corporatisation and society's changing expectations about working conditions, prices have been going up at a rate far outstripping inflation.
Increasing prices have of course been accompanied by an increase the standards of care and the range of clinical equipment.
But the question everyone must ask is at what point the cost of veterinary care for a dog outstrips the benefits of owning one?
These complaints are the canary in the coalmine.
Linda gave her address at the Royal Institute of British Architects, venue for the RCVS Annual General Meeting last Friday.
Linda, an equine vet and director of the Wiltshire-based George Veterinary Group, said: “A Royal College and a regulator – it’s a challenge but this combined role is also an opportunity for us.
“In the time I’ve served the RCVS, I’ve definitely learnt some of what it takes to fulfil these roles under the remit of both the Veterinary Surgeons Act and our Royal Charter; to think not just from personal perspective and experience, and also to try to look beyond the needs of the profession today and consider what tomorrow might bring.
“Vets are not just one thing.
"The roles we fill in our working lives are many and varied, and I would argue that the MRCVS is the best placed arbiter of animal health and welfare.
"As such, keeping the MRCVS at the heart of decision-making around how veterinary care and services are provided is essential both to safeguard animal health and welfare and also to retain public trust in our work.
“Cultivating trust is a big part of what many of us do, day in and day out – trust in us from within our teams, from our clients and perhaps even from our patients.
“The RCVS with its two hats does a tough job for both the professions and the public.
"In many cases, the interests of the professions and the public align and there is no conflict.
"Of course, as a regulator where the interests don’t align, the RCVS regulates in the wider public interest and this, too, is a positive for us as a profession.
“Working in a regulated environment is a strength for us.
"The landscape in which we work has changed and the regulatory environment needs to change too. Now we are the other side of the general election, work can continue on legislative reform seeking parliamentary time for a new Veterinary Surgeons Act.”
As the 13th female President of the RCVS, Linda will lead an Officer Team comprising the now Senior Vice-President Dr Sue Paterson FRCVS, Junior Vice-President Professor Tim Parkin FRCVS and Treasurer Dr Tshidi Gardiner MRCVS as well as VN Council Chair Belinda Andrews-Jones RVN, who attends Officer Team meetings as an observer.
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed an application to be restored to the Register of Veterinary Surgeons from former Wirral-based vet Ian Beveridge.
In May 2013 the Committee had asked the Registrar to remove Mr Beveridge from the Register following a four-day hearing in which he was found guilty of serious professional misconduct after finding that he had treated clients badly, kept inadequate clinical records, was dishonest in his dealings with the RCVS and that animals in his care were placed at risk.
In June 2013 Mr Beveridge, who was not present or represented at the original hearing, then appealed the decision. The appeal was withdrawn in May 2014 which was when Mr Beveridge was formally removed from the Register.
Then, in April 2015, Mr Beveridge applied to be restored to the Register. The Disciplinary Committee met to consider his application in June 2015, however, this hearing was adjourned after new evidence was served to the Committee concerning allegations that Mr Beveridge had ordered prescription-only veterinary medicines when he was not authorised to do so. He was subsequently interviewed by police who took no further action.
In deciding whether Mr Beveridge was fit to be restored to the Register, the Committee heard evidence in regards to the circumstances in which the prescription-only drugs were ordered using his account and delivered to his former practice address which had been taken over by Medivet after he sold the premises to the company.
During the course of the hearing, Mr Beveridge admitted that his account had been used to buy the drugs, but that a part-time member of his staff, who was neither a veterinary surgeon nor a veterinary nurse, had done so without his prior knowledge or approval.
In relation to this evidence Ian Green, chairing and speaking on behalf of the Committee, said: "The Committee takes the view that the unauthorised use of a veterinary surgeon’s drugs account for which he carries the ultimate responsibility is a very serious matter and, of itself, demonstrates that the applicant has at best a cavalier attitude to his work which of itself means that he remains unfit to be on the Register.
"This attitude is further demonstrated by the fact that, even after the first orders were placed in late April and early May 2014, the applicant did not seek clarification from the College of his status following the withdrawal of his appeal against the original Committee’s findings."
In addition to this, the Committee also considered the seriousness of his original failings, the fact that Mr Beveridge’s acceptance of these failings was ‘qualified’, that he had been off the Register for 20 months and the fact that his efforts in terms of continuing professional development had been inadequate and not focused on those areas in need of improvement, among other factors. In mitigation it did consider that Mr Beveridge had demonstrated genuine remorse about previous actions and noted a petition and a large number of letters in support of him from former clients of his practice.
However, the Committee felt that this did not detract from the seriousness of the original failings and, in conjunction with the subsequent unauthorised ordering of veterinary drugs, that the application for restoration must be dismissed.
The follow up service ‘can be provided personally by the veterinary surgeon or practice, or by written agreement with a veterinary services provider which is local to the client (as with the current situation for [out-of-hours] care provision)’.
The new rule comes into force on the 1st November, to allow practices to make any necessary arrangements.
The RCVS Council also decided that the temporary derogation from the usual requirement to conduct a physical examination before an animal is regarded as ‘under care’ be reviewed as a standing item at each subsequent Standards Committee meeting, until the normal guidance provisions are fully restored.
The symposium, which will be held on Tuesday 24 September 2019, at Church House in London, will bring together researchers interested in all aspects of veterinary professionals’ wellbeing and mental health. It will feature plenary speakers from mental health research, including:
Professor Neil Greenberg: Sustaining resilience at work – what does the evidence tell us works?, Professor of Defence Mental Health, Consultant Academic Psychiatrist at King’s College London, Chair of the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ (RCP) Special Interest Group in Occupational Psychiatry.
Professor Alexandra Pitman: The impact of veterinarian suicide on colleagues, Associate Professor in Psychiatry in the UCL Division of Psychiatry and an Honorary Consultant Psychiatrist at Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust.
Professor Stuart Reid: The Mind Matters Initiative – what we’ve achieved so far, Principal, Royal Veterinary College, Chair of the Mind Matters Initiative.
Presentations should be in the format of a 15-minute oral presentation or an A1 poster.
Those wishing to apply should submit an abstract clearly marked ‘poster’ or ‘oral presentation’. The title should be 15 words or fewer. The abstract should include author(s) first name(s), followed by surname(s), institution of affiliation and country. The body of the text should be no longer than 250 words and include: background; clear and explicit aims and objectives, hypotheses or research questions; methods; results; discussion; and conclusion.
All abstracts should be submitted as Word documents to Rosie Allister on rosie.allister@gmail.com no later than 23:59 (GMT) on Friday 19 April 2019.
Applicants will be notified if they have been successful within 14 days of this date. Speakers whose applications are successful will receive complimentary registration for the symposium, not including travel and accommodations costs.
A small number of travel bursaries are available for students, people with lived experience of mental health problems, and people who are unwaged, who would not otherwise be able to attend. For further details, please contact Lisa Quigley, Mind Matters Initiative Manager, on l.quigley@rcvs.org.uk.
The full eligibility criteria, including FAQs and guidance notes, for veterinary surgeons who wish to stand for RCVS Council can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/rcvscouncil21. The deadline for nominations is 5pm on Sunday 31 January 2021.
Due to the ongoing postal problems caused by the coronavirus pandemic, RCVS Council has approved a temporary change to the RCVS Election Scheme this year to allow nominations to be submitted electronically, rather than in hard copy. This temporary change is currently before the Privy Council for final approval.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer for the elections, said: "For prospective RCVS and VN Councils election candidates this will mean that, rather than having to send us hard copies of your nomination documents in the post, these can simply be emailed to the College along with the relevant digital photographs and electronic signatures."
The College has also updated its information and guidance for prospective candidates, including an informal ‘job description’, to help them better understand what it means to be members of RCVS Council, their responsibilities, commitments and how they help the College meet its strategic goals, as well as the principles and rules governing their conduct.
Prospective candidates for RCVS Council can also contact RCVS President Dr Mandisa Greene for an informal conversation on what it means to be a Council member on president@rcvs.org.uk.
Mandisa said: “As I have often said publicly, when I decided to stand for RCVS Council it was out of a mixture of fear and curiosity, the RCVS seemed liked some distant organisation that was often talked about, but not entirely understood, and that made me want to find out more. It is fair to say that, since joining RCVS Council, I have learned and experienced a great deal, have got to know people in our profession that I would otherwise never have had the opportunity to meet, and have been at the forefront of key discussions about how our profession is regulated and its future.
"Throughout my time on Council I have also been a working mother of two young children and so, for those who are concerned about how being a Council member can fit around personal and professional life, I can assure you that there is flexibility that allows you to carry out your Council work around other commitments.
"I do hope that, if you are interested in the future of our professions and having a say in our professional and educational standards and how we are governed, then please take the time to consider becoming a member of RCVS Council and don’t hesitate to get in touch with me if you want to know anything more."
There is one more Council meeting before the nomination period ends. It will take place online on Thursday 21st January 2021 and prospective candidates who would like to get a feel for it are welcome to attend as observers: contact Dawn Wiggins, RCVS Council Secretary, on d.wiggins@rcvs.org.uk.
The Committee's decision to recommend the addition of vets to the list is seen as a major win for the RCVS and the BVA which together submitted evidence as part of the review, which began in autumn last year.
Professions on the list are prioritised for visas required to live and work in the UK. Employers wishing to hire professionals on the list are not required to complete the Resident Labour Market Test, meaning they don't have to advertise vacancies locally before offering the role to an employee from overseas.
The RCVS/BVA submission focused on the need for the UK immigration system to recognise that the veterinary workforce is already under capacity and that this problem is likely to be exacerbated after Brexit. This is due to the potential for increased demand for veterinary surgeons in areas such as export certification, and also the likelihood that fewer veterinary surgeons from the European Union will be joining the Register. It also reiterated the importance of veterinary surgeons in areas such as public health, food safety, disease surveillance and control, as well as education, research, clinical practice and animal welfare.
RCVS President Amanda Boag said: "We are very pleased to see that our submission, made with our colleagues at the BVA, has been welcomed by the Committee and that this recommendation will now be going to the key decision-makers at the Home Office for consideration. While we are still unaware of how the process of the UK leaving the EU will pan out, this is a very important step in ensuring the future security of the profession and mitigating against worsening workforce shortages.
"We would reiterate to the Government that the UK is currently reliant on overseas registrants to meet the demand for veterinary surgeons, with veterinary surgeons from the rest of the EU making up around 50% of new registrants each year. By adding veterinary surgeons to the Shortage Occupation List, and therefore reducing the immigration requirements needed to live and work in the UK, the Government will be helping ensure vital veterinary work continues to be done particularly in areas such as food safety and public health."
Simon Doherty, BVA President, said: "MAC’s recommendation is a huge win for animal welfare and a resounding vote of confidence in the veterinary community and the multiple benefits it realises across the UK. We are absolutely delighted that the committee has heeded our calls and recognised the need to reinstate vets on the list to keep workforce supply and resilience high in the unpredictable times ahead."
Mr Seymour-Hamilton was originally removed from the Register in June 1994 for failing to maintain his practice’s equipment and facilities in working order such that it evidenced a total disregard of basic hygiene and care for animals, thereby bringing the profession into disrepute.
The restoration hearing on Monday 15 May was Mr Seymour-Hamilton’s fifth application for restoration, with previous applications being submitted but refused in July 1995, June 2010, January 2015 and March 2016. However, as the Committee made its decision on the merits of the case before it, those previous applications were not considered as relevant to its decision.
Mr Seymour-Hamilton told the Committee that he currently works as a herbalist and naturopath for humans and wished to be restored to the Register so he could include animals in his research, citing his treatment of one of his dogs as evidence.
The Committee rejected his application on a number of grounds, including the impact on animal welfare should Mr Seymour-Hamilton be restored to the Register; the length of time he had been off the Register and the fact that he was therefore not up-to-date with contemporary veterinary practice and professional conduct; that his efforts to keep up-to-date in terms of knowledge, skills and developments in practice were insufficient; and his lack of evidence of public support for him or his work.
Ian Green, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee has very great concerns about the future of the welfare of animals in the event of the applicant being permitted to have his name restored to the Register. He has made it clear that whilst he has no intention to return to routine veterinary general practice, he would intend to treat animals and to continue his research using animals. The Committee observes that were he to be restored to the Register, there would be no power to prevent the applicant practising as a veterinary surgeon in any way he may choose."
He added: "The applicant has now been off the Register for nearly 23 years. It will be apparent to anyone that the veterinary profession today is in many respects different from what it was 23 years ago, (eg: in terms of medical understanding and its own regulation). The Committee is far from persuaded that the passage of 23 years has not had a negative impact on the applicant’s ability to practise safely and competently as a veterinary surgeon at this present time."
The original survey was sent last year to more than 5,000 UK-registered veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses who gained their qualification from a non-UK EU institution, with a response rate of around 55%.
This year the Institute for Employment Studies (IES), on behalf of the RCVS, contacted over 6,000 veterinary surgeons and almost 50 veterinary nurses – including those previously surveyed as well as EU registrants who have joined since the last survey – who trained in non-UK EU countries to seek their views on the implications of Brexit for European veterinary professionals.
Chris Tufnell, RCVS Senior Vice-President and Chair of the College’s Brexit Taskforce, said: "The aim of this survey is to gain a greater understanding of the views and expectations of our EU colleagues now that certain elements of the UK’s withdrawal process from the European Union, as well as the timing, have become clearer. The survey will also be looking for the views of colleagues on how the College has addressed the challenges of Brexit so far.
"It is particularly important that those who responded to last year’s survey do so this year because the aim is to get a sense of how their views and plans are shifting as the Brexit process moves forward."
As with last year’s survey, the views collated through the consultation will help the College understand the immediate and longer-term impact of the UK’s exit from the EU, gather evidence that could be used to make a case for special treatment of veterinary professionals with regard to future immigration policies and allow the College to provide informed advice to European veterinary professionals as they make decisions about their future careers.
Dr Tufnell added: "I would strongly encourage EU veterinary professionals to respond to this survey, even if they didn’t do so last year, as their views really do matter to us and really do have an impact on our Brexit policies and the views we put forward to the government in these critical times."
The deadline for sending responses to the IES is Wednesday 18 July 2018 and all data will be managed and analysed by IES, an independent not-for-profit research institute, on a confidential basis with no individual responses being seen by the RCVS.
The College says it intends to conduct a third survey when the terms of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, and the impact of this on non-UK EU nationals, are better defined.
The nomination period runs until 5pm on Tuesday 31 January 2018. In order to stand, candidates will need to submit a nomination form along with contact details, a short biography and a statement, and supply a high-resolution digital photograph.
Each candidate also needs two nominators, who should be veterinary surgeons who are on the College’s Register but are not current RCVS Council members.
Professor Stephen May, RCVS President, said: "I myself have been an elected Council member since 2012, and it has given me tremendous opportunity to get involved with a whole range of subjects, including my particular interests, undergraduate education and lifelong learning. It’s incredibly rewarding to see how the decisions you make during your time on Council can really benefit the profession, and I would encourage anyone who shares an interest in the future of our profession, whether that be about graduate outcomes, practice standards, the wider veterinary team or the effects of Brexit, for example, to stand for election."
Although the RCVS is planning the elections as usual, it is concurrently preparing for a change to its governance arrangements, including a reduction in the size of the Council, as agreed in March 2016.
Commenting on the Legislative Reform Order (LRO) that will be required to amend the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966, RCVS Registrar Eleanor Ferguson said: "This is a complex matter and, unfortunately, due to unavoidable delays associated with the 2017 General Election and the impact of preparing for the UK’s departure from the European Union, the LRO has not yet completed the legislative process.
"This means that whilst we will be running the elections on the basis that there will be six elected places available, as per the old size and structure, it should be expected that under the new size and structure, only three places will ultimately be available."
Meanwhile, due to comparable changes to the governance of the Veterinary Nurses Council, including a reduction in its number, there will be no 2018 VN Council elections as the outgoing members will not need to be replaced.
The RCVS Council election period will start around mid-March and voting will close at 5pm on Friday 27 April 2018.
Nomination forms, guidance notes and frequently asked questions are available for prospective RCVS Council candidates at www.rcvs.org.uk/rcvscouncil18.
Voting for this year’s election will take place from 15th March until 5pm on Friday 23 April 2021 and the 14 candidates are:
This year, four candidates will be elected to serve a four-year term.
For the first time, the RCVS Council election will be carried out completely online.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer for the election, said: “Due to the coronavirus pandemic and the issues that it has caused regarding disruption to the postal service, the RCVS has gained permission from the Privy Council to temporarily amend our Election Scheme, a document that governs how we run our elections, to allow voting to take place entirely online this year. This means that physical ballot papers will not be distributed to veterinary surgeons eligible to vote this year.
“The small number of veterinary surgeons for whom we do not hold an email address will receive a letter with instructions on how to vote online, in addition to their security code to allow them access to their unique voting website. If they need further help there will also be the opportunity for them to call Civica Election Services, which runs the election on our behalf, who will assist them with casting their vote.”
Ahead of the start of the election, the RCVS is also inviting members of the profession to submit one question each for the candidates. The candidates will then be asked to record a short video of themselves answering two of the questions of their choice which will be published when the election starts.
Questions can be submitted by emailing vetvote21@rcvs.org.uk or via the RCVS Twitter account (@theRCVS) using the hashtag #vetvote21.
The full candidate biographies and manifestoes have already been published on the RCVS website and are available to view at: www.rcvs.org.uk/vetvote21
Members of the profession have until Wednesday 24 February 2021 to submit their question.
The recommendations were proposed by the Legislation Working Party (LWP), which was set up in 2017 to consider the principles governing any new legislation affecting veterinary regulation and come up with recommendations for what innovations could and should be included in any future replacement for the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966.
The LWP comprises members of RCVS Council, RCVS staff and representatives from the BVA and the BVNA.
The approved recommendations were grouped into five key headings: embracing the vet-led team; enhancing the veterinary nurse role; assuring practice standards; introducing a modern ‘fitness to practise’ regime; and, modernising RCVS registration processes.
The recommendations include:
Professor Stephen May, RCVS Council member and Chair of the LWP since its inception in 2017, said: “The scale of the changes that are recommended in this report are very significant indeed and, if implemented via new primary legislation, would really change the face of veterinary regulation, bringing it up to date with that of other healthcare professions, and ironing out many of the oddities and closing many of the gaps in our current regulatory regime.
"Changes to the legislative framework for veterinary regulation have been mooted for some time. While the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 has served the profession well for over 50 years, and we have been able to make some changes to it – for example, reducing the size of Council, the separation of the Disciplinary Committee from Council and introducing the concept of delegation to veterinary nurses via Schedule 3 of the Act. However, there are limits to how much we can continue to tinker around the edges, and it has become increasingly clear that new legislation is needed if we are to make progress.
"I have been very grateful to my colleagues on the Legislation Working Party for their hard-work over the past three years. There has been a lot of robust debate on how we can move veterinary regulation forward, but ultimately we have a consensus that there are significant deficiencies, imperfections and blind-spots in the current regime and, in order to ensure that the professions are able to best fulfil their mandate to protect animal health and welfare, and that the RCVS is able to meet its mission to set, uphold and advance veterinary standards, significant changes are needed.
"I am delighted that members of RCVS Council have agreed to put our recommendations to a full consultation and I look forward to seeing how this report and its, sometimes quite radical, recommendations will spark important debate of these big ideas.”
A full public consultation process on the recommendations is expected to take place later this year. After this has taken place, and depending on its outcome, and Council’s final decision on how to proceed, a full set of proposals on legislative reform will be put to the Department for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs in the hope of seeking support for new legislation.
While RCVS Council approved, in principle, the report as a whole, there was a separate debate on some of the report’s recommendations concerning reform to the RCVS disciplinary regime which do not require changes to primary legislation, but could be made through powers granted to the College via its 2015 Royal Charter. Further details on this will be announced separately.
The full Report of the LWP is available to view in the papers for the June 2020 meeting of RCVS Council at: www.rcvs.org.uk/document-library/rcvs-legislation-working-party-report-to-council-2020
The RCVS has also published a blog from Professor Stephen May explaining, in more detail, the workings of the LWP and the rationale behind its recommendations. This is available to view at: www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/blog/a-step-change-in-veterinary-regulation
Professor May’s presentation from the Council meeting is also available to view on the RCVS YouTube channel at www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos
The Disciplinary Committee of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons has dismissed a case against a veterinary surgeon from Kent having found him not guilty of serious professional misconduct.
Mr Francois-Guillame Saulnier-Troff - formerly an employee of North Kent Referrals in Blue Bell Hill near Aylesford - was charged with concealing from his clients that a fragment of metal had been left in their dog's body following surgery, and omitting any reference to that in the clinical records or notes.
At the hearing, the Committee heard that, during spinal surgery on Pippin, a Jack Russell terrier belonging to Mr and Mrs Bowers, a small metal fragment broke off a palpator and became lodged in the bony material. Mr Saulnier-Troff was unable to retrieve it.
However, Mr Saulnier-Troff did not inform Pippin's owners of this occurrence, either during the telephone conversation on the 15th of January immediately following the operation, or when he met with them for Pippin's post-operative check on the 2nd of February. He said that he had intended to discuss the fact with the owners when the dog was discharged and had requested that he be contacted when the owners came into the surgery. He had not been contacted, though, and on attending the practice two days later, found that Pippin had already been returned to his owners.
It was accepted by the Committee that Mr Saulnier-Troff had not considered the fragment of clinical significance, and that telling Mr and Mrs Bowers about it was not at the front of his mind at their subsequent meeting.
The Committee heard there was no reference to the fragment included in the clinical notes, discharge summary or referral report, but accepted that the discharge summary had not been prepared by Mr Saulnier-Troff and that the referral report had been drawn up and sent out without Mr Saulnier-Troff's approval or personal signature.
In their findings, the Committee made no criticism of Mr Saulnier-Troff for the breakage or non-retrieval of the fragment, concluding that he came across as a skilled and conscientious veterinary surgeon and that he was fundamentally honest. The Committee also described as "honest and straightforwards throughout," the accounts given by Mr and Mrs Bowers of their recollections of events. The Committee noted that Mr Saulnier-Troff had admitted that he ought to have told Mr and Mrs Bowers about the fragment and that he ought to have included details in the clinical notes.
Disciplinary Committee Chairman Mrs Alison Bruce said that they were "highly critical of the fact that Mr Saulner-Troff did not inform Mr and Mrs Bowers at any time of what had occurred or check that the clinical records had been completed either post-operatively or at the follow-up examination."
"The matters, which Mr Saulnier-Troff has admitted, flow from a failure on his part to speak to Mr and Mrs Bowers after the discharge had taken place and to check that he had completed a full clinical record which included reference to part of the palpator being left in Pippin's body,"
Mrs Bruce continued, adding that this was "indeed conduct which falls short of the standard to be expected. However, in the opinion of this Committee his conduct does not fall so far short that it amounts to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect."
Mrs Bruce concluded: "In these circumstances, the charge is dismissed."
Expanding on the training available in autumn 2022, which was launched based on the results of an extensive training pilot, MMI is offering a total of 14 sessions taking place both online and in person over the next few months. Sessions will be running from January to April 2023. The courses will cover areas that have been identified as priority topics from previous MMI surveys, feedback from the professions, and evaluation of the training pilots.
Mind Matters Initiative Manager, Lisa Quigley, said: “Mental health and wellbeing are impacted by a whole host of structural and societal factors and maintaining a healthy workforce goes far beyond supporting people on an individual level.
"Whilst it is undoubtedly important to provide people with the skills they need to look after themselves, we are aiming to expand on this by providing individuals with the skills and knowledge needed to recognise and address wider collective issues. For example, the importance of creating and maintaining a positive workplace culture.
Session dates and specific topics are as follows:
Mental Health First Aid (£30 in-person)
9am – 5pm
Psychological Safety and Civility (£20 in-person, £15 online)
In-person – 9am – 4pm
Online – 9am – 1pm
Sustaining Your Emotional Health (£15 in-person)
2pm – 5pm
For more information on the training courses, visit: https://vetmindmatters.org/training/
The 4% increase was approved by the Privy Council and the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs.
Dr Tshidi Gardiner, RCVS Treasurer, said: “As with last year, RCVS Council recognises that we are living in difficult economic times, and have tried to keep the fee increase to a minimum.
"However, it is important that we increase fees in line with inflation, as well as take into account additional related costs, to ensure we are fulfilling our regulatory remit to the best of our abilities and meet our strategic priorities.”
Veterinary surgeons need to pay their annual renewal by 1st April and will be sent their fee notices within the first two weeks of March.
Anyone who has not paid their fee by 1st May will incur a higher fee charge of £36, with non-payment by 1st June risking removal from the Register and ineligibility to practise.
As part of the annual renewal process, all individual vets will also need to log into their online MyAccount to confirm their registration and contact details and declare any convictions.
Anyone who expects to encounter any difficulties in paying their fees should contact the RCVS Finance Team on finance@rcvs.org.uk or 020 7202 0722.
Seventeen overseas-qualified veterinary surgeons who succeeded in passing the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons Statutory Examination for Membership, have been admitted to the RCVS Register and may now practise in the UK.
Remarkably, nearly half of them (8) were graduates of St George's University School of Veterinary Medicine (SGUSVM) in the Caribbean island of Grenada. Austin Kirwan, St George's Associate Dean of UK and Ireland Clinical Affairs said: "This outstanding result confirms the school's status as a leading international teaching institution for prospective veterinarians. Our graduates now have a proven record of high standards which is encouraging to those who follow in their footsteps."
To mark the occasion, a ceremony was held at Belgravia House for the registrants, their friends and families. After the veterinary surgeons' names were entered into the Register, RCVS President, Mr Peter Jinman, made a short address to welcome those attending, and presented the new Members with their certificates.
"Today is a celebration not just for those registering but for all of you," he said, acknowledging the importance of the support provided to vets by their friends and family. He also encouraged those who were newly graduated to sign up for the Professional Development Phase as the route to postgraduate education, saying that "Education does not stop today; indeed it is just a closing of one chapter and tomorrow is the opening of another, for learning is a lifelong experience."
The College has kicked off with questions and answers about the right to work in the UK and the impact on those currently studying to become a veterinary surgeon or planning to do so.
Although it's not yet possible to give definitive answers and there will doubtless be many more questions, the College says it will be keeping the new page updated as the situation unfolds.
The Q&A page can be found here: http://www.rcvs.org.uk/registration/about-the-rcvs-register/frequently-asked-questions-on-the-impact-of-the-eu-referendum/
Mr Seymour-Hamilton was originally struck off in 1994 after his Kent practice was found to be unhygienic and unsterile with poor record keeping.
However, he has always maintained that the reason his premises were unhygienic and unsterile was because they were closed.
As in previous applications, he said his reason for applying for restoration was to help him gain recognition for his alleged herbal and natural remedy discoveries and that he had no intention of going back into general practice.
As with previous applications, the Committee said that Mr Seymour-Hamilton has shown no real insight into the conduct underlying the original findings and nor has he shown insight into matters identified by previous restoration hearings.
The Committee also considered that Mr Seymour-Hamilton has been off the Register for some 31 years and would therefore need prolonged, intensive, formal retraining to ensure that he was now fit to practise, without which he might pose a risk to animal welfare.
Mr Seymour-Hamilton's case was not helped by the fact that he indicated that he had practised veterinary surgery while off the Register – including conducting two spay procedures in Calais, France, and treating two of his own dogs for cancer.
He also referred to having cultured faecal bacteria in a witness’ kitchen.
The Committee felt it was concerning that Mr Seymour-Hamilton thought these things were compatible with being on the Register and upholding the professional standards expected of a veterinary surgeon.
Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “Mr Seymour-Hamilton still lacks an understanding as to why he has not been restored in the past.
"Apart from additional CPD, he has not set about effectively addressing any of his shortcomings.
"He relies passionately on his research, yet he does not support that research with any peer-reviewed publications, indeed all his attempts to gain recognition have been rebuffed.”
He added: “The Committee is firmly of the view that after such a prolonged period of failing to be reinstated as a veterinary surgeon, Mr Seymour-Hamilton has to face the reality that his continued applications, taking up time, resources and expense (which is ultimately borne by all those veterinary surgeons who are on the Register), are vexatious and ultimately unlikely to succeed.
“Whilst the College cannot prevent him from continuing to apply to be restored to the Register, Mr Seymour-Hamilton should by now realise that this is not a good use of the College’s finite resources.
"He is now 86 years old and has not practised for over thirty years and in fact has now been off the Register for longer than he was on it.
"This is now the twelfth time he has been found to be not fit to be restored to the Register.
"The Committee hopes Mr Seymour-Hamilton will now take time seriously to reflect and take into account the impact to all concerned of his continued applications, before deciding to submit any more.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings
The College says that design thinking is a problem-solving process that anyone can use in all areas of veterinary practice. It is a method by which teams can create solutions to problems or challenges using empathy, creative thinking and experimentation.
The 75-minute session will give an overview of the principles behind design thinking, its various practical stages, and how it can be used to tackle challenges and problems within everyday practice.
Sophie Rogers, RCVS ViVet Manager, said: “While design thinking may sound quite theoretical and conceptual, it is actually a very practical problem-solving process that suits busy veterinary professionals and their teams. For example, the webinar will also be applying design thinking to the current backdrop of the challenges posed by Covid-19 and will be using examples that are relevant to the veterinary world to explore how it can help overcome some of these key challenges.
“The webinar will also be interactive, with delegates being sorted into small groups to carry out tasks that bring ideas to life and demonstrate how it supports innovation and working collaboratively.”
The webinar will be hosted by Gill Stevens, the Founding Director of Level Seven, a consultancy that specialises in merging coaching with design thinking methodology as a way to support innovation and team productivity, and Rick Harris, Founder of Customer Faithful, a research-led consultancy, specialising in customer research, proposition design and employee engagement.
You can sign up to the webinar, which will count towards the continuing professional development (CPD) requirement for both veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses, via the ViVet website at: www.vivet.org.uk/design-thinking-webinar-a-practical-approach-to-problem-solving-in-veterinary-practice.
Although developed by the RCVS and VSC BAME Student Support Working Group ostensibly for use by Universities, EMS placement host practices and other educational establishments, it is recommended that all veterinary practices review the guidance.
The Guidance on Religious Clothing and Beliefs covers issues such as: balancing accommodations for religious dress with clinical considerations, and making accommodations for religious observance in academic timetabling and exams.
Gurpreet Gill, RCVS Leadership and Inclusion Manager said: “This document is about recognising that personal religious beliefs should be respected and accommodated as far as possible, while also not compromising professional responsibilities such as infection control, effective communication and the health and safety of individuals and their colleagues.
"Most importantly, it is about creating a welcoming and inclusive environment and ensuring that all students are able to express their religious identity whilst participating in educational and workplace settings.
“Although the guidance is not exhaustive, we would highly recommend that, where relevant, educators, practices and other veterinary workplaces review, adopt and adapt this guidance for their own settings to ensure that all members of the professions are welcomed and included.”
The Guidance on Religious Clothing is available to download from: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/publications/guidance-on-religious-clothing-and-beliefs/
Noelle Lowry, a marathon-running vet from Lichfield has raised almost £2,500 for the RCVS Trust in the London Marathon.
Noelle beat her fundraising target of £1,500, to raise money for the Trust to use in its work to support veterinary education and research, and in providing library and information services.
She finished 4,594 out of the 11,037 women runners in the London Marathon, taking 4 hours and 36 minutes to run the 26.2 mile long course - and beating her time last year in the New York marathon.
Noelle said: "A lot of people chipped in at the last minute - my mum has been organising people back home in Ballymena and my friends and colleagues have all put their hands in their pockets - so a huge thank you to all of them.
"I'm a great fan of the RCVS Trust. It's not one of the big charity brands but the grant funding for veterinary research can really make a difference to animals - and we can all use the library and online resources - so I wanted to give it some help."
Click here for more about the work of the RCVS Trust
Those veterinary surgeons being audited are being asked to share their records for 2013 to 2015 by either allowing the College to access their online Professional Development Record or by sending the RCVS a copy of their CPD record cards. The deadline for sharing records is Friday 14 October 2016.
The audit is focused on six groups:
If any of the veterinary surgeons who have been audited are found to be non-compliant (ie. less than 105 hours of CPD over a rolling three-year period), they will be asked to explain why and send a plan stating how they will make up the hours in order to become compliant.
The College says it is also keen to remind veterinary surgeons that CPD encompasses a wide range of recorded activities, which can be clinical or non-clinical, including private reading/study, webinars, mentoring, clinical audit and discussion groups as well as attending seminars and workshops.
More information about what counts as CPD can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/cpd
Those with any questions about the auditing process or what constitutes CPD can contact Jenny Soreskog-Turp, Education Officer at the College, on cpd@rcvs.org.uk
Ed's note: Don't forget to claim your VetSurgeon.org CPD certificate detailing time you've recorded reading content and taking part in qualifying discussions on the site. Click 'My Account' and then the 'CPD' tab to view your records and create your certificate.
Captains Nicola Housby-Skeggs and Claire Budge, the first two members of the Royal Army Veterinary Corps (RAVC) to achieve the RCVS Certificate in Advanced Veterinary Practice (CertAVP), have been presented with their certificates at Belgravia House.
The two Captains were visiting the RCVS as part of a 'Meet the RCVS Day' organised for a group of Officers from the RAVC. The Captains were presented with their Certificates by Vice-President Peter Jinman.
Capt Nicola Housby-Skeggs had completed a mixture of small animal and equine modules in order to achieve her Certificate, and was positive about the modular approach. She said: "It's reassuring to know you can have a break if you need to. The compulsory module on professional key skills was also more useful than I had anticipated, as it focused on aspects that you don't really have time for at vet school, such as management, and health and safety."
Meanwhile, Captain Claire Budge appreciated the fact that many of her modules could be completed via distance learning. She said: "It was great that I could continue with my studies even when serving in Afghanistan. My only regret is that when I started the Certificate back in 2008, there wasn't the range of modules available that there is now. For example, I would like to have done one of the new Animal Welfare, Ethics and Law modules. However, there is no reason why I can't just take this as continuing professional development - that's the benefit of the modular approach."
More information about the CertAVP can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/modcerts.
'Meet the RCVS Days' give members of the veterinary team the opportunity to visit the College and find out what goes on behind the scenes. If you would like to join a future event, please let Fiona Harcourt know, on f.harcourt@rcvs.org.uk. Reasonable travel expenses are paid.