The Disciplinary Committee heard that Mrs Garfield had told a representative of the Retired Greyhound Trust (RGT) that she had possession of a greyhound called Lola, that she proposed keeping Lola living with her as an adoptee, and that she would not relinquish possession of Lola except to the RGT. This was despite the fact that, at the time of signing the adoption agreement, she had already given Lola to another charity named Greyhound Gap and that, as a result, her conduct was misleading and dishonest.
In considering the facts of the case, the Committee found the charges and all constituent parts proven and went on to consider whether this amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
Judith Way, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The end result of the respondent’s decisions and conduct meant that RGT was persuaded to pass lawful possession and ownership of the dog Lola to the respondent when it would not have agreed to do so had it been told the truth by her.
"In truth, the respondent was not going to adopt and re-home Lola herself. Instead the respondent’s plan and intention was that Lola should be passed on to a third party who had been recommended by a rival dog rescue charity for rehome and adoption."
Judith added: "The consequence was that a social media dispute broke out when the rival dog charity decided to attempt to take advantage of the erroneous belief of the respondent that a decision had been taken by RGT to put Lola to sleep. The publicity generated by the respondent’s erroneous belief… was obviously adverse…. The gravamen [seriousness] of the respondent’s dishonest conduct was that she set one dog rescue charity against another, caused them to spend publicly raised funds on a legal dispute about who should be allowed to retain Lola when those precious funds ought, instead, to have been spent on their charitable objectives."
The Committee judged that the charge and its parts constituted serious professional misconduct and went on to consider the sanction against Mrs Garfield.
In considering the proportionate sanction the Committee took into account both mitigating and aggravating factors. In terms of aggravating factors the Committee considered that the dishonesty was pre-meditated, that she accused members of a rescue charity of lying and demonstrated no or only minimal insight into her wrongdoing. In mitigation the Committee considered that Mrs Garfield had cooperated with the College in its investigations, that she had acted in the genuine belief that she was acting in the best interests of Lola and that her conduct did not put Lola at risk or cause her to suffer any adverse consequences as a result. The Committee also accepted the testimonials and positive evidence from colleagues.
However, the Committee decided that removal from the Register would be the only appropriate sanction.
Summing up Judith Way said: "The reputational consequences for RGT were potentially significant bearing in mind that it is a rescue organisation with some 57 or so branches across the country. All of these consequences, actual and potential, stem from the respondent’s premeditated act of dishonesty in relation to which the Committee considers she showed very limited insight prior to this disciplinary hearing, as she did during the course of this hearing.
"In the result, it is the conclusion and decision of this Committee that the only proper sanction that can be imposed in this case is that the respondent’s name should be removed from the Register.”
Mrs Garfield has 28 days from being informed of the Committee’s decision to appeal.
According to the charity, every year, 250,000 animals are brought to rescue centres around the UK1. Most are much loved pets that through no fault of their own find themselves without a home. They may be an odd mix of breeds, they may not look perfect, but they have so much to give.
Battersea’s research shows that whilst 92% of people say they believe rescue is the right thing to do2, when the time comes to get a new pet, many choose to go online and search for a specific breed instead. In the last 12 months there have been on average 165,000 monthly searches online for ‘French Bulldogs’3. A fifth of people who say they wouldn’t consider rescue say they can’t get the type of breed they want from a rescue centre4 and over half (52%) say the animals in rescue centres often have health or behavioural problems, and you don’t know their full history5.
Claire Horton, Battersea’s Chief Executive, said: "Even though one in four dogs and cats are rescues6, you’re still more likely to hear about French Bulldogs, or Labradors being the nation’s favourite pets. Our preoccupation with breed is fuelling a ruthless pet trade based on looks alone – one that can sadly put profit before animal welfare."
"Battersea is setting out to increase the visibility of rescue animals, to show they’re more common than you think, and are in homes across the nation. They’re the most rewarding, responsible choice for a pet, and we’re hoping to bring them front of mind – to get all generations of animal lovers to think rescue first."
To encourage potential pet owners to be more open to rescue pets and look beyond certain breeds, Battersea has removed breed filters from its own online animal galleries. Initial tests have shown that when visitors to the site were not given the option to filter by breed, they viewed more animal profiles, and a higher percentage of them went on to apply to rehome a dog or cat.
Rob Young, Battersea’s Head of Operations, said: "We know that misconceptions and pre-conceived notions about the traits and behaviours of certain dog and cat breeds can heavily influence people’s rehoming choices. By removing the option to search by breed we’re hoping that visitors to our website will be more open-minded to finding the right match. If someone is looking for an affectionate lap dog, or an energetic, playful pet, then they will find a perfect match regardless of breed. When you go to Battersea, you won’t just get a Ragdoll, or a Labrador, or even a Mongrel. Most importantly, you’ll be getting a Rescue."
Last year Battersea rehomed 2,301 dogs and 2,140 cats. The charity says it has seen a notable reduction in rehoming over recent years as more people search online for fashionable breeds and are influenced by what they see on social media. The charity believes ‘Rescue Is Our Favourite Breed’ will help break down some of the misconceptions people have about rescue animals, encouraging them to see rescue as desirable and a badge of honour.
Rob added: "People think rescue dogs or cats will be harder to train than a puppy or kitten, or that it’s just not as prestigious to own a pet that hasn’t come from a breeder. Well, nothing could be further from the truth. Ask any proud rescue owner and they will tell you that rescue pets are the best pets. They may not be perfect, but they’re worth it."
For more information on the campaign, visit Battersea.org.uk and join the growing community of rescue lovers at #RescueIsMyFavouriteBreed.
References
According to the forthcoming PDSA Animal Welfare 2016 report, only 35% of pet owners are familiar with their pets' legal welfare needs, a figure which has remained persistently low over the past 6 years (45% in 2011, 31% in 2012, 38% in 2013, 36% in 2014 and 31% in 2015).
The same report revealed in 2015 that 97% of veterinary professionals agreed there is value in encouraging pet owners to better understand and provide for the five welfare needs of their pets.
The 2016 report will also report that pet owners who feel more informed about each of the five welfare needs are significantly more likely to provide preventive healthcare to their pets.
Gudrun Ravetz, President of the BVA said: "It’s concerning that, despite many veterinary practices’ best efforts, public awareness of the five welfare needs remains consistently low. There are so many strong voices for animal welfare, which is why it’s great that so many veterinary organisations – including BSAVA, BVNA and BVZS – are coming together within this coalition to highlight pet owners’ legal duty of care. We hope practices across the country will join us in spreading the message by continuing to deliver the welfare need-focused advice to clients that they already do, day-in, day-out."
The 2006 Animal Welfare Acts of England and Wales, and Scotland consolidated and replaced more than 20 pieces of outmoded legislation. They established a duty of care, enshrining in law five animal welfare needs, outlining housing, diet, behaviour, social interactions and health as the legal responsibilities that every owner should meet to ensure their pet is as happy and healthy as possible.
The veterinary animal welfare coalition says it recognises that veterinary practices across the UK already promote the five welfare needs through a range of methods, from displaying materials in their waiting rooms to providing health check consultations with vets and vet nurses to discuss pets’ needs. The seven organisations, which are all UK based and support or provide veterinary service delivery, are pooling their resources so that veterinary practices can more easily signpost clients to the wealth of resources that are available.
James Yeates, who chairs the veterinary animal welfare coalition as part of the Vet Futures Action Plan, said: "The five welfare needs are a fantastic 'umbrella' guide to taking care of our pets, yet each and every species has such differing welfare needs - from cats who tend to be solitary animals and usually prefer to be the only pet to rabbits that should live in pairs or groups of other rabbits and dogs, who should not be left on their own for more than a few hours a day - it’s vital that pet owners can translate theory into practice. Our understanding of animal welfare science has come such a long way over the past 50 years so we'd really like pet owners to visit their local veterinary practice, where they will be able to get tailored, up-to-date advice for their pets."
The BVA's Spring 2016 Voice of the Profession survey of over 1,600 veterinary surgeons found that the majority (60%) see diet as their main welfare concern, causing obesity, dental issues and a variety of other complex health problems. The coalition of veterinary organisations behind this campaign says it hopes it will encourage the 15% of pet owners not currently registered with a veterinary practice to seek out their local surgery for expert advice about issues such as these.
More information about the coalition and the resources available to practices can be found at www.bva.co.uk/news-campaigns-and-policy/newsroom/news-releases/uk-pets-at-risk-as-two-thirds-of-owners-unaware-of-legal-welfare-needs/
In next year's election, there are three places on Council for elected veterinary surgeons, with successful candidates serving four-year terms.
The nomination period runs until 5pm on Friday 31 January 2020. In order to stand, candidates need to complete a nomination form, submit a short biography and personal statement and supply a high resolution digital photo.
Each candidate also needs to have two nominators who need to be veterinary surgeons who are on the RCVS Register but are not current RCVS Council members.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer said: "As always, we would encourage those who are interested in having their say in some of the key debates in the regulatory sphere, such as our under care review, our policies around the impact of Brexit and our vision for new veterinary legislation, to become a candidate.
"RCVS Council is at its best when it encompasses a broad range of perspectives, experiences and knowledge, and so we encourage people from all areas of veterinary life and all levels of experience to put themselves forward and share their expertise and insight."
Nomination forms, guidance notes and frequently asked questions for prospective RCVS Council candidates can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/rcvscouncil20.
Prospective candidates for RCVS Council are welcome to contact the Registrar, Eleanor Ferguson (e.ferguson@rcvs.org.uk) and the RCVS CEO, Lizzie Lockett (l.lockett@rcvs.org.uk) for more information about the role of the College and/or RCVS Council.
RCVS Council will also be holding its next public meeting on Thursday 23 January 2020, prior to the closure date for Council candidate nominations. Prospective candidates are welcome to attend the Council meeting as an observer. Contact Dawn Wiggins, RCVS Council Secretary, on d.wiggins@rcvs.org.uk if you wish to attend.
Virbac Animal Health has launched 'Spray to Win' competition in which vets who use the topical corticosteroid Cortavance between now and the end of June have the chance to win one of five Canon Ixus Cameras worth £150.
To enter the competition, ask your territory manager for a Spray to Win card, spray the pictured dog to ease his pruritus, and answer one question.
Winning cards will reveal either a camera or a 124 page manual on topical glucocorticoid therapy compiled by a group of the world's leading dermatologists.
Virbac product manager Chris Geddes MRCVS said the purpose of the campaign is to illustrate the efficacy of Cortavance as the first line treatment for all pruritic and inflammatory skin disorders: "As a potent skin-specific steroid with no detectable harmful effects¹ and competitive pricing, it's an ideal first line treatment for all atopic dermatitis cases."
There are also automatic rewards in the form of a clinical handbook on canine dermatology or a didactic atlas on canine dermatoses with every 10 bottles of Cortavance purchased, or get both with 15 bottles.
The supply of spray cards is limited, so anyone wishing to obtain a card is advised to contact their Virbac territory manager as soon as possible, or call 01359 243243.
Ms Buttler was charged with having been under the influence of alcohol whilst at work on two separate occasions. On both occasions, she was working as a locum veterinary nurse.
The first occasion was between 25th and 28th April 2016 in Frome, and the second from 3rd July to 4th July 2016 in Salisbury.
It was also alleged that a prior conviction of drunk driving on 19th November 2013 rendered her unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
The Committee decided to hear the case in Ms Buttler’s absence as it was satisfied that she had properly been served with the notice of hearing and because she had stated that she was aware of the proceedings but did not wish to engage with the process. The Committee also noted that she had not requested any adjournment.
The Committee heard from five witnesses for the first charge, including three veterinary nurses and one veterinary surgeon. They gave testimony that they had had cause to suspect that Ms Buttler was under the influence of alcohol whilst at work due to her demeanour, and recalled Ms Buttler repeatedly retreating upstairs to her accommodation during the working day. Further, an open wine bottle was found in Ms Buttler’s accommodation and was observed to have been drunk during the course of her shift. The Committee found the first charge proved.
The Committee heard from four witnesses in respect of the second charge. Two of the witnesses stated that they smelt alcohol on Ms Buttler’s breath while she was on duty, with one of them stating that Ms Buttler had slurred speech and a flushed face at the end of a fourteen-hour shift. The other two witnesses also presented evidence to support the assertion that Ms Buttler was under the influence of alcohol whilst at work, while the Committee found that Ms Buttler lacked credibility because she had denied having any alcohol on the premises when originally confronted, but later admitted in an email to the College that she had had an open bottle of wine in her bag. The Committee found the second charge proved.
The Committee then considered the third charge, namely the conviction in 2013. The Committee considered the certificate of conviction obtained from the North East Devon Magistrates Court and was satisfied that Ms Buttler had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol as set out within charge 3.
When considering whether these all amounted to a finding of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, the Committee was concerned about Ms Buttler showing no insight into her drinking, and the repeated nature of the offences. The Committee also considered that being under the influence of alcohol when working as a veterinary nurse was conduct which fell far short of the standards to be expected of members of the veterinary nursing profession.
It therefore concluded that Ms Buttler was guilty of disgraceful conduct in respect of charges 1 and 2.
The Committee then considered whether Ms Buttler’s conviction (charge 3) rendered her unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse. The Committee concluded that Ms Buttler had not acknowledged the seriousness of her actions in 2013, or learnt any lessons from it. Accordingly, it felt that she continued to pose a risk to animals and the public in the future. The Committee also felt that the conviction undermined the reputation of the veterinary nursing profession because the offence inevitably involved a risk of injury to herself and other road users.
Having found Ms Buttler guilty of misconduct, the Committee went on to consider sanction.
The Committee took into account aggravating factors, including that there was a risk of injury to an animal, the fact that the first two charges involved an element of premeditation, the fact that Ms Buttler was under the influence on more than one shift in each practice, that there is no evidence of insight from Ms Buttler and there is a future risk to animals if she continued to practice unrestricted.
They also considered mitigating factors, including the fact that this is the first disciplinary hearing she has faced, that she did not cause any harm to any animal and that she did not gain financially from her conduct.
In reaching its decision Jane Downes, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee noted that Ms Buttler said she had worked for twenty years without any problem and that she was previously of good character. However because there was no evidence that Ms Buttler would not repeat the conduct with regards to working whilst under the influence of alcohol she could continue to pose a risk to animals or the public in the future. The Committee therefore was bound to consider her removal from the register.
"Although it noted from the brief email correspondence Ms Buttler had sent to the College that she said she did not intend to practice in the future, the Committee decided that until she had shown insight into her behaviour in 2016, she remained a risk to animals. It therefore decided that the proportionate action was to instruct the Registrar to remove her name from the register of veterinary nurses forthwith."
If Ms Buttler chose to re-engage with the College, she could apply for restoration to the register after ten months.
Ceva Animal Health has announced the launch of Cardalis for the treatment of canine heart failure caused by degenerative valvular heart disease.
Cardalis contains what the company says is a unique combination of benazepril and spironolactone in one tablet which provides "dual blockade" of the RAAS system.
Benazepril reduces the production of angiotensin II, which causes narrowing of the blood vessels, while spironolactone blocks the harmful effects of aldosterone, which include cardiovascular remodelling and fibrosis.
Cardalis tablets are small, beef flavoured and designed to be administered once a day with food. Each pot contains 30 tablets and there are three sizes available. Ceva says it should be given as part of standard heart failure therapy as soon as clinical signs, such as exercise intolerance, coughing or dyspnoea, appear.
Fraser Broadfoot, small animal product manager at Ceva Animal Health, said: "Through our clinical studies, it has been found that dogs receiving benazepril and spironolactone (compared with benazepril alone) have a better quality of life and, at any one time, are three times less likely to die from heart failure.
"We have also assessed 101 dogs in a field study that were prescribed Cardalis for three months, followed by separate benazepril and spironolactone tablets for two weeks. In the study, 97 per cent of dog owners found Cardalis easier to administer than the two separate tablets and 89 per cent of vets found Cardalis easier to prescribe."
For further information about Cardalis, or to receive marketing materials for the product (which include a waiting room poster and client information booklets), visit www.ceva.com.uk, or contact the practice support team on 01494 781510.
A group of brave veterinary nurses and a student nurse leapt out of a perfectly serviceable aircraft last weekend, both to raise money for children with epilepsy, and to highlight the need to protect the title 'Veterinary Nurse' in law.
Vicky Couzens, Jenny Cook, Kim Blowing, Michelle Dickens, Gillian James and Leigh Martin, none of whom had parachuted before (in fact, Gillian hadn't even been in a plane before), were raising money for the Muir Maxwell Trust, a charity which funds research into childhood epilepsy, and supports the families of some of the 70,000 children affected by it in the UK.
The daredevil nurses also wanted to highlight the fact that anyone can call themselves a veterinary nurse, regardless of whether they've ever even set foot inside a veterinary practice, let alone passed the demanding examinations. They argue that the title 'Veterinary Nurse' should be protected in law, in exactly the same way as 'Veterinary Surgeon', so that the pet-owning public can have the reassurance of knowing when their animal is being cared for by a qualified professional.
To support these nurses' efforts, and help them reach their fundraising targets, click the links below:
http://www.justgiving.com/Victoria-Couzens http://www.justgiving.com/Jenny-Cook23 http://www.justgiving.com/KimBlowing http://www.justgiving.com/Michelle-Dickens
Meanwhile, one of the children that has benefitted from the work done by the Muir Maxwell Trust is Emily Guthrie, daughter of the editor of VetNurse.co.uk and VetSurgeon.org. She sent the jumpers her own message of thanks:
Chanelle's head of sales and marketing, Killian Gaffney said: "The total UK market is around 80,000 bottles annually. However, with the major supplier announcing some re-stocking in March but full availability still under question, there is a real sense of urgency for practitioners.
"The Chanelle team worked throughout December with our manufacturing division to ensure that the UK product shortfall could be alleviated.
"Air freighting supplies seemed the obvious course of action, and ensured we could supply the UK market as quickly as possible."
For further information, contact: Chanelle on 00353 91 841 788.
Billed as an essential reference, the new guide gives practical information on pain management in a wide range of small animals, emphasizing patient welfare and evidence-based medicine.
The BSAVA Guide to Pain Management in Small Animal Practice is edited by Ian Self, an RCVS and European Specialist in Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia.
Each chapter is written by a specialist in the field, and the guide includes 'Authors’ perspectives' and case examples.
The first six chapters cover key areas in pain management, including the physiology of pain, acute and chronic pain, and pharmacological and physical treatment of pain. The remaining chapters look at specific types of pain, and pain in species commonly encountered in small animal practice.
Ian said: "This Guide is not to be seen as an instruction manual, rather a helping hand. For each case discussed and analgesic approach explained, there are multiple valid alternative approaches… when seeking inspiration or information when faced with a patient in pain, we hope that the information presented here will assist in reaching a satisfactory clinical outcome."
The new book will be given to eligible vet and vet nurse members free of charge as part of the Association's loyalty scheme; a 'thank you' for staying a member for another year. Further details are available from the member benefits section of the BSAVA website.
Eravac is an injectable emulsion ready for administration without the need for reconstitution beforehand. Containing 10 vials with individual doses, the new presentation is is indicated for the immunisation of pet rabbits from 30 days of age.
For more information, visit: https://www.hipra.com/portal/en/hipra/animalhealth/products/detail/eravac-pets
Jane (or John) Doe was charged with having stolen midazolam, butorphanol and promethazine hydrochloride from their practice for use other than for veterinary purposes, making false clinical records concerning the use of drugs on their own dogs to disguise the fact that the drugs were instead being used for non-veterinary uses, and drawing up medication taken from the practice into a syringe for the purpose of self-medicating.
In addition, they were charged that their conduct was dishonest.
The Committee found it proven that Jane/John Doe had taken approximately 150 vials of midazolam, 87 ampoules, 112 tablets and one elixir bottle of promethazine hydrocholoride, and 0.2mls of butorphanol together with Iml of midazolam for their dog at a time when their dog was, in fact, dead.
The Committee also found it proven that the defendant had drawn up medication for the purpose of self-medicating, and had created false clinical records.
In deciding the sanction, the Committee concluded that the respondent had abused their position of trust, that their actions were dishonest, prolonged and repeated in nature, and undermined the reputation of the profession as a whole.
Therefore the only appropriate action was removal from the Register.
Unusually, the RCVS did not issue a press release about this case, as it normally does.
There was also a protracted delay between the hearing and the report of the hearing being published on the College website.
Furthermore, when it was finally published, the report had been redacted to remove any reference to the name, gender or location of the respondent.
When asked why, the College said: "Matters of a highly confidential nature arose following the hearing which led to a delay in the decisions being published.
“The decisions have been redacted and we cannot provide the reasons for the redactions as that would necessarily involve disclosure of confidential and personal information.
"However, the circumstances are considered to be exceptional and the College’s decision to make the redactions was only made following very careful consideration of evidence provided to the RCVS.
"The decision has been published on the RCVS website in its redacted form and in view of the timeframe and the circumstances, it has not been considered appropriate to issue a press release.”
CommentThe College will for sure have had very good reasons for redacting the name of the respondent in this case.
One has to assume there must have been a very real threat to the respondent’s life, and under those circumstances, confidentiality is absolutely right and proper.
However, whatever the reason, secrecy is never a good look, especially when it comes in the form of a cape worn by a regulator.
So it is frustrating to hear that the College has again made a rod for its own back, when it could so easily have included a very general one-line explanation for why it felt redaction was necessary, without compromising the individual’s confidentiality.
It would have been enough, for example, just to say that the College felt there was a risk to life. People would accept that.
The materials include eye-catching waiting room bunting, wall displays, posters, leaflets and leaflet holders which offer hints and tips on how to look after pets while fireworks are going off.
Ceva is also launching a series of eight three-minute fireworks videos which offer advice to owners about how they can 'Help take the fear out of fireworks' and more information about Adaptil and Feliway. The videos are presented by Emma Carr, training and charity key account manager at Ceva Animal Health and are available to download via Vimeo and Ceva’s social media tool kit.
Veterinary practices are being encouraged to use the new materials to take part in Ceva’s annual fireworks waiting room display competition, which offers a £200 voucher for the overall best display and luxury chocolate hampers for 10 runners up (hint: entrants get additional credit if they build a display den and plug in an Adaptil Calm Home Diffuser nearby).
Practices taking part in the competition can post pictures of their dens and waiting room displays on Ceva Animal Health UK's Facebook page in October.
Abigail King, senior behaviour product manager at Ceva Animal Health, said: "The extensive marketing support we are putting behind Adaptil and Feliway in the run up to the fireworks season will help educate pet owners on the measures that can be put in place to help their pets with firework fears, while highlighting the benefits of our products."
For further information, or to request the new waiting room material, contact your local account manager or email: cevauk@ceva.com.
The company warned last year that Equip Artervac would be out of stock from the end of November 2017 until mid-2018, but says that the re-availability of the vaccine means many vaccinated stallions and teasers should now be able to have their six-monthly booster dose within the normal designated timeframe.
Equip Artervac is indicated for the active immunisation for horses against equine arteritis virus to reduce the clinical signs and shedding of virus in nasal secretions following infection.
For further information, contact your Zoetis Account Manager or the Zoetis Technical Team on customersupportUK@zoetis.com or 0845 300 9084 choosing option 1.
VetFinders will recruit for permanent and locum positions for veterinary practices throughout the UK, from administration roles through to nursing staff and vets.
The agency has been founded by a man called Chris Worthington who previously built an engineering recruitment firm called Qualtech Resourcing.
Alongside Chris in the VetFinders team are recruiters Gabrielle Dawson and Martin Wilson, both with over 15 years’ experience in recruitment, Chris’s wife Anna, who is charge of accounting and payroll, and administrator Suzy Buttress.
Chris said: "VetFinders is a business with a purpose, a business with a force for good and a business with a double bottom line! Our approach is totally unique in the industry and it’s what sets us apart. Candidates are already hearing about our message and registering with VetFinders rather than other agencies.
"We have chosen four specific charities and our support for them does not stop at the point of donation. We will also be working closely with them, funding specific projects and working on their front line."
The chosen charities are:
Hope Pastures, in Leeds, which rescues, rehabilitates and re-homes horses, ponies and donkeys.
Moorview Rescue in Harrogate, which has re-homed almost 2000 dogs in the UK since it was set up as a registered charity in 2009.
Nuzzlets, a small charity based near Great Ouseburn in York which specialises in giving loving homes to unwanted animals and enabling young people free access to them for therapy and education.
Blue Cross.
When a candidate is placed by VetFinders, the client can choose which of the four charities they want a percentage of their fee to be donated to. The client and placed candidate will then be given regular updates of how their money has benefitted children and animals, including through photos, videos, emails and website updates.
For more information, visit: https://www.vetfinders.co.uk/
Photo: Top (L-R): Martin Wilson - Veterinary Recruitment Consultant, Chris Worthington - Managing Director. Bottom (L-R): Gabrielle Dawson - Veterinary Recruitment Consultant, Anna Worthington - Finance and Payroll Manager and Suzy Buttress - Administrator.
The inquiry in regard to Karen Tracey Hancock took place in her absence in January, after she indicated that she was content not to appear or to be represented.
The charges against Mrs Hancock related to an injury she falsely claimed she sustained to her knee while moving a euthanased dog in August 2015 that was then exacerbated while moving another dog a couple of weeks later.
The charges also stated that she made entries in the practice’s accident book also stating that she had injured her knee at work and then aggravated it later.
The charges also stated that, in County Court civil proceedings against the practice in relation to the alleged injuries, she falsely:
The Committee noted that the County Court claim made by Mrs Hancock was listed for a trial and concluded with a consent order dated 21 June 2019 which stated that the claim was dismissed.
It also considered evidence from eyewitnesses regarding the two alleged events that led to and exacerbated her knee injury in August 2015. In doing so the Committee found that, though Mrs Hancock did have an injury to her right knee, this was due to a horse-riding incident a number of years earlier and that her account of the incidents on 13 and 29 August, and therefore her claims to have been caused injury by them, were false and that her conduct had been dishonest.
The Committee therefore found all charges against Mrs Hancock proven.
The Committee then considered whether the proven charges amounted to serious professional misconduct. In doing so it considered submissions made by Counsel for the RCVS that there were a number of aggravating factors in the case of Mrs Hancock’s conduct including that the misconduct was sustained over a long period of time, was premeditated and involved lying for financial gain.
In commenting on whether the conduct was serious professional misconduct Judith Way, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee found all of the aggravating factors set out… in this case applied to its decision on whether or not the conduct amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
"Such conduct would bring the profession of veterinary nurses into disrepute and would undermine public confidence in the profession because the dishonesty was directly concerned with the respondent’s work as a veterinary nurse in the veterinary practice.
"The Committee concluded that the dishonest behaviour was serious misconduct, particularly so because it took place at the respondent’s workplace. It considered that honesty and trust between veterinary nurses and their employers is essential to the profession and that such conduct as set out in the charges would be considered deplorable by other members of the profession."
The Committee was therefore satisfied that all four charges individually and cumulatively amounted to serious professional misconduct.
Committee members then considered the appropriate sanction for Mrs Hancock, taking into account the aggravating factors, including a lack of insight in that, in correspondence before the hearing, she continued to deny the charges. In mitigation it noted that there had been a significant lapse of time and that she had a long and hitherto unblemished career.
On balance it decided that removal from the Register was the appropriate and proportionate sanction and requested Mrs Hancock be removed from the Register, particularly as dishonesty is considered ‘in the top spectrum of gravity’ for misconduct.
Judith Way added: “The Committee acknowledged that the respondent was physically unwell with her knee between 2015 and 2019. However there was no evidence that her health had caused her to commit the misconduct. It noted the representations that the respondent made regarding the need to support herself financially but the Committee determined that the public interest outweighed the respondent’s own interests in this case because the proven dishonesty in the circumstances in which it took place was fundamentally incompatible with continued professional registration.
“In the Committee’s judgment without any evidence of remorse or insight by the respondent a suspension order could not meet the public interest in this case. It therefore concluded that removal of the Respondent’s name from the register was the proportionate and appropriate sanction in this case.”
The authors say that whilst it has long been suspected that adverse drug reactions are under-reported, this study is the first to show the scale of the problem, using real data from veterinary clinical records.
For the study, researchers looked for electronic heath records within the Small Animal Veterinary Surveillance Network (SAVSNET) which contained “adverse drug reactions” and “side effects” in the free-text clinical narratives.
The results were then analysed to determine the suspected product, the seriousness and expectedness of the event, and whether the event had been reported to the Veterinary Medicines Directorate or Marketing Authorisation Holders.
Of the 827 cases of suspected adverse drug reactions identified out of a total of 10,565 records reviewed, approximately 90% were not reported.
74% were related to dogs and 70% were listed as “expected” (i.e. already listed in the product information).
The clinical severity of the reaction didn’t appear to impact whether it was reported.
Dr Heather Davies, lead author of the study, said: “As adverse drug reaction reporting rate is directly linked to the regulators ability to mitigate safety issues, this paper is a call to arms encouraging all veterinary professionals to report suspected adverse drug reactions and regulators to make reporting quicker and easier.
"It also the highlights the promise that big real-world data sets hold in enhancing drug safety monitoring processes.”
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jsap.13721
Elanco Companion Animal Health has launched a competition to encourage veterinary professionals to showcase the company's new range of practice support materials for the company's parasiticides, Comfortis and Trifexin.
To enter the competition, you'll first need to order the support materials, which include: waiting room posters, client leaflets and a waiting room leaflet dispenser, modular window hangers, social media artwork and display kits which consist of 19 die-cut colour pieces for waiting room displays. Entry / order forms are available here.
Then create your display and email a digital photograph of it to Elanco before the 29th August 2014.
Matthew Rowe, Senior Brand Manager at Elanco said: "We're asking veterinary practices to use their creativity and imagination when putting up their parasite control displays. Last year's winner, the Animal Health Centre in Torquay, even composed their own song, so the more creative the better!"
The overall winner will win a team celebration worth £1000, and there are £250 Amazon vouchers for 11 regional winners.
For further information contact your local Elanco Companion Animal Health key account manager or email elancocahuk@elanco.com
For the study, 2,834 seizure incident cases were identified from a population of 455,553 dogs attending VetCompass participating practices in 2013.
The study found that that approximately 1 in 160 dogs under first opinion veterinary care are affected by seizures every year.
Many of those dogs will have underlying epilepsy, defined as dogs with two or more unprovoked seizures at least 24 hours apart. Seizures can be secondary to idiopathic epilepsy, structural epilepsy or epilepsy of unknown cause.
Until now, however, there has been little information on the classifications of seizures, diagnostic approaches, or clinical management of dogs with seizures in the veterinary first opinion population.
The main findings from the research were:
Dr Dan O’Neill, Senior Lecturer in Companion Animals Epidemiology at the RVC, and author of the paper, said: "Watching your dog undergo a seizure can be an incredibly scary moment for any dog owner. It is really important that dogs that seizure are rapidly diagnosed to decide whether they need no further treatment beyond careful monitoring or alternatively require a clinical work-up to define the cause of the seizures.
"There are now some excellent treatments for many seizure-related diseases. This study helps up to understand the current state of play for seizure management in dogs and identifies opportunities for improved care of these affected dogs."
Reference
The full paper is freely available from Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine and can be accessed here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jvim.15911
The case was brought by the College after a member of the public raised a 'concern' relating to Mrs Mullen's practice in December 2015. The concern was not pursued by the College.
However, during its initial investigation, the RCVS case manager ascertained that contrary to the requirements of the Code of Professional Conduct, Mrs Mullen did not have PII.
In January 2016 Mrs Mullen was advised by the College that, in order to comply with the Code, she needed to ensure her professional activities were covered by PII or equivalent arrangements.
The matter was considered by the Preliminary Investigation Committee which asked, in October 2016, that Mrs Mullen produce evidence that she was now compliant with the requirement to have PII or equivalent. Mrs Mullen responded in November 2016 confirming that she had not put in place such arrangements.
The case was then referred to the Disciplinary Committee in January 2017.
During the hearing it was determined that, during the relevant time period (from November 2015 to November 2016) Mrs Mullen was practising but did not have professional indemnity insurance in place and therefore was in breach of the Code.
Mrs Mullen, who represented herself, told the Committee that she admitted that she did not have PII. She explained that she was 'ethically and morally opposed to it' as she felt that it did not give fair compensation to claimants and did not know it was a requirement of the Code of Professional Conduct until she was informed by the College in January 2016.
When giving oral evidence as to equivalent arrangements she disclosed that she kept significant funds in a bank account; these were not however specifically earmarked for use in the event of any possible claims, and were also required to pay practice expenses.
In light of evidence produced by the College and her own admissions, the charges against Mrs Mullen were found proved and she was found guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
In coming to this decision Chitra Karve, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The respondent failed to have PII in place for a period of about 12 months as specified in the charges. Moreover, she failed to remedy the situation when advised in January 2016 by the College that she was in breach of the Code and the supporting guidance. This remains a continuous course of conduct, which has still not been remedied. The respondent has chosen not to read the Code, or the supporting guidance, until very recently, in relation to her obligation to have PII or equivalent arrangements in place, and she failed to heed the advice of the College that she must rectify the position."
In considering the sanction the Committee took into account mitigating and aggravating factors. Aggravating factors included the fact that the misconduct was sustained over a significant period of time and that limited insight was shown by Mrs Mullen. While she did begin to display limited insight into the significance of her misconduct, the Committee said that this insight was "hampered by her ambivalence towards the College and the systems that regulate the veterinary profession."
In mitigation the Committee took into account Mrs Mullen’s long and unblemished career and the fact she was a sole practitioner who reported challenging personal circumstances and provided a unique service to a niche group of clients.
However, Chitra Karve said: "The Committee is unable to overlook the Respondent’s lack of commitment to obtaining PII or equivalent arrangements, even after being advised by the College that this was essential. The Committee is aware that a suspension could adversely affect her practice and her clients that she uniquely serves. However the Committee thinks it is necessary to send a clear message to the respondent and the public, that failure to obtain PII or equivalent arrangements is wholly unacceptable."
She added: "Accordingly, the Committee directs the Registrar to suspend the respondent’s registration for a period of two months. The Committee considers that this period of suspension will give the respondent an opportunity to rectify her breaches of the Code in relation to PII… and to reflect upon her attitude towards the College and the appropriate regulation of the veterinary profession."
The ten-minute online survey aims to gather a snapshot of horse health over the period of a week.
The results help to identify trends in endemic equine diseases and help the Blue Cross steer equine awareness, education and research.
This year the survey includes some welfare questions to help guide knowledge in response to what the charity calls 'the UK’s horse welfare crisis'.
The National Equine Health Survey is run by the Blue Cross in partnership with the British Equine Veterinary Association. Dodson and Horrell is helping to cover the costs of running the scheme.
Supporters of the survey include the British Horse Society, Horse Trust, Redwings and the Pony Club.
Medal-winning riders Mary and Emily King, and Yazmin Pinchen (pictured right) also support the survey.
Visit www.bluecross.org.uk/NEHS or email NEHS@bluecross.org.uk to register and take part, which carries the chance of winning prizes including Star Lister Clippers, a Lister Adagio Trimmer and some Burford Ariat boots.
The webinar will cover the entire disease process of MMVD in dogs from pathology to current treatment approaches and future advancements in therapy, and will include the following presentations:
https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_QyfUofLgRG-YsaXQbkT7Tw#/registration
The paper was written by FEDIAF’s Scientific Advisory Board, comprised of independent academics from leading European universities, with the aim of informing both the industry and the public.
Based on recent scientific data, the paper explains the different life expectancies of dogs related to their size, and defines when "old age" sets in. It explains how changes in the digestive tract can affect food intake, how food texture may become a crucial factor, and how aging can lead to changes in energy metabolism and alter the nutrient requirements of senior dogs. It also offers practical guidance to pet owners for feeding an older dog.
Dr Thomas Brenten, Chairman of FEDIAF’s Nutrition & Analytical Science Group said: "Age-related changes in cognitive functions, behaviour, skin, digestive tract, cardiovascular system, respiratory tract, degenerative joint and skeletal function, as well as urinary disorders are the most common issues concerning older dogs. Many of these can be addressed via nutrition."
The paper can be downloaded in the new section on science on FEDIAF’s website: https://tinyurl.com/fediaf-senior-dogs.
Ane’s research interests lie in the surgical correction of neurological diseases leading to chronic pain and epilepsy. Amongst other things, she has developed an international database and phone application to help dogs and owners affected by epilepsy.
Ane began her veterinary studies in her native Spain before transferring to the Veterinary School of Paris (Ecole National Veterinaire d’Alfort) where she completed a three-year European residency in neurology. She then spent eight years working as a neurology-neurosurgery specialist in the UK.
Ane, who speaks five languages, then moved to the USA, where she joined Tufts University, training students, interns and residents and continuing her passion for research.
Henry L'Eplattenier, clinical director at Southfields, said: “We’re absolutely delighted Dr Uriarte has agreed to join the team.
"She is a very talented neurologist with a passion for neuro-oncology and will bring a wealth of experience and knowledge, which will benefit our world-class team."
Ane said: “I’m thrilled for the opportunity of leading the neurology service of such an outstanding hospital.
"Pets are part of our family and having a neurological disorder can be devastation. I’m committed and looking forward to helping referring veterinarians and owners in such circumstances."
The survey was sent to all UK veterinary practices on the 25th November with a deadline to respond by the 1st December and received 186 responses, a response rate of 6%.
The survey found that during this period:
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS CEO, said: “Thank you once again to all the practice staff who took the time to complete this survey, it really is very useful for us to have a clear picture of how coronavirus and its restrictions are affecting day-to-day activities, as it has an impact both on our decision-making and policies, and what we can tell others about the impact on the professions, such as the UK and national governments.
"The overall picture from this survey is that, while for most it is not business as usual, veterinary practices and members of the professions are, to an extent, getting used to the disruption and have plans and policies in place to help mitigate the impact of the mosaic of different restrictions across the UK.
"While there is hope on the horizon with the start of the roll-out of coronavirus vaccines, we will continue to review and keep up-to-date our advice and guidance to ensure that you can practise to the best of your abilities, while keeping safe and within the rules.
“Of course, we also recognise the toll that the pandemic has taken on many people’s mental health and wellbeing, and this is reflected in some of the more concerning statistics around the impact that staff absences can have on the rest of the team.
"We also asked practices what might help them manage from a staff mental health and wellbeing point of view, and will take these suggestions into account when planning further support via our Mind Matters Initiative mental health project. In the meantime, we would like to remind those who are feeling stressed or are in distress that there are sources of help available during these difficult times – these can be found at www.vetmindmatters.org/help-links/help-during-covid-19/.”
The full report of the survey is available to view at www.rcvs.org.uk/publications