Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Jo Dyer — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 12:40:03 GMT

Hi all,

Just a reminder:

If you wish your voice to be heard by RCVS and you wish to do so by signing a petition which will forward my email to them, please let me know any changes to the wording that you would like to see, by posting here before 20th Jan.

If you are all done then a big thank you to those who have given feedback and I will let you know when the petition is up and running, with a link.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Anthony Todd — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 10:54:30 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]You know my opinion but you should make your 'introduction' factually correct or the petition becomes irrelevant.[/quote]

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]Supposition. The vet did not offer any defence so the DC was unable to use any defence, assumed or otherwise, in their considerations.[/quote]

And you should be factual too.

We were given no evidence that he actually received any documents after the first lot, because of the geographical and logistic gap, and the incredible failure to ensure the documents were received or the email opened.

In addition the unacceptable and excessive delay made it likely that he assumed the matter was closed.

The final report said ".... it is unlikely that there is any significant factual dispute in this case which would make the need for Mr Chikosi's attendance compelling"

So he was stuffed whether he appeared or not; nor did the committee try to mitigate his alleged transgression in any way, which is why many of us are very unhappy.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Jo Dyer — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 10:07:36 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]You know my opinion[/quote]

Hi Gillian,

Yes, I do know your opinion The point is, the Chikosi subject has been debated to death and clearly we will never all agree, so it is time to move on and try to use all the outrage to change things for the better. We live in a democratic country and free speech is a huge part of that. You are perfectly entitled to start your own petition and/or poll and you can word it however you wish.

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]I am only aware of one other case, but am happy to be corrected if you know of more?[/quote]

Yes, there was Mr Albring in 2011 but I'm sure there was an Australian woman who was struck off for not visiting out of hours. I have a feeling it was around 2007 or perhaps before. A lot of debate was provoked at the time, similar to Chikosi, and a veterinary journalist phoned practices belonging to RCVS council members anonymously to see if they offered visits out of hours. Unsurprisingly, some of them didn't. I think that case contributed to the last Review of 24/7 by the RCVS in 2009, and changes in wording to Clause 3.13, amongst others. If anyone can remember anything or has a reference then I would be interested and I too am very happy to be corrected by the evidence.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Gillian Mostyn — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:02:16 GMT

You know my opinion but you should make your 'introduction' factually correct or the petition becomes irrelevant.

[quote user="Jo Dyer"]a veterinary surgeon was struck off the register and thus had his livelihood removed in this country, as a result of delaying attendance on an animal at the owners' premises[/quote]

The actual delay wasn't the issue - it was because it was deemed unnecessary - I do feel you should make this clear.

[quote user="Jo Dyer"]while he made arrangements for his inpatients and outpatients to be cared for[/quote]

Supposition. The vet did not offer any defence so the DC was unable to use any defence, assumed or otherwise, in their considerations.

[quote user="Jo Dyer"] Other vets have been struck off in the past for refusing to attend to pets at their owners' homes outside of surgery hours.[/quote]

I am only aware of one other case, but am happy to be corrected if you know of more?

You are writing 'Daily Mail' style - only including facts that back up your own opinion and glossing over the facts that don't. If you are genuinely worried about how inexperienced (or otherwise) members of our profession feel, then you should make sure you don't propagate the myth that we should do house visits on request.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Anthony Todd — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 22:45:11 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]as is the stuff about the risk of assault they were not an issue in the Chikosi case. [/quote]

Edited quote, before I get accused of taking things out of context.

Certainly risk of assault is, IMHO, a real concern in some areas and in some cases but, unfortunately and as usual, it will take a serious incident before "procedures are re examined going forward" or some other mealy mouthed euphemism for not realising the bleeding obvious before it happened...

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

sandpiper — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 21:07:34 GMT

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Martin Atkinson — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:17:10 GMT

[quote user="Jo Dyer"]Sorry the layout is a bit ragged![/quote] I don't want to sound too critical because whether I agree with the sentiments or not at least you've had the get up and go to do something rather that the rest of us just bleating on about it, But It is ragged and disjointed. I haven't chosen the second option because it would take too long to say why or how I would change it. It needs a complete re-think. For example the stuff about large animals is irrelevant as is the stuff about the risk of assault or specialist visiting services, they were not an issue in the Chikosi case. Or maybe I'm just misinterpreting the whole thing.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Mark Holmes — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 14:54:49 GMT

Ok I understand, the poll was on the nature of the petition. That makes sense now.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Jo Dyer — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 14:42:02 GMT

The point is, that there isn't a 'No' option on a petition. You are either for it or you have to set up your own. Like it or not, that is how they work. (Go to https://www.change.org/en-GB for examples)

This poll is simply to check if I have got the wording more-or-less right and see if anyone can spot any glaring errors. If no-one signs the actual petition when I set it up, then at least they have had a chance to do something rather than just whinge And if all 8 unqualified Yes's do sign, then perhaps that is 8 more than would have contacted the RCVS under their own steam.

Either way I will have done my bit for something I believe in.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Francisco Gomez — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 14:09:06 GMT

[quote user="Mark Holmes"]It needs a no optio[/quote] +1 otherwise you're not really gaining any trustworthy info.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Jo Dyer — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:30:47 GMT

[quote user="Mark Holmes"]I also think vets who choose not to offer a home visit service need to make this clear and explicit when clients register, along with other aspects if ooh care.[/quote]

I absolutely agree.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Mark Holmes — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:24:23 GMT

It needs a no option, not that I would use it but to be taken seriously it needs the chance for people to disagree. I also think vets who choose not to offer a home visit service need to make this clear and explicit when clients register, along with other aspects if ooh care.

Re: Petition re house visits and RCVS 24/7 call for evidence

Jo Dyer — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:48:56 GMT

Sorry the layout is a bit ragged! I couldn't seem to upload a Word file so copied and pasted and it seems to have lost something in translation. Anyway I'm sure you get the gist.