<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.vetsurgeon.org/utility/feedstylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>What has happened to the &amp;#39;under care&amp;#39; review.</title><link>https://www.vetsurgeon.org/f/non-clinical-questions/28945/what-has-happened-to-the-under-care-review</link><description> Back in September 2019 the RCVS announced a review into the &amp;#39;under care&amp;#39; issue. The chair of the standard committee Melissa Donald is quoted as saying “This is set to become one of our most fundamental reviews of RCVS guidance in recent years. This is</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Community 10</generator><item><title>RE: What has happened to the 'under care' review.</title><link>https://www.vetsurgeon.org/thread/220392?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2020 09:09:16 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">146601cc-3922-4be7-9974-7e1d4e45a66b:c185a640-df4c-4709-ad4e-acb5e84d24de</guid><dc:creator>Iain Richards</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Dunno, I&amp;#39;m as mystified as you. I don&amp;#39;t see why an external organisation is needed to curate an investigation of the profession&amp;#39;s ethics, when we are a self-regualting profession. It&amp;#39;s interesting to see that there is a plan for a survey, quite what was wrong with the previous one I don&amp;#39;t know (ignoring the leading questions).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>