Is this offensive?

RE: Is this offensive?

Clive Ansell — Sat, 30 Mar 2024 09:59:17 GMT

[quote userid="3169" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244204#244204"]I've been to parts of Kent and "multicultural sh*t hole" isn't an unreasonable description.[/quote]

Not untrue. I've worked in parts of kent and I agree. Could leave out the word multicultural though, were I was working it was mainly feral young male caucasian natives.

Not unique to Kent either, most of the UK is affected.

[quote userid="3169" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244204#244204"]I'm imagining a DC day trip to Thanet.[/quote]

Stop off in the West Midlands on the way, much the same in many parts. I could give you a guided tour.

[quote userid="3169" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244204#244204"]This lady should be entitled to her own opinions [/quote]

Of course, and she is. It is how she has chosen to express them that is the issue here.

RE: Is this offensive?

Michael Woodhouse — Sat, 30 Mar 2024 00:23:50 GMT

[quote userid="8991" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244199#244199"]Ha no probably not, some of my family now live in Kent [/quote]

I've been to parts of Kent and "multicultural sh*t hole" isn't an unreasonable description. I'm imagining a DC day trip to Thanet.

I'm not sure I agree with some of her choices of words I think there are some points worthy of discussion in schedule 2. Brexit was voted through with control of our own borders a major issue. I don't find myself offended, just disappointed that some of the views were not better written and then worthy of discussion.

This lady should be entitled to her own opinions and I'm not sure any of this has any bearing on her fitness to practice. I don't even object to her claiming to be a vet in random twitter posts - that's a million miles from her practising veterinary medicine. I used to pretend I was a hedgehog or small plumber and complete missions on my computer.......

RE: Is this offensive?

David Mills — Fri, 29 Mar 2024 22:02:35 GMT

[quote userid="11249" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244185#244185"]deprived northern town on a Friday night " - only northern towns?!?! [/quote]

Ha no probably not, some of my family now live in Kent and whilst the accent may be different....

RE: Is this offensive?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:17:43 GMT

[quote userid="4181" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244186#244186"] as the defendant admitted the charges as laid;[/quote]

As the defendant often does, because if you defend yourself the DC say you "didn't show insight" so your offence was worse.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244187#244187"]Maybe the code needs changing, to be about bringing the profession into disrepute, rather than what constitutes offence or not. It might be a subtle difference, but I think it's just that little less subjective, and it removes the need for the College to be deciding whether something is or is not offensive. [/quote]

Ye-es, but it still leaves it possible for the College to maintain you are "bringing the profession into disrepute" because of your opinions if they are contrary to the trendy woke opinions of the day. And if a small majority of the DC (DC decisions are made by majority, and no member of it is permitted to issue a dissenting judgment) agrees, you're guilty.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244187#244187"]There's this assumption that if it is on t'internet, the whole world has seen it. In many cases, though, the truth is that hardly anyone has. [/quote]

I didn't realise that. But in this case enough people saw it for there to be one who made an official complaint.

RE: Is this offensive?

Clive Ansell — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:38:20 GMT

[quote userid="8991" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244177#244177"]The RCVS really has no jurisdiction in deciding what is offensive or not, which it appears they have done in this case (haven't read the whole document), but whether it undermines public confidence/trust in the profession.[/quote]

Maybe the case should or should have been passed to the police? they would then decide if any laws could have been breached and press charges, for a court to then decide whether or not she is guilty.

If she is found guility, then, and only then, she could be removed from the register

I don't agree with her posts, and think they would likely offend many people, but along with others I think she has a right to say them (As long as they haven't or don't break any laws)

RE: Is this offensive?

Clare Tapsfield-Wright — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:33:38 GMT

I think it’s a responsibility that as a professional that the college needs to communicate and re emphasise to vet nurses and vets alike. I feel this individual fell into the swamp of social media and illustrates what a complete mire it is . I know ignorance of professional obligations is not an excuse but it’s a lot easier to cock up big style nowadays . Previously you would just be the big loud idiot in the bar

RE: Is this offensive?

Clive Ansell — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:31:46 GMT

[quote userid="11249" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244185#244185"]"deprived northern town on a Friday night " - only northern towns?!?![/quote]

Depends what is meant by "Northern" I live in the West Midlands, so North to London, but someone from Newcastle would call me Southern.

Anyway, don't need to go that far North, Plenty of that type of conversation here in any local bar, or even at work sometimes.

RE: Is this offensive?

Arlo Guthrie — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 17:47:50 GMT

[quote userid="4181" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244186#244186"]Well if the code of conduct guidance includes not peosting offensive material https://www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/advice-and-guidance/code-of-professional-conduct-for-veterinary-surgeons/supporting-guidance/social-media-and-online-networking-forums/ then such is going to be in the remit of the RCVS to investigate/determine[/quote]

Maybe the code needs changing, to be about bringing the profession into disrepute, rather than what constitutes offence or not. It might be a subtle difference, but I think it's just that little less subjective, and it removes the need for the College to be deciding whether something is or is not offensive.

[quote userid="4181" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244186#244186"]if she didn't, I wonder what the decision would have been[/quote]

The same, I would have thought, as she was bang to rights on impersonating a vet and I would say that a lot of those schedule 2 comments would bring the profession into disrepute.

That said, I still wonder how many people actually saw these tweets. It must surely be an important point. There's this assumption that if it is on t'internet, the whole world has seen it. In many cases, though, the truth is that hardly anyone has.

RE: Is this offensive?

Rob Loxley — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:09:26 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244183#244183"]that the DC should surely not be getting into such a grey area as what constitutes offense[/quote]

Well if the code of conduct guidance includes not peosting offensive material https://www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/advice-and-guidance/code-of-professional-conduct-for-veterinary-surgeons/supporting-guidance/social-media-and-online-networking-forums/ then such is going to be in the remit of the RCVS to investigate/determine. Except that they didn't need to decide on this, as the defendant admitted the charges as laid; if she didn't, I wonder what the decision would have been

RE: Is this offensive?

ian bates — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:52:12 GMT

"deprived northern town on a Friday night " - only northern towns?!?!

RE: Is this offensive?

Arlo Guthrie — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:23:48 GMT

[quote userid="25265" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244175#244175"]I'm not sure your press release makes this clear, but the DC doesn't seem to have had an issue with tweets 1, 2, and 8. My guess is they are in there because they make it clear to the public that she is on a regulated register. [/quote][quote userid="25265" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244175#244175"]The report makes it clear that they consider tweets 3-7 and 9-12 either falsely state or imply that Mrs D is a veterinary surgeo[/quote]

I must confess I had not read the full report - I based my story on the College's press release.

In any event, the report doesn't add much. It still beggars the question why the other tweets were included, because I dont think they make it clear that she is on a regulated register, or that this isn't obvious from the context in which it is presented (ie a DC for a regulated professional).

[quote userid="25265" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244175#244175"]The report also makes it clear they consider tweets 9, 10, and 12 to either be offensive or unprofessional. I agree with 9 and 10 as they seem to be directed at individuals. 12 seems pretty tame to me.[/quote]

Whereas I think 9 is pretty tame, and 12 less so. Which kind of takes me back to my point about subjectivity.

I think David Mills point is the important one - that the DC should surely not be getting into such a grey area as what constitutes offense, and consider only whether a comment (s) undermines trust in the profession.

I would argue that calling someone a twit does not. A) it is a pretty minor rebuke and B) I would be highly surprised if more than a very small number of people actually saw the tweet.

Indeed, if you are judging something purely on whether it undermines confidence in the profession, then surely the size of the audience is relevant. You can see how many people have viewed a tweet. Was that taken into consideration in this ruling, I wonder. Because if only three people ever saw the tweet, then its no worse that mouthing of to colleagues about some obnoxious client in the staff coffee room!

RE: Is this offensive?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 02:12:18 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244171#244171"]

Evelyn Barbour-Hill said:
As for the rest, it's supposed to be a free country. Freedom of opinion and therefore freedom of expression (freedom of opinion is valueless without freedom of expression) are fundamental.

Evelyn, yes, but dont you think that it is fair for a profession to require that certain freedoms are curtailed. In the same way as clubs have codes of behaviour.

Put it another way, are you happy with other members of the profession tarnishing your reputation by broadcasting racist views?

[/quote]

That's two separate questions.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244171#244171"]ont you think that it is fair for a profession to require that certain freedoms are curtailed. In the same way as clubs have codes of behaviour. [/quote]

Yes, a profession can and should require that its members behave professionally – to express any opinions they hold in a reasoned and reasonable manner. As far as I can see, it's impossible to do that on Twitter. So maybe veterinary surgeons and RVNs shoudn't be using Twitter at all. Moreover, I believe an awful lot of people read what's on Twitter, indeed often loony, semi-literate or stupid people, and a professional person should consider their audience. I have myself occasionally yelled comments not unlike some of those in the case (you'll have to guess which), at Jeremy Vine on the wireless, or some dimwitted pontificator on Any Questions, but it was in the privacy of my own home. I'd use much more moderate language actually talking to someone..

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244171#244171"], are you happy with other members of the profession tarnishing your reputation by broadcasting racist views? [/quote]

Other members of my profession are entitled to hold any opinions at all and therefore to express them. Whether they tarnished the reputation of the profession would depend upon the manner in which they broadcast them. For instance, if they broadcast them as a private citizen, or as an election candidate, and didn't announce that they were a veterinary surgeon, I see little problem. Moreover, if it were animal welfare they were talking about, it would be very proper to mention that they were a veterinary surgeon – if they held strong views about Muslim slaughter, for instance, or about how travellers mistreat horses at Appleby Horse Fair.

RE: Is this offensive?

David Mills — Wed, 27 Mar 2024 22:57:21 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244170#244170"]

I can't see anything there that is the business of the RCVS, except the ones where she claims to be a "vet" (implying a veterinary surgeon, it is probably fair to assume) . Even there, she is just making the claim (foolishly and unnecessarily) to give weight to her argument; not to induce anyone to allow her to carry out veterinary medicine and surgery, not "for gain" as the lawyers say.

As for the rest, it's supposed to be a free country. Freedom of opinion and therefore freedom of expression (freedom of opinion is valueless without freedom of expression) are fundamental.

[/quote]

Yes I agree with this. However people may respond to the opinions expressed (to me the Schedule 2 ones are pretty awful), they are opinions. If they meet the threshold for "hate speech" (shudder) then it's really a police matter. The RCVS really has no jurisdiction in deciding what is offensive or not, which it appears they have done in this case (haven't read the whole document), but whether it undermines public confidence/trust in the profession.

Although I disagree with her views, quite stridently (not least the inelegance of expression), she does have the right to express them if she so wishes - in fact take a trip to any deprived northern town on a Friday night and these are pretty tame (though it does not make them justified). However there is a lefty moralistic judgement to all this - we do not agree with your views because they are a priori wrong and immoral - a favourite tactic of our comrades when wishing to close down argument. However there is a dangerous inductive step that because we (DC) don't agree, the public don't agree (despite several pointers to the opposite) therefore you are guilty of bringing the profession into disrepute. I suspect if challenged at PC this would be thrown out as there is an unexamined assumption at the core of this which is simply not supportable from a technical regulatory perspective (even though her views some, me included, will find abhorrent).

RE: Is this offensive?

Ben Walker — Wed, 27 Mar 2024 20:33:08 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244163#244163"]It's just that Schedule 1 to me seems to be largely inoffensive, and I wonder if it is concerning that some of them have been cited in the case by the regulator.[/quote]

I'm not sure your press release makes this clear, but the DC doesn't seem to have had an issue with tweets 1, 2, and 8. My guess is they are in there because they make it clear to the public that she is on a regulated register. They also don't claim that most of the Schedule 1 tweets are offensive.

The report makes it clear that they consider tweets 3-7 and 9-12 either falsely state or imply that Mrs D is a veterinary surgeon.

I suspect we can all agree this is true for tweets 3, 4, 11, and 12. I think 5 and 6 clearly imply they are a vet and I can't imagine 9 came up off the back of someone claiming RVNs are too well paid so that seems likely to be a fair judgement. I'm less sure on 7 and 10.

The report also makes it clear they consider tweets 9, 10, and 12 to either be offensive or unprofessional. I agree with 9 and 10 as they seem to be directed at individuals. 12 seems pretty tame to me.

RE: Is this offensive?

Chris Milligan — Wed, 27 Mar 2024 18:17:38 GMT

are unhinged, untrue highly racist comments in a public forum founded on a bedrock of lies by pretending to be a respected professional with public duty offensive? Yes. yes they are.

RE: Is this offensive?

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 27 Mar 2024 18:08:41 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244170#244170"]As for the rest, it's supposed to be a free country. Freedom of opinion and therefore freedom of expression (freedom of opinion is valueless without freedom of expression) are fundamental.[/quote]

Evelyn, yes, but dont you think that it is fair for a profession to require that certain freedoms are curtailed. In the same way as clubs have codes of behaviour.

Put it another way, are you happy with other members of the profession tarnishing your reputation by broadcasting racist views?

RE: Is this offensive?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:33 GMT

As for the rest, it's supposed to be a free country. Freedom of opinion and therefore freedom of expression (freedom of opinion is valueless without freedom of expression) are fundamental.

I suspect that the members of the Disciplinary Committee were, whether they would admit it or not, upset by the opinions expressed. The style of their expression is unpleasant but as far as I can judge is probably inseparable from the nature of Twitter (or whatever it's called).

Having said that, if any nurse of mine used such crude language to their face to anyone who would be directly offended, I might look at it as an instant-dismissal matter (then probably think again and consult a lawyer instead). If the tweeting activity came to my notice (but how would it?) I guess I'd have to gently suggest that it ceased, because it might put people off the practice. Not the opinions, the manner of their expression.

RE: Is this offensive?

Gillian Mostyn — Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:57:30 GMT

I don't think it's so much about the vet having controversial beliefs and therefore choosing not to use them - more that it may directly impact how they treat that particular client and pet.

In your example, imagine being a black person and finding they were a KKK member! You'd wonder if it influenced their decision making.

RE: Is this offensive?

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 27 Mar 2024 13:56:45 GMT

[quote userid="2457" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244160#244160"]I don't think there's anything 'subjective' about a lot of those remarks. They are blatantly hate-filled and offensive.[/quote]

I don't disagree! A lot are just incontrovertibly offensive, and for sure you cant have people representing the profession in that way, and the sentence was appropriate.

I was drawing attention to the bigger picture and the difficulty in judging something as offensive.

Of the 12 tweets in Schedule 1, I wouldn't have considered half of them (1, 2, 6, 7, 8, or 9) to be offensive or unprofessional. Well, maybe calling someone a twit (9) is a bit borderline, but context is important. Likewise 10 is borderline without knowing context.

That leaves 4/5 tweets (3, 4, 11, and 12) where she claims to be a vet, and one where it is a bit ambiguous (5 - she says she trained to be a vet, and we don't know whether she did or not (and didn't complete the course)).

And of those, 3 is not at all offensive, and nor is 4. And I've heard a lot worse than 11 and 12.

For sure, it gets worse and I am not trying to defend her. It's just that Schedule 1 to me seems to be largely inoffensive, and I wonder if it is concerning that some of them have been cited in the case by the regulator.

[quote userid="2457" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive/244160#244160"] If you were one of the ethnic or religious groups she refers to in her tweets, would you want to think she's treating your animal? [/quote]

Interesting ... When I've visited the vet, I cant say that it has even crossed my mind to consider what their personal thoughts and beliefs are. I'm there to get the dog fixed and that is all I am interested in. But you're right, if I thought they were a paid up member of the Klu Klux, I'd take my business elsewhere.

RE: Is this offensive?

Gillian Mostyn — Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:50:57 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive"]And whilst it seems to me quite fair and reasonable that if someone wants to remain a member of a profession, they shouldn't trumpet unprofessional remarks in public, there's something I find a bit uncomfortable about the idea of big brother making a subjective judgement about 'offence'[/quote]

Whilst I agree many of the tweets are just keyboard warrior rubbish, I don't think there's anything 'subjective' about a lot of those remarks. They are blatantly hate-filled and offensive.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/30923/is-this-offensive"](although I think there is a world of difference between having a law which applies to society as a whole, and standard to which members of a profession should stick to.[/quote]

Absolutely. If you were one of the ethnic or religious groups she refers to in her tweets, would you want to think she's treating your animal? Its about her being in a position of trust.