Dorset-based homeopathic practitioner Philippa Rodale, who requested that her name be removed from the RCVS Register in July, has been convicted of cruelty at Weymouth Magistrates Court.
The case related to Mrs Rodale's treatment of a female foxhound called 'Dangerous', which had been brought to her after being hit by a car.
The dog was reported to the RSPCA by a member of the public who was alarmed after seeing the dog lying in the surgery, whining and dragging her back legs. The court heard that at this point, Dangerous had already been in the care of the clinic for 10 days, during which time Mrs Rodale had administered both homeopathic and conventional treatment, but had failed either to x-ray the animal or give adequate pain relief. In addition, the court heard hygiene and nursing care standards were poor.
RSPCA inspector Marie Griffiths said: "When I found Dangerous she was just lying on a tiled floor with no bedding and only a towel propping up her head, paralysed, and covered in infected pressure sores. She couldn’t even stand up.
"It was a shocking sight and definitely not something that I would ever expect to see anywhere, let alone in a veterinary practice.
"She was clearly in agony and had just not received the level of care and attention that you would expect from a vet. She was suffering so much that sadly a decision had to be made by another veterinary surgeon to do the kind thing and finally put her to sleep.
"The RSPCA exists to protect animals from cruelty and suffering and to defend them when their needs are not being met and we hope that this case goes some way to showing that no-one is exempt from providing animals with the duty of care that they deserve - not only morally, but because it is also the law.”
Mrs Rodale was ordered to pay £4,000 in costs to the RSPCA as well as £520 in court charges and a £15 victim surcharge.
Do you think the RCVS should issue a public statement about homeopathy, and require that veterinary surgeons inform owners about the scientific evidence which demonstrates it is ineffective? If so, visit The Campaign For Rational Veterinary Medicine, and sign the petition.
Picture BNPS
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vets.
I wonder if poor Dangerous had homropathic "treatment"?
Wynne
Ed's note: updated the article to answer your question, Wynne.
Biased as always, coming from you, Arlo! This vet has a record of poor professional conduct in any way possible, so it is not surprising that she cannot treat an animal safely with anything, that includes homeopathy, which takes a lot of training and skill. The title is totally inappropriate, as the vet in question is not a homeopathic vet but a vet - and a poor one it seems. The last encouragement to vote against homeopathy on the strength of this 'article' is unnecessary and with emphasis on a small issue in an obviously poorly judged case of malpractice in any way possible.
Please get the facts right instead of making articles with headlines just for the sake of it.
Sorry Beanolive but how can giving an animal water take 'a lot of training and skill'?
I mean, you might fall over and hurt yourself I guess...
This incident has nothing to do with homeopathy. This vet also gave allopathic medicine. An equally appropriate and misdirected title would have been "Conventional vet convicted of cruelty". If on that basis CAM vets called for all vets to be stopped from working using allopathic medicines no doubt such a statement and bias would get the derision it deserves. As I put in my comment on Vet Times that was trimmed of this point, Arlo, if the shoe was on the other foot and there was a move to restrict the freedom of the press I doubt you'd be supportive of such action or be campaigning to spread support. Beware of tarring all homeopathic vets with the same brush especially when it's not relevant, because if we extrapolate such actions to non-homeopathic practice there wouldn't be any vets left to practice if the majority are damned by the action of 1.
Beanolive, not sure I agree with the description 'biased' (which is defined as an unfair prejudice against something). I'd prefer to think my position on homeopathy is just a rational, informed position. Veterinary surgeons who offer homeopathy commonly describe themselves as homeopathic vets, so it is perfectly reasonable that I do so too. The headline is therefore accurate. Whilst you are right, this case highlighted faults in the animal's conventional treatment, it is a fact that it was treated homeopathically (ie with water) too, which raises an important question about whether the veterinary surgeon elected to prioritise homeopathy (ie administering water) over other, more important aspects of care (such as adequate pain relief or taking an x-ray). We don't know the answer to that question, but I disagree with you that it is a 'small issue'. The degree to which homeopathic practitioners' decision-making may be affected by their belief in homeopathy is important. Finally, the last paragraph does not invite people to sign the petition on the strength of this story. I stand by the story as being factually (and in every other way) correct.
Hi Roger. Thank you for posting. Good to have some criticism from the other side of the fence (I mean that)! To restate the known facts that I have reported: Mrs Rodale was a homeopathic vet. The animal in question was treated both conventionally and with homeopathy. That's all. Personally, I think that raises a question as to whether the veterinary surgeon in question prioritised homeopathic treatment, or allowed their belief in homeopathy to colour their decision-making, but I stayed clear of making any such inference in the story, because frankly, I don't know. Members are not asked to sign the Campaign For Rational Veterinary Medicine on the basis of this story, but it is tangentially relevant, hence the inclusion of the link at the foot. Roger, I would really value the opportunity to engage in a proper, reasonable discussion about the issues surrounding homeopathy with you in the main forums, but quite understand why you might not feel the same!