In August 2017, Georgina Bretman was found guilty of causing unnecessary pain and suffering to her two-year-old dog Florence by injecting the animal with insulin, causing the dog to suffer from hypoglycaemia, collapse, convulsions and seizures, for which it needed immediate veterinary treatment to avoid coma and death.
Following her conviction, Miss Bretman was sentenced to a Community Payback Order, with a requirement to carry out 140 hours of unpaid work. An order was also made to take Florence away from her and to ban her from owning a dog for two years.
At the VN Disciplinary Committee hearing, Miss Bretman admitted the facts as contained within the charge against her and the Committee found the charge proved.
The Committee went on to consider whether the charge rendered Miss Bretman unfit to practise.
The Committee heard from Miss Bretman’s counsel, Mr O’Rourke QC who indicated that Miss Bretman accepted that her conviction rendered her unfit to practise as a Registered Veterinary Nurse. The Committee found Miss Bretman’s actions in deliberately administering a poisonous substance to Florence thereby risking Florence’s death to be “very serious and deplorable conduct on the part of a veterinary nurse, a member of a profession specifically entrusted to look after and care for animals.” It also took into account the fact that Florence needed urgent veterinary treatment to avoid death and that Miss Bretman was in a position of trust over Florence as her owner.
Stuart Drummond, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "Miss Bretman’s conduct was also liable to have a seriously detrimental effect on the reputation of the profession and to undermine public confidence in the profession. The fact that she was a veterinary nurse was made clear at the trial and reported in the press. The Committee considered that members of the public would be rightly appalled that a Registered Veterinary Nurse had committed an offence of this kind.
The Committee was satisfied that this conduct fell far below the standard expected of a Registered Veterinary Nurse and that Miss Bretman’s conviction was of a nature and seriousness that rendered her unfit to practise."
The Committee then heard oral evidence from Miss Bretman in which she explained that she had always been passionate about working with animals and working in the veterinary profession and how she enjoyed her work as a veterinary nurse with a particular interest in hydrotherapy and rehabilitation.
She spoke about the devastating effect of the incident and the shame that was ‘brought down on her head’. She told the Committee that she had been suspended from her job and, since her conviction, had not worked as a veterinary nurse.
However, Miss Bretman said that, while she accepted and respected the verdict of the court, her stance remained that she had not done what was alleged and now hoped to rebuild her career as a veterinary nurse. She accepted that the offence of which she had been convicted was very serious, particularly for a veterinary nurse.
In considering Miss Bretman’s sanction the Committee took into account the aggravating and mitigating factors. Aggravating factors included the fact there was actual injury to an animal, that it was a pre-meditated and deliberate act against an animal for whom she was responsible, the fact that a medicinal product was misused, a lack of insight and a lack of remorse.
In mitigation the Committee took into account the fact she had no previous disciplinary history, had received positive references and testimonials and that, following the conviction, she demonstrated a willingness to be removed from the Register and to not work with animals to avoid causing embarrassment to the RCVS.
Stuart Drummond said: "The Committee was of the view that the nature and seriousness of Miss Bretman’s behaviour, which led to the conviction, was fundamentally incompatible with being registered as a veterinary nurse. The conduct represented a serious departure from professional standards; serious harm was deliberately caused to an animal; the continued denial of the offence demonstrated a complete lack of insight, especially in regard to the impact of her behaviour on public confidence and trust in the profession. In light of these conclusions, the Committee decided that the only appropriate and proportionate sanction was removal from the Register.
"In reaching this decision the Committee recognised the impact this was likely to have on Miss Bretman, which was unfortunate given her young age and her obvious passion for a career as a veterinary nurse. The Committee had considered with care all the positive statements made about her in the references and testimonials provided. However, the need to protect animal welfare, the reputation of the profession and thus the wider public interest, outweighed Miss Bretman’s interests and the Committee concluded that removal was the only appropriate and proportionate sanction. The Committee determined that it was important that a clear message be sent that this sort of behaviour is wholly inappropriate and not to be tolerated. It brought discredit upon Miss Bretman and discredit upon the profession".
The Committee then directed the RCVS Registrar to remove Miss Bretman’s name from the Register. Miss Bretman has 28 days from being notified of the Committee’s decision to submit an appeal.
The Disciplinary Committee of the RCVS has refused an application for restoration to the RCVS Register by Dr Janos Nemeth, who had previously been found to have fraudulently registered with the RCVS and struck off.
At the original hearing, in February 2009, Dr Nemeth - the holder of a veterinary science degree from the Szent István University in Budapest, who had practised in the Wokingham area of Berkshire - was found to have dishonestly entered his name in the RCVS Register using a forged document (a Certificate of Membership and Good Professional Behaviour from the Hungarian Veterinary Chamber). The Disciplinary Committee at that time found the evidence that the document was a forgery to be "overwhelming" and concluded that Dr Nemeth had been lying to them about his knowledge of the forgery. It directed that his name should be removed from the Register.
Dr Nemeth lodged an appeal against this decision with the Privy Council, but then took no further steps. Accordingly, the Privy Council dismissed Dr Nemeth's appeal and he was struck off in October 2009.
On lodging his application for restoration, Dr Nemeth had asserted he was not guilty of the original charge. The Committee was disappointed with this aspect of Dr Nemeth's application saying that he would be "well-advised to demonstrate some insight into the seriousness of the original findings."
The Committee emphasised that a finding of dishonesty against a member of the College is "one of great seriousness and never made lightly" and accepted that it may be considered "fundamentally incompatible with being a veterinary surgeon."
Questioning Dr Nemeth, the Committee was further disappointed to learn that he had not made himself more familiar with the RCVS Guide to Professional Conduct, or made a greater effort to keep up to date with veterinary practice in the UK, or provided documentary evidence of attendance at continuing professional development (CPD) meetings.
After considering all the facts presented to it, including the severe personal and financial impact on Dr Nemeth of his removal from the Register, the Committee was not satisfied that he was fit to be restored and did not consider it in the public interest to grant his application.
Acknowledging she could not bind a future Committee as to any further application for restoration by Dr Nemeth, Committee Chairman Mrs Caroline Freedman advised: "Dr Nemeth should provide supporting evidence where possible, including records of CPD, testimonials from other veterinary surgeons or employers, or a more incisive knowledge of the Guide to Professional Conduct. We would remind Dr Nemeth that the onus is on him to establish his fitness to be restored to the Register."
The Disciplinary Committee of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons has postponed judgment on sanction for 12 months in the case of a Hampshire veterinary surgeon found guilty of serious professional misconduct for cumulative failures to provide adequate professional care, and insufficient regard for animal welfare whilst treating a dog.
At a hearing which concluded last Thursday, Peter Ardle MacMahon MRCVS faced a six-part charge after working as a locum for Vets Now at North End in Portsmouth where, on the night of 14/15 July 2009, he treated Wilfred, a Cocker Spaniel who had ingested broken glass along with raw mince.
The Committee found that, having decided that surgery was an appropriate treatment, Mr MacMahon had not removed the glass identified on a radiograph. Nor had he even superficially searched the stomach contents he had evacuated to check that a large piece of glass he had previously identified on the radiograph had been removed. He had also not taken adequate steps to prevent contamination of Wilfred's abdominal cavity prior to the incision to the stomach.
Mr MacMahon admitted he knew there had been considerable spillage of stomach contents into Wilfred's abdomen. The Committee found that, with this knowledge, for Mr MacMahon to use only 250ml of fluid to lavage the abdomen was inadequate. This contributed to the Spaniel developing chemical peritonitis which might have developed into septic peritonitis but for a second operation the next morning, after the dog had been returned to the care of his usual veterinary practice. The Committee also expressed concern that Mr MacMahon had failed to effectively communicate the abdominal contamination to Wilfred's usual vets when he was handed back into their care.
Taken as individual allegations, these would not, in the opinion of the Committee, constitute serious professional misconduct. However, the Committee was of the view that, taken cumulatively, the charges were proved, and therefore the treatment given to Wilfred, fell far short of the standard to be expected in the profession.
When considering mitigating and aggravating factors, the Committee accepted that Mr MacMahon and the veterinary nurse assisting him were unfamiliar with the premises in which they were working, resulting in a difficulty in locating important equipment, and there were also multiple urgent cases during the evening the operation took place. The Committee also noted that 17 months had passed since the operation, and no further complaints against Mr MacMahon had been received by the RCVS.
The Committee further took into account that Mr MacMahon had little recent experience, having returned to practising veterinary medicine in January 2009, following almost ten years spent outside the veterinary profession. During this hiatus he undertook no continuing professional development (CPD), and completed only a five-week period of supervised practice prior to re-entering the profession.
Mrs Caroline Freedman, Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee said: "The Respondent placed himself in this situation: he knew that he had been out of practice for ten years, had not done any formal CPD during that time and chose to accept an appointment to work as a locum in a sole-charge out-of-hours emergency clinic. A foremost aggravating factor is that animal welfare was adversely affected. A non-critical patient was placed at risk by the Respondent's failures."
The Committee reiterated that the purpose of sanctions was not to be punitive, but to protect animal welfare, to maintain public confidence in the profession and to maintain professional standards. "A postponement of judgment, with suitable undertakings from the Respondent, is the correct course of action," said Mrs Freedman. Mr MacMahon has subsequently signed undertakings relating to CPD in both surgical and medical disciplines, and the Committee has postponed for 12 months its judgment as to any further sanction.
The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons is calling for members to nominate veterinary surgeons and non-veterinary surgeons who merit the award of Honorary Associateship or Honorary Fellowship.
Honorary Associateships are awarded annually to people, not necessarily veterinary surgeons, by reason of their special eminence in, or special service to, the veterinary profession. Council has agreed that these should only be people ineligible for election as Honorary Fellows.
Honorary Fellowships can be awarded to up to three veterinary surgeons in any one year for their service to, or special eminence in, the cause of veterinary science.
Nominees for Honorary Fellowships must be members of the RCVS and have been a member, or held a registrable qualification, for at least 20 years.
All nominations need to include the particular reasons why the honour/award should be conferred, along with supporting statements from two referees, at least one of whom must not be a working colleague of the person nominated.
Nominations must be received by the President, Dr Jerry Davies, by Friday, 2 September 2011.
Members may download the nomination form, or request it from the RCVS Executive Office (0207 202 0761 or executiveoffice@rcvs.org.uk).
Last year a cohort of 1,010 veterinary surgeons responded to the CPD audit, which took place in September 2019 and included a random sample of 658 vets sourced from across all UK postcode areas.
The audit found that 820 (or 81%) of respondents met the annual requirement – a 13% increase from the 2018 audit. This followed a decline in compliance rates from 82% in 2014 to just 68% in 2018.
Amongst veterinary nurses, 79% of respondents were compliant, a 7% increase on last year’s compliance rate and the highest compliance rate ever from a veterinary nursing CPD audit.
Dr. Linda Prescott-Clements, RCVS Director of Education (pictured right), said: "It is fantastic to see that this year’s results demonstrate a significant increase in CPD compliance rates after a number of years in decline for vets and a largely static rate for veterinary nurses and I hope that it is part of a long-term trend towards the professions recognising the value of keeping their clinical and non-clinical skills up-to-date.
"This year we have made a number of changes that should make CPD compliance even easier now, including a clearer and simpler annual CPD requirement of 35 hours for vets and 15 hours for vet nurses, and the 1CPD platform and app which can be signed into through the My Account area and provides the professions with the ability to record, plan and reflect on their CPD."
Further information about the changes to the College’s CPD policy and the 1CPD platform can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/cpd2020.
The 1CPD app can be downloaded through the Apple App Store, Google Play and via the RCVS website at https://onecpd.rcvs.org.uk/accounts/login/
The symposium, which will be held on Tuesday 24 September 2019, at Church House in London, will bring together researchers interested in all aspects of veterinary professionals’ wellbeing and mental health. It will feature plenary speakers from mental health research, including:
Professor Neil Greenberg: Sustaining resilience at work – what does the evidence tell us works?, Professor of Defence Mental Health, Consultant Academic Psychiatrist at King’s College London, Chair of the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ (RCP) Special Interest Group in Occupational Psychiatry.
Professor Alexandra Pitman: The impact of veterinarian suicide on colleagues, Associate Professor in Psychiatry in the UCL Division of Psychiatry and an Honorary Consultant Psychiatrist at Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust.
Professor Stuart Reid: The Mind Matters Initiative – what we’ve achieved so far, Principal, Royal Veterinary College, Chair of the Mind Matters Initiative.
Presentations should be in the format of a 15-minute oral presentation or an A1 poster.
Those wishing to apply should submit an abstract clearly marked ‘poster’ or ‘oral presentation’. The title should be 15 words or fewer. The abstract should include author(s) first name(s), followed by surname(s), institution of affiliation and country. The body of the text should be no longer than 250 words and include: background; clear and explicit aims and objectives, hypotheses or research questions; methods; results; discussion; and conclusion.
All abstracts should be submitted as Word documents to Rosie Allister on rosie.allister@gmail.com no later than 23:59 (GMT) on Friday 19 April 2019.
Applicants will be notified if they have been successful within 14 days of this date. Speakers whose applications are successful will receive complimentary registration for the symposium, not including travel and accommodations costs.
A small number of travel bursaries are available for students, people with lived experience of mental health problems, and people who are unwaged, who would not otherwise be able to attend. For further details, please contact Lisa Quigley, Mind Matters Initiative Manager, on l.quigley@rcvs.org.uk.
The deal includes an option for the College to lease the building for up to two years to give it time to consider its options for the future, and how they may have changed as a result of the pandemic.
The decision to sell the property was made back in November 2018, when Council decided that the building was rapidly becoming unfit for purpose and the College needed more up-to-date and modern facilities with more room for a growing workforce. The College’s Estates Strategy Project Board was tasked with managing the process, chaired by former RCVS President Barry Johnson.
RCVS Treasurer Susan Dawson said: “Council recognised that this deal realised maximum value for the building, especially considering the impact the pandemic has had on property prices in Central London.
“It also provides a very valuable opportunity to reflect on the changing needs of the organisation and the professions and public it serves, and to consider the requirements and different working patterns of the College staff going forwards.
“It is likely that many staff members will wish to continue to work at home more than they did pre-Covid, so the need for pure desk-space may not be as great as we had planned for the 10-15 years ahead. However, the importance of in-person meetings for collaboration, creativity and the maintenance of good corporate culture is not to be underestimated, so our new requirements are likely to be different to that anticipated back in 2018.”
The College says it expects to welcome limited numbers of staff back to the office in June, to work in a socially distanced way, including virtual or partly-virtual meetings.
Changes to working patterns over the coming months will also help inform decisions around future remote working policies and the type and size of building that will best suit the future needs of the College and its workforce.
Would-be candidates in the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeon Council and Veterinary Nurse Council elections are reminded that the nominations deadline is 5pm on 31 January 2013.
Veterinary surgeons need two nominations from veterinary surgeons, and veterinary nurses two nominations from veterinary nurses, to stand in the respective elections.
Veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses not presently on either Council can nominate one candidate each.
Nomination forms, full instructions and guidance notes are available from www.rcvs.org.uk/rcvscouncil13 and www.rcvs.org.uk/vncouncil13.
Six seats are due to be filled on RCVS Council, and two on VN Council. Those elected will take their seats on RCVS Day next July, to serve four-year terms. Council members will be expected to spend at least six to eight days a year attending Council and Committee meetings, working parties and subcommittees (for which a loss-of-earnings allowance is available).
The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons is calling for comment on a draft Performance Protocol, which aims to manage proportionately any justified concerns about the professional performance of veterinary surgeons and registered veterinary nurses.
The RCVS's Preliminary Investigation and Advisory Committees have been working together to develop a new protocol setting out the way in which the College will respond to ongoing performance-related concerns. There is an expectation that veterinary surgeons and RVNs are already regularly reviewing their clinical work in the workplace. This will be reinforced by the new principles-based Code of Professional Conduct, currently being finalised, which is likely to require clinical governance to be part of professional practice for veterinary surgeons and RVNs.
According to the College, the draft protocol is intended to formalise and build on the way it already manages ongoing serious performance-related concerns. It introduces new measures, including supervision and undertakings, to seek to ensure that veterinary surgeons and RVNs take reasonable steps to address any serious performance concerns. This will bring the RCVS into line with other professional regulators and enable a tailored and proportionate response to these cases to protect the welfare of animals and the public interest. The College's current system of offering advice to veterinary surgeons and RVNs will remain for complaints which are closed, because there is no indication of serious professional misconduct.
The College says that according to independent legal advice, such an approach is appropriate and necessary in order for it to fulfil its regulatory responsibilities. The draft performance protocol follows similar legal advice that supported the implementation of the RCVS Health Protocol, and both protocols clarify the College's parallel jurisdiction relating to health and performance-related issues.
RCVS President Jerry Davies said: "When veterinary surgeons and registered veterinary nurses are unable to deal with performance-related concerns, it is important that we are able to provide a supportive framework to oversee remedial steps that are designed to address those concerns and encourage professional development. This is best achieved outside a Disciplinary Committee hearing, if at all possible".
The approved draft protocol is now open for public consultation, and may be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/performance. All comments on the draft should be emailed to Simon Wiklund, Advisory Manager at s.wiklund@rcvs.org.uk by 13 January 2012, with 'Performance Protocol' added to the subject heading.
The feedback received from the consultation will be considered by the Preliminary Investigation and Advisory Committees in January 2012, before being submitted to RCVS Council for approval in March.
The College says it hopes that a performance protocol will form part of the supporting guidance to the new RCVS Codes of Professional Conduct for both veterinary surgeons and registered veterinary nurses.
Free veterinary careers materials are available from the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons for vets going back to school to give careers talks.
Freda Andrews, Head of Education said: "We know that, although veterinary surgeons are busy people, they often say yes when schools ask them to give careers talks. "Since September last year we've responded to around 500 requests for our 'Veterinary Science...for all Walks of Life' careers information. If you are giving a talk, these are well worth a look."
Comprising a printed booklet and a series of short videos available online, the careers materials were produced by the RCVS in collaboration with the vet schools and with government funding. They aim to show the variety both in veterinary work, and in vets themselves, to encourage teenagers from all backgrounds to consider aiming for a career in veterinary medicine. The videos can also be watched on the VetCareers channel on YouTube.
Each video features a vet working in a different field within veterinary medicine, and the brochure contains information about different types of veterinary careers, routes into the vet schools, and the entry requirements. Anyone who is in a position to advise aspiring vet students on the university entry requirements needs to be aware that there are now a variety of different routes into vet school, including options for students with vocational qualifications such as BTEC Diplomas, and pre-entry or foundation years aimed at increasing the diversity of the student population.
A new careers leaflet will also shortly be available from the RCVS to encourage would-be veterinary nurses, and will include the new RCVS Level 3 VN Diploma and the mixed-practice route to qualification newly introduced by the RCVS.
Freda said: "Veterinary surgeons can come from all walks of life - as our careers materials show. It's important that the profession reflects the population it serves and for teenagers to have good advice about veterinary careers and how to get into the profession. So, if you're going back to school to encourage the next generation, then get in touch!"
Free hard-copies of the brochure are available by contacting the RCVS Education Department (education@rcvs.org.uk or 020 7202 0791). An interactive version of the booklet can be found at http://www.walksoflife.org.uk/, and individual videos viewed at http://www.youtube.com/vetcareers.
Mr Samuel had been removed from the Register in 2018 for causing unnecessary harm to numerous animals.
After being tried and convicted of several animal welfare offences alongside his former partner at Leeds Magistrates Court, Mr Samuel was sentenced to 12 weeks’ imprisonment, suspended for 12-months on the condition that he did 150 hours of unpaid work.
He was also ordered to pay a £100 fine and subjected to a disqualification order under the Animal Welfare Act for three years.
Mr Samuel’s application for restoration was based on the facts that he accepted the seriousness of his actions and that he did not challenge the DC’s 2018 decision.
The Committee also heard evidence that since his removal from the Register, Mr Samuel - who had run a first opinion veterinary practice for nine years prior to being struck off - has undertaken 340 hours of work experience with other veterinary surgeons and 20 hours of CPD.
Dr Samuel was represented by Counsel who outlined in his submissions to the Committee how Dr Samuel’s former partner had sole responsibility for the animals and that she was involved in rehoming dogs and cats and that their relationship was ‘stressful’, that this made Dr Samuel neglect his professional obligations, and that Dr Samuel was now in a different relationship and his life had been ‘transformed’ since his conviction.
The College opposed Dr Samuel being restored to the Register.
Ms Curtis, Counsel on behalf of the College, submitted to the Committee that Dr Samuel continued to represent a risk to the welfare of animals and that to allow him to be restored to the Register would undermine public confidence in the profession.
She explained that even though his sentence and Animal Welfare Act Disqualification Order had come to an end, and he was now legally able to own animals, this should not be equated with him now being fit to return to the Register.
Dr Austin Kirwan MRCVS, chairing the Committee, and speaking on its behalf, said: “Where a veterinary surgeon has shown himself to be capable of such indifference to the welfare of multiple animals, there remained, in the Committee’s view, a real risk of that indifference manifesting itself again.
"A registered veterinary surgeon is entrusted with the care of animals, often when they are at their most vulnerable, and sometimes for prolonged periods of time.
"Given the nature of the animal welfare offences committed by Dr Samuel, the Committee considered there would be a real and significant risk to animals if the high level of responsibility and trust that comes with registration were returned to him.
“For a veterinary surgeon, conduct involving neglect of animals is at the highest end of the spectrum of serious professional misconduct.
"For the reasons outlined above, the Committee considered Dr Samuel continued to represent a risk to animal welfare and thus allowing him to be restored to the Register would seriously undermine public confidence in the profession.
"For all these reasons the application to restore Dr Samuel to the Register is refused.”
The Committee’s full findings can be viewed at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
The RCVS has announced that its Professional Standards Advice Team, which offers advice about the Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance, is now trialling extended hours and remaining open until 7pm Monday to Friday.
The trial will last for three months.
The closing time of 7pm was decided by the RCVS Standards Committee because research conducted by both the Society of Practising Veterinary Surgeons and the RCVS determined that this is the average closing time for veterinary practices in the UK.
On average the Professional Conduct Department deals with 7,500 calls a year (which includes calls from veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses looking for advice about professional responsibilities and standards) as well as around 2,000 written requests which are dealt with exclusively by the Professional Standards Advice Team.
Laura McClintock, Standards and Advisory Manager, said: "The aim of the trial is to determine if the profession would take advantage of these extended hours and, therefore, if our team should permanently extend its operating hours to provide a better service to the profession.
"However, it must be remembered that this is not an emergency service but an extension to our standard service and advice during the extended hours will not necessarily be any more immediate than at any other time during the day because it may need further research or input from members of the Standards Committee.
"Prior to launching the trial we also liaised with 10 other UK healthcare and professional regulators and found that our current professional advice service compared favourably to others and that we were providing a more extensive service than many."
The team aims to provide clear, concise and consistent advice to help veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses understand their professional responsibilities and support compliance with the Code. It also distinguishes between professional requirements, legal requirements and suggested good practice and may offer suggestions about how professional responsibilities can be applied in practice.
However, there are some areas on which the team is unable to offer guidance. For example, it cannot offer clinical advice or advice on legal matters such as employment law, maternity rights, or contractual or civil disputes.
Advice is also available for members of the public, for example, to help animal owners understand what they can expect from their veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses.
To contact the team call 020 7202 0789 or, alternatively, email profcon@rcvs.org.uk
The RCVS and the BVA have announced the launch of Vet Futures, a jointly funded initiative designed to stimulate discussion about the future of the profession, and help its members prepare for and shape it.
The initiative will draw on the experience and insight of a wide range of individuals and organisations, including veterinary surgeons and nurses, veterinary bodies, farmers, pet owners and other key stakeholders.
The objective is to understand where the provision of veterinary services is currently heading, whether this is in the best interests of the profession, animal owners and the public at large, and what might be done to shape an optimal future for the veterinary team, keeping animal health and welfare at its heart.
In the project's first phase, independent researchers will gather evidence via focus groups, phone interviews and desk-based research, in addition to the gauging of opinion through events, the internet and social media.
This evidence gathering will be followed by an engagement phase, where the profession will be asked for their feedback on initial thoughts; a period of analysis, where a report will be written by the independent researchers; and, finally, there will be an action phase, where key strategic issues will be identified, together with a clear plan for action from the BVA and the RCVS, as well as other organisations and individuals.
Professor Stuart Reid, RCVS President. said: "The RCVS is implementing a programme of reform to make it a first-rate regulator, but how do we also make ours a first-rate profession, that is resilient and agile enough to meet future demands?
"The Vet Futures project will not just be about horizon-scanning, but getting a fix on those issues over the horizon that we may not yet have considered, such as the use of emerging technologies.
"It's an exciting challenge and I am looking forward to members of the veterinary team getting involved so that, together, we can develop an action plan that will deliver a sustainable future for the profession."
John Blackwell, BVA President, said: "It is no secret that the veterinary profession is changing rapidly and that is why the theme for my presidential year is 'driving change and shaping the future'. It is essential that we come together to map out where we want to be as a strong and trusted profession and identify how we can make that happen.
"On such cross-cutting issues it is appropriate that the two leading professional bodies come together to provide joint leadership for the profession, but we are keen to engage as many individuals and stakeholders as possible. It is designed to be a hugely collaborative project and we want to hear voices from across the whole profession and the whole veterinary team."
The project has a dedicated website www.vetfutures.org.uk where the latest events, reports and publications will be found. There will also be a 'topic of the month' for the duration of the project, with controversial opinion-pieces being posted to stimulate debate from within the profession and amongst animal owners and other stakeholders.
In June the College held a six-week consultation with the profession, asking for opinions on its proposal for an outcomes-based approach to CPD which would concentrate less on hours logged and more on interactive, reflective learning and measuring the impact that CPD has on the individual’s practice and patient health outcomes.
The proposed model for CPD had four key components: planning, doing, recording and reflecting. While an overall majority of the 3,357 people who responded to the College’s consultation agreed with the proposed changes to the CPD requirement, certain elements received less support than others. The lowest amount of support was received for the ‘reflection’ component with 35% of respondents disagreeing with it.
The RCVS Education Committee therefore decided that a pilot of a new outcomes-based approach should be held during 2017 with a group of volunteers, before making a recommendation to Council.
Professor Stephen May, who chaired the Working Group that developed the CPD proposals, said: "Because of the concern voiced by members of the profession responding to the consultation we decided that, at this stage, it would not be appropriate for the RCVS to move straight into this new way of doing CPD but that it would be more appropriate to hold a pilot. The idea is that we will explore some of the concerns around reflection and around the extra time and paperwork that people felt that a more reflective approach may lead to.
"We have taken all these comments into account and are now seeking to work with individual volunteers on this pilot. It is important to note that we are not only looking for volunteers who agree with what we are doing but also those who are apprehensive about it or even some who see it as something they do not support. We want to explore the full range of views and how we can move forward in changing our approach to CPD."
The pilot is expected to be launched in February next year and the College is now looking for volunteers who both support the proposals and have a ‘healthy scepticism’ about them. Volunteers will receive help and support throughout the trial and will also be invited to attend an introductory CPD meeting at the RCVS offices in February.
If you are interested in volunteering, contact Jenny Soreskog-Turp, RCVS CPD Officer, on cpd@rcvs.org.uk.
Further information, including the CPD Policy Working Party’s response to the consultation and the full interview with Stephen May, is available at www.rcvs.org.uk/CPDpilot.
The RCVS Council has announced its agreement with wholesale reform of the College’s governance arrangements to improve the efficiency and accountability of its decision-making processes.
The changes agreed by Council included almost halving the number of Council members and formalising lay and veterinary membership.
Under the proposals approved by Council it would be reduced to 24 members – comprising 13 elected veterinary surgeons (constituting a majority of Council), six appointed laypeople, three members appointed on behalf of the UK veterinary schools and two veterinary nurses. There would also be the option to appoint an additional member on behalf of any allied professions that RCVS Council may choose to regulate as associates of the College.
Professor Stuart Reid, Senior Vice-President of the RCVS and Chair of the Governance Panel that developed the recommendations, said: "I am delighted that Council so fully supported our proposals for a new structure. The new composition will ensure that both veterinary nurses and laypeople have a guaranteed place at the Council table, as well as maintaining a majority of elected veterinary surgeons and important input from the veterinary schools.
"The proposal recognises the unique nature of the RCVS and will allow us to expedite our decision-making process, making us more fleet of foot and better able to respond to the needs of the profession and the public. It has also been constructed to allow Council to evolve its position, ensuring it remains relevant into the future. If all goes well we hope that the changes could come into force as soon as March 2017."
Liz Cox, the Chair of VN Council, particularly welcomed the changes in respect of veterinary nursing representation on RCVS Council, adding: "It is an historic decision for veterinary nurses and one that has been long awaited. It is only right that those who work so closely alongside veterinary surgeons in practice should have a direct input into regulation that affects us all."
Council’s approval of the recommendations was the culmination of two years of debate and consultation with the profession and other stakeholders. This included a formal consultation by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) last year which garnered 52 responses – including from the British Veterinary Association - most of which were supportive. Different options for reform had, in turn, been developed by a Governance Panel, chaired by Professor Reid, which was set up by Council in March 2015 to consider various options.
Defra will now run a short informal consultation to provide those who responded to the initial consultation the opportunity to comment on the proposed reforms. If no issues are raised Defra officials will seek approval from the Government to proceed with a legislative reform order (LRO) to make the necessary changes to the Veterinary Surgeons Act.
This LRO will be scrutinised by parliamentary committee and voted on in both the House of Commons and House of Lords. Once this has been passed there will be a three-year transitional period, agreed by Council members, during which Council’s numbers would be gradually reduced.
In her opening address, Mandisa said: "When the College was founded in 1844, it would have been unthinkable that a woman, let alone a black woman, would become President of the institution one day. I am immensely proud of this achievement and, while it clearly demonstrates progress, there is still plenty to do in widening access to our professions.”
She said she hoped to use her position as President to act as a role model to young people from under-represented groups, to encourage them to consider careers in veterinary surgery, and to support those already in the profession.
Mandisa, a graduate of the University of Edinburgh in 2008 and an elected member of RCVS Council since 2014, added: “I also take the Presidential baton from Niall to champion a more diverse and inclusive profession with renewed intention, and look forward to playing my part in our upcoming Diversity & Inclusion Action Plan.
“As recent weeks and the Black Lives Matter movement have highlighted, there is more to be done, and we are committed to doing the work necessary. It is essential that we support all members of the veterinary team to work in an environment that is free from discrimination and racism.”
In another first at the RCVS AGM, Matthew Rendle became the first male veterinary nurse to chair VN Council.
The RCVS has launched a research project into the extent to which veterinary surgeons are able to meet its requirement that steps are taken to provide 24-hour emergency cover.
The College's 24-hour Emergency Cover Working Party (24-7 WP) has been considering the ongoing practicality of the current requirement in the Guide to Professional Conduct, and whether it should remain, be removed, or be amended in some way. The research aims to build a sound evidence base on which a decision can be made.
"Changes in practice profiles and owner demands, health and safety issues, the desire for an improved work-life balance, veterinary and animal density... all these factors affect the ability of veterinary practitioners to meet our 24-7 requirement. The Working Time Regulations - which prescribe maximum working hours and minimum rest periods - have also affected practices' ability to run out-of-hours services," according to RCVS President Jill Nute.
"However, we are frequently reminded by members that the profession is proud to offer a 24-hour emergency service to animals and their owners. There seems to be no single majority view in the profession, so we need to understand exactly how people are meeting the requirement before any changes are made," she says.
To ensure that the research is independent and representative, the RCVS has contracted a specialist market research agency, Cognition Market Intelligence.
The first step is to build a robust and unbiased questionnaire that takes account of all of the issues. To this end, in-depth interviews will be carried out over summer with a small number of veterinary surgeons from a range of different practice types, and across different gender/age/role categories.
The 24-7 WP will then meet in September to hear the findings and agree the questionnaire, which Cognition Marketing Intelligence will then use during autumn as part of a quantitative phone interview exercise with 440 veterinary surgeons, again covering a spread of individuals, practice types and geographies. The phone interview approach will ensure that the views of a range of different practitioners are heard, which is not always the case with a paper survey.
Should changes to the Guide to Professional Conduct be recommended by the Working Party on the basis of the findings, a consultation exercise may be undertaken.
The RCVS President has sent a letter to all home-practising members to explain the activities. She has urged veterinary surgeons to assist the research team, saying "your contribution will make a difference".
ViVet (derived from the Latin word ‘vivet’ meaning ‘it will thrive’) will, says the College, provide a variety of resources and support to help the professions keep pace with change and remain at the forefront of animal healthcare provision.
Chris Tufnell, RCVS Senior Vice-President, helped develop the scope of the ViVet programme during his presidential year. He said: "This is an ambitious project for the College to embark upon but also very important for the future relevance and survival of the professions. Technology in the animal health sector is developing rapidly, such as the growth of telemedicine, wearable and implantable devices to gather health-related data from our animals, and low-cost genomic sequencing.
"These technologies could have a disruptive effect on the veterinary sector, so it’s important to encourage and support veterinary input at an early stage to enable the professions to shape their development and ensure that animal health and welfare is a foremost consideration.
"ViVet will help veterinary professionals to engage proactively with innovation in animal health, so that they can embrace and drive change and are not side-lined by it."
The Vivet website (www.vivet.org.uk), which was launched simultaneously at the College's inaugural Innovation Symposium in London today, contains a number of resources to showcase new technologies and innovative business models.
Anthony Roberts, Director of Leadership and Innovation at the College, said: "The aim of these resources is to help veterinary professionals harness the immense opportunities that innovation can bring to animal health and welfare by providing practical advice on areas such as launching new products and services and, in turn, encourage innovators to think about how the expertise and knowledge of the veterinary professions could input into new technologies.
"Furthermore, the programme will also help the College gain insights into the animal health market and how it is evolving. This will allow us to develop a regulatory framework that is relevant and adaptable to 21st century technology, while continuing to foster and support responsible innovation."
ViVet will also continue to organise events like today’s live-streamed symposium, which brought together thought-leaders from across the animal health, technology and business sectors, and provided a forum to discuss the opportunities and threats presented by innovation in the veterinary sphere, the impact it may have on the professions and how they are regulated.
Further details about the RCVS Innovation Symposium, including the full programme and speaker profiles, are available at www.rcvs.org.uk/innovation. Videos of speakers and a written report of the proceedings will be available from www.vivet.org.uk in due course.
A project which aims to standardise the assessment of veterinary nurse practical training across Europe will have life beyond its pilot phase, thanks to European VN training network, Vetnnet.
The announcement was made in September at an Oslo-based conference to mark the conclusion of the pilot phase of the Pan-European Practical Assessment System project (PEPAS).
During its two-year pilot, the Leonardo da Vinci-funded project developed 111 new stations for Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), including mark-sheets and examiner notes, and trained over 50 veterinary nursing examiners from eight countries across Europe. The new OSCE stations have been trialled across 250 students by seven European veterinary nurse schools.
Vetnnet has now committed to continuing the project, enabling its members to access the OSCEs and associated training.
The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons was a main project partner in the pilot, with specific responsibility for training and quality assurance of the system. Victoria Hedges, RCVS VN Examination and Higher Education Quality Manager said: "It's great that the hard work put into the project by so many countries will continue to bear fruit.
"Feedback in Oslo was excellent and it was heartening to see that when examiners' marks were compared across countries, standardisation was very good. The feedback also helped us to see where students were not achieving the desire results, indicating where more training is needed."
See www.vetnnet.com for more information.
The interviews give an insight into the career advice the interviewees got from their school, what steps they took to secure their place to study for their qualification, what hurdles they had to overcome and what can be done to address issues around the under-representation of some groups within the profession.
The College says the aim is to help inspire school age children to consider a veterinary career through frank conversations with role models who have chosen a vet or vet nursing career.
The first film is an interview with Rheanna Ellis, a 2021 Nottingham Vet School graduate who is now working as a veterinary surgeon at a West Midlands practice. In her interview she talks about her passion to become a vet from a young age, how she went about researching and preparing for her job, and the importance of perseverance.
To help promote the videos and the College’s ongoing work on diversity and inclusion, the RCVS has partnered with the official Black History Month campaign and website which will also be hosting the videos.
Many of the interviews have been carried out by Mandisa Greene, RCVS Senior Vice-President, who helped lead the RCVS Black History Month activities last year as the College’s first ever black President.
Mandisa said: “It’s important that we demonstrate commitment to diversity and inclusion and have a role in acknowledging and accentuating diverse voices within the professions. Throughout these video interviews I’ve had the opportunity to speak to some inspiring newly qualified and student veterinary professionals who are all clearly very passionate about supporting animal health and welfare.
“I hope that school children from all backgrounds who watch these videos will get the chance to see how rewarding and enjoyable a veterinary career can be and that they’ll be inspired to consider becoming a vet or vet nurse in the future.”
The RCVS will be publishing more video interviews on its YouTube channel through October and beyond.
The RCVS reports that its alternative dispute resolution (ADR) trial is now nearing completion with over two-thirds of its target number of cases either resolved or in process.
The year-long trial, which began in November 2014, aims to gather the evidence needed to develop a permanent scheme which would provide a way of adjudicating on concerns raised about a veterinary surgeon that do not meet the RCVS threshold of serious professional misconduct.
The aim of the trial, which is administered by the independent, not-for-profit Ombudsman Services, is to make determinations on around 100 cases in order to gather information about types of concern, time taken to resolve disputes, recommendations and how likely each party is to accept recommendations. As of this week some 72 cases have been referred to the trial scheme, with final decisions made in relation to 54 of these cases.
RCVS CEO Nick Stace was responsible for pushing forward the trial believing that “what is good for the consumer is good for the profession”. The College also says it brings it into line with a European Union Directive on alternative dispute resolution which, while not legally binding, specifies that regulators and other ‘competent authorities’ should have consumer redress systems in place.
Nick said: “The majority of cases are either being determined in the veterinary surgeon’s favour or finding that they need take no further action in order to resolve the dispute. Where recommendations have been made in favour of the client, the suggested remedies have generally been for a small goodwill payment to be made.
“However, the trial has not been without some frustrations so far. The fact that participation in the trial is entirely voluntary has meant that, in many cases, members of the profession have chosen not to take part.
“With this in mind, it is very important to stress the benefits of the trial to the profession – chiefly that many of the vets who chose to take part have had their actions exonerated by Ombudsman Services in a way that a concern being closed by our Professional Conduct Department does not. For clients, where a vet does have a case to answer, it gives them the chance to seek recompense without having to resort to legal action.
“Regardless of which way the decision goes in any of these cases, participating in the trial can bring these often long-standing and burdensome disputes to a close.”
The trial will continue to run until the end of October and a full report and recommendations will be presented to RCVS Council at its meeting on Thursday 5 November 2015. Full details of the trial and its parameters can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/adr
At the June 2017 meeting of RCVS Council, members decided to look into two models by which paraprofessionals working in the veterinary, animal health or related fields, might be regulated by the College under powers granted by the RCVS’s Royal Charter in 2015.
The first was an accreditation model, which would involve the RCVS accrediting an organisation which would regulate the profession in question. The second was an associate/ full regulation model, in which individual paraprofessionals would receive a similar level of regulation to that already received by veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses.
At its January 2019 meeting, RCVS Council agreed to proceed with both proposed models of paraprofessional regulation, with the suitability of each model being considered on a case-by-case basis, depending on the nature of the profession applying for recognition.
Paraprofessions whose work will need to be underpinned by Schedule 3 reform would need to apply for the associate model, as the RCVS would be required to be directly responsible for the register of any individuals undertaking such minor acts of veterinary surgery.
Two paraprofessional groups that have already expressed an interest in being regulated by the College, namely meat inspectors and animal behaviourists, will now be invited to apply for associate or accredited status.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar, said: "This is a very significant decision by Council to open up a pathway to related paraprofessions to apply to become regulated by the College.
"It is difficult to give a time-frame at this stage as to when these particular professions will be brought on board, as we will have to go through a process of developing a number of new regulatory structures including registration, education and investigation and disciplinary, as well as the appropriate governing bodies for each of the professions.
"However, we are very pleased that the Association of Meat Inspectors (AMI) and the Animal Behaviour and Training Council (ABTC) have expressed an interested in being regulated by the College and we look forward to working with them to make this happen."
David Montgomery, President of the ABTC, said: "The ABTC enthusiastically welcomes the news that the RCVS is expanding its influence to include paraprofessionals. We look forward to exploring the opportunity to demonstrate the professional status of ABTC-registered Animal Trainers and Behaviourists by coming under the regulatory umbrella of the RCVS for the benefit of animal welfare."
Ian Robinson, a Trustee of the AMI, said: "The Association of Meat Inspectors welcome the news that the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons intends to invite paraprofessionals to be regulated under the ambit of the RCVS. We believe it will offer enhanced security, opportunity and status, and we look forward to further dialogue to explore the various models in due course."
The College says it is also in touch with a number of other paraprofessional groups, including those representing animal musculoskeletal practitioners and equine dental technicians, about the future of paraprofessional regulation. However, before such professions could become associates, there would need to be reform of the Veterinary Surgeons Act in order to remedy some of the deficiencies of the current legislative regime and make sure that these groups have appropriate legal underpinning for their work. This, says the College, complements ongoing discussions on changes to the legislative framework to bolster the role of veterinary nurses.
On particular issue that the College says the new proposals are designed to remedy is that of equine dental procedures being carried out by well-trained but nevertheless unregulated paraprofessionals. Neil Townsend, Chair of the British Equine Veterinary Association’s (BEVA) Allied Professional Committee, said: "Change to the current situation, where legislative enforcement is impossible, horse owners are confused, and horse welfare is compromised, is long overdue. BEVA is really pleased that the RCVS has listened and is supporting a proposal for regulation of all equine dental procedures. We hope that Government will act."
RCVS President Amanda Boag, said: "This is a real milestone in the history of the RCVS and represents quite possibly the biggest change to our regulatory role since the introduction of the Register of veterinary nurses in 2007, and should Schedule 3 reform be achieved it would be the most significant change since the role of veterinary nurses was first recognised in law in 1991. It is particularly befitting for our 175th anniversary year, as it demonstrates we are an organisation that can evolve to meet the changes occurring in the wider veterinary and animal health sector and use our regulatory experience and expertise to ensure that animal health and welfare and public health is safeguarded in different, but related fields of endeavour."
The full approved paper regarding the review of the minor procedures regime and paraprofessional regulation can be found on the RCVS website at: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/policy/veterinary-legislation-review/
The RCVS has announced that this year, for the first time, it will accept debit card payments from veterinary surgeons who are renewing their registration.
The annual renewal fee should be paid by 31 March. Those who have not paid by 30 April will be charged an extra £35 to renew their registration while those who have not paid by 31 May will be removed from the Register.
Corrie McCann, RCVS Director of Operations, said: "Following feedback from the profession, this year, thanks to a change in our registration regulations, we are able to accept debit card payments which we hope will make the renewal process much easier and more convenient for our members. Furthermore, members will also no longer be charged if they choose to pay their fee by credit card."
Veterinary surgeons will also need to confirm their registration details (including their correspondence and registration addresses), confirm that they have met the RCVS requirement for continuing professional development of 105 hours over a three-year period and disclose any new or previously undisclosed convictions, cautions or adverse findings.
Another change is that vets will now have the choice of either home or work as their registered address (in the past, only work addresses were allowed).
The annual renewal can be completed by returning the form that has been sent by post or by logging into the 'My Account' area of the RCVS website (www.rcvs.org.uk/login) using the security details that have been sent to all MsRCVS.
Any members who have not received their annual renewal form or security details for the 'My Account' area should contact the RCVS Registration Department on 020 7202 0707 or registration@rcvs.org.uk as soon as possible.
Those with queries about paying the annual renewal fee should contact the RCVS Finance Team on 020 7202 0733 or finance@rcvs.org.uk
The panel, chaired by veterinary ethicist Professor David Morton CBE, was established last year on a trial basis as a means of offering an ethical review process for practice-based research projects that may not have the same access to resources as clinical studies in academia or industry.
Since its establishment at the end of July last year it has received 23 applications, mostly concerning small animal clinical studies. However, due to demand from the profession, it will shortly be considering applications for equine or farm animal-based research and will be recruiting new panel members to cover these areas.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar, said: "Although the number of cases considered so far have been relatively small, the service has been very well received as a means of providing ethical review to those who might not otherwise be able to do so and so, therefore, might struggle to get papers published.
"Considering the importance of practice-based research we expect there to be an increase in the number of applications as word gets out about the service and so are happy to extend the trial for another year and for it to consider a wider range of applications."
Further details about the Panel, as well as guidelines for making applications and the application forms, can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/ethics
For an initial discussion about submitting an application to the Ethics Review Panel, contact Beth Jinks, Standards and Advisory Officer, on 020 7202 0764 or ethics@rcvs.org.uk
Mr Dobson was struck off in 2021 after the DC found that he'd carried out an act of veterinary certification after being removed from the Register for non-payment, failed to have professional indemnity insurance in place and failed to respond to requests from the RCVS about these things.
Mr Dobson submitted a restoration application by email at the start of June, but then didn't reply to any further correspondence from the College, didn't provide any detail supporting his application, didn't attend the hearing and didn't contact the RCVS to explain why.
The Committee decided to go ahead with the restoration hearing in Mr Dobson's absence.
It decided that although Mr Dobson's email on 2nd June 2023 did suggest that he accepted the original findings for which he was removed from the Register, there was not enough evidence of remorse or insight into the the failings which led to him being struck off in the first place, or that he had attempted to keep his continuing professional development (CPD) up-to-date or that, if restored, he would pose no risk to animal health and welfare.
Paul Morris, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Disciplinary Committee will only restore the name of the applicant veterinary surgeon to the Register where the applicant has satisfied it that he or she is fit to return to unrestricted practice as a veterinary surgeon and that restoration is in the public interest.
“The Committee’s real concerns about this application and this applicant are that it has before it no evidence of any value or substance to satisfy either of these criteria.
"There is no basis on which the Committee could conclude that the applicant is fit to return to unrestricted practice.
"In turn, there is no basis on which the Committee could conclude that it is in the public interest that this applicant’s name be restored to the Register.
“It is of importance to the profession and to members of the public that restorations to the Register should only occur when the applicant has established by clear evidence that the criteria which are set out in the public documents produce by the College have been satisfied.”
He added: “Having regard to the above criteria and its findings on them, the Committee considers that it remains the case that the protection of the public and the public interest requires that his name be not restored to the Register and therefore refuses this application.”
www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary