The RCVS Charitable Trust is seeking two creative and energetic UK-based veterinary students to attend the British Science Festival in Aberdeen from 4-9 September 2012.
The Trust says that the students will be required to use their observations and experiences to help it develop future outreach activities to inform and inspire public audiences about aspects of veterinary clinical practice and research, and will have all their expenses paid by the Trust.
Entrants need to write to the RCVS Charitable Trust to say how they would go about meeting this challenge, ideally giving examples that demonstrate their proven innovative abilities. The deadline for entries is 9 July, after which the entries will be considered by a competition panel who will decide the winners. Entrants must be able to commit to attending the entire festival and to deliver a feedback presentation to the competition panel on 31 October. Entrants should also be willing and able to compile a video diary or blog to feedback their experiences.
Further information and details about how to enter are available at http://trust.rcvs.org.uk/home/. The successful applicants will be announced at the end of July.
The measures agreed by RCVS Council will allow UK-practising members to spread the cost of renewal over three instalments: paying 50% of the full cost by 30th April, 25% by 30th September, and the remaining 25% by 31st December.
Kit Sturgess, Treasurer, said: “We recognise that most veterinary businesses will be seeing a downtown during the coronavirus (COVID-19) lockdown, especially as veterinary practices reduce their workloads to emergency-only procedures or those that can be classed as urgent. Furthermore, we understand that many individual veterinary surgeons will no longer be working, and that this will cause financial difficulties for many vets and their families.
"We appreciate that this is a very difficult time for the profession, and as part of our compassionate approach to regulation we wanted to do our bit to help people manage the difficult financial consequences of the coronavirus crisis, and to help them to return to work as soon as Government advice allows. While fees for veterinary nurses are not due until the end of the year, we will keep the impact of the coronavirus pandemic under review on an ongoing basis.”
Any UK-practising member wishing to switch to the payment-by-instalments system should cancel their existing Direct Debits immediately (the College has already temporarily deferred these direct debits for around 10-14 days to allow time for them to be cancelled).
The College says that any member who does not pay the first instalment of 50% of the total fee by the end of April will need to pay the full amount in one instalment by the end of May. Should they then fail to make this payment, the College would then have to remove their name from the Register.
Those who pay the initial 50% instalment but fail to pay one or both of the subsequent 25% instalments will be moved to the non-practising Register for up to one year. This would mean that they could transfer back to the UK-practising Register without incurring a restoration fee. However, they would no longer legally be entitled to practise as a veterinary surgeon while on the non-practising Register until they had paid the retention fee in full and been transferred back to the UK-practising Register.
RCVS Council also agreed that the higher fee that usually applies for late payments, ie those made between 1 May and 30 May, will not be applied to any category of membership this year.
Members can opt to move to the new arrangements or continue with full payment. Details of how to pay under the new arrangements will be sent to members shortly. Any member who has already paid their fee in full and would like to switch to the payment-by-instalments mechanism should contact the College on refunds@rcvs.org.uk.
Further details about the scheme are available in a detailed Frequently Asked Questions guide via www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus.
COMMENTIt has been argued that at a time when many veterinary surgeons have lost a significant part of their livelihood, the College should have gone further and reduced the renewal fees, at least for the period of time that vets' earning ability is compromised. I'm not qualified to judge whether the College could have afforded that, and a spokesman would only say: "...we have to work within the framework of the legislation and the statutory instrument and, given this, the measures that RCVS Council has put in place is a reasonable outcome and will assist veterinary surgeons who may be struggling during these very tough times."
The RCVS Charitable Trust Library is marking National Libraries Day (4 February) with an open day and prize draws for library users.
The Library is inviting all vets and veterinary nurses - and librarians, staff and students from veterinary schools, other Royal Colleges and university medical schools - to an open day on Friday, 3 February. Free workshops on how to use and search the bibliographic databases will be run by Trust librarians, and those visiting can sign up for a free three-day trial membership. Refreshments will also be provided.
On National Libraries Day, every member of the RCVS Charitable Trust Library will be entered automatically into a draw to win a free 12-month extension to their library membership. Anyone who uses the Trust's Library services between 30 January and 10 February will also be entered into a separate draw for a chance to win a £50 voucher for Trust Library services.
Trust Librarian, Clare Boulton said: "We have an extensive collection of books and online resources useful to vets and VNs, and income from Library members and users helps us to ensure its continuing stewardship. So we're inviting all our users to an open day and holding two prize draws as a way of saying 'thank you'."
The open day will run from 10.30-4pm on Friday, 3 February. Literature search workshops can be booked by contacting Clare Boulton (c.boulton@rcvstrust.org.uk or 020 7202 0752).
The RCVS has appointed Nicola South to the new role of Customer Experience Manager, a new role intended to help improve the experience for vets, veterinary nurses and the public in their dealings with the College.
Nicola said: "I'm extremely excited and proud to be joining the staff at the RCVS, and at such a significant time, just as the First-Rate Regulator initiative is underway, which will lead to a change of focus in how we deliver our services to meet all of our customers' needs. My arrival has been met by a staff made up of extremely dedicated and passionate individuals, and I'm really looking forward to working as a team to deliver an improved customer experience for everyone."
CEO Nick Stace said: "Nicola brings to the College a wealth of customer service experience gained from the hotel and tourism industries. Improving our customer service delivery is a priority, and I am delighted to have Nicola on board who will help to champion these improvements across the organisation."
Nicola joins the RCVS from Orbit Group Ltd, where she was Service Excellence Advisor for the East and South Region.
The symposium will be launched by Dr Leah Quinlivan (pictured right), a research fellow and chartered psychologist at the University of Manchester.
Her talk ‘Evidence-based care for people who have self-harmed: risk prediction, psychosocial assessments, and aftercare’, will outline the importance of improving mental health services for patients who have harmed themselves, via discussion of evidence, policy, and practice for risk prediction, psychosocial assessment, and aftercare.
Leah's talk will be followed by presentations delivered by veterinary mental health researchers from across the UK and Europe.
Topics will include post-Covid wellbeing amongst veterinary professionals, the impact of companion animal euthanasia, workplace stressors and how they change with career stage, and the quality of mental health support received by veterinary nurses.
Lisa Quigley, Mind Matters Initiative project manager, said: “This year, the event promises once more to be a supportive and thought-provoking event, where we can gather to share findings, information and best practice for the good of the professions.
“The recent publication of MMI’s five-year strategy has outlined our recognition that we need to expand the conversation beyond mental health awareness and into looking at more systemic and cultural issues, as well as exploring how the insights gained from research might be implemented in practice.
"These ambitious aims are reflected in the breadth of the talks and presentations at the symposium and so I look forward to hearing more from those who share our values and aims, and to continuing the conversation about how and where we can do more.
“The symposium is very much open to all members of the veterinary team including vets, vet nurses, practice managers and academics."
Tickets cost £45 per person although the event is free for students, people with lived experience of mental health problems, and people who are unwaged, who would not otherwise be able to attend.
www.vetmindmatters.org/events
The questionnaire asks you about your perceptions of the PDP, with a focus on the guidance made available both by the RCVS and where applicable the resources provided by the BSAVA.
The company stresses that the survey is confidential, and results will be reported in aggregate only; no individual will be identified. It takes 5 minutes and the results will be used to help evaluate and improve the PDP in the future.
Graduates who are currently or have recently completed the PDP are invited to share their views on the PDP: http://app.keysurvey.co.uk/f/1141621/9038/
Employers / mentors of veterinary graduates are invited to share their views on the PDP here: http://app.keysurvey.co.uk/f/1141665/288d/
The announcement came in the form of a written statement by the then Home Secretary Sajid Javid to the House of Commons on 23rd July, which said: "The Government is happy to accept all of the MAC’s recommendations on the composition of the SOL and the necessary amendments will be made in the Autumn Immigration Rules changes."
Being on the shortage occupation list means that employers do not need to advertise jobs for veterinary surgeons in the UK for 28 days before advertising abroad (the Resident Labour Market Test). In addition, there are lower visa fees and it provides exemption from the minimum income threshold.
RCVS President Niall Connell said: "Both the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and the British Veterinary Association worked together to ensure this outcome, which will see a lowering of the immigration barriers, for example, in terms of visa requirements, for overseas veterinary surgeons who wish to live and work in the UK.
"We also considered this a vital piece of preparation for the UK leaving the EU, as around half of those registering as veterinary surgeons with the RCVS in a given year are non-UK EU nationals and we would not want to see this vital supply of veterinary talent immediately dry up should ‘freedom of movement’ end when the UK leaves the EU.
"We thank Mr Javid for accepting the Committee’s proposals and congratulate his successor Priti Patel on her appointment and look forward to the decision being implemented. The new Prime Minister pledged on the steps of Downing Street to do more to promote the welfare of animals, and having veterinary surgeons on the Shortage Occupation List will help in our mission to uphold animal health and welfare and ensure that vital veterinary work can continue to get done, whatever happens with the relationship between the UK and the EU."
Mr Paschalidis faced three charges.
The first was that he failed to carry out an examination or vaccinate a dog called Beluga, but made entries in the clinical records for the dog indicating he had.
The second charge was that, on the same day, he failed to carry out an examination or vaccinate a cat called Simba, but made entries in the clinical records for the cat indicating he had, and told a veterinary nurse colleague that he had vaccinated the cat.
The third charge was that the conduct of Mr Paschalidis in relation to the other two charges was dishonest and/or misleading and that he was therefore guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
The Committee found the charges relating to the failure to carry out an adequate examination and vaccinate Beluga and Simba proven.
The Committee also found that Mr Paschalidis had been dishonest and misleading in relation to his clinical records for Beluga.
Although Mr Paschalidis admitted the charge that he had failed to examine Simba, he denied that the record was misleading or dishonest as he said he'd been interrupted by a colleague whilst making the notes, rendering them an incomplete draft.
The Committee found it unproven that Mr Paschalidis had dishonestly made entries in the clinical records for Simba indicating that he had vaccinated him when he hadn’t.
Nor did it find that that Mr Paschalidis had been dishonest in his entries which indicated that he'd examined Simba, instead finding that his conduct was misleading.
However, having found that Mr Paschalidis was dishonest in his recording of his examination/vaccination of Beluga and that he was dishonest in relation to his communication of vaccination of Simba to a colleague, the Committee found that his conduct amounted to conduct falling far below that to be expected of a reasonably competent veterinary surgeon.
The Committee took into account eight testimonials, which were all positive about Mr Paschalidis’ character.
The Committee also noted his Continuing Professional Development (CPD) record, which, from February 2020 to February 2023, totalled over 170 hours.
It also considered that there was no evidence of actual harm to either Beluga or Simba, no evidence of any gains for Mr Paschalidis, and that the episode lasted no longer that one hour.
Against that, the Committee considered the risk of injury to the animals from not being vaccinated or examined adequately and the breach of client trust.
Paul Morris, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee assessed that the conduct of Mr Paschalidis, which included dishonesty, was in the upper middle range on the scale of dishonest conduct as the breaches of the Code of Professional Conduct were committed deliberately and for dishonest reasons, rather than through inadvertence or mistake.”
"The Committee decided that all of the mitigating factors, combined with an absence of any further incidents or similar behaviour having been drawn to the College's attention, alongside the positive testimonials, led it to conclude that the risk of any repetition of similar conduct was reduced such that Mr Paschalidis no longer poses a significant risk to animals or the public."
"The Committee considered that the misconduct found proved was sufficiently serious to require suspension from the Register, which would have a deterrent effect and would satisfy the public interest in this case.
"However, because Mr Paschalidis had continued to work as a veterinary surgeon for two years since these events without complaint and had shown some insight, the Committee decided that a lengthy suspension would not serve a useful purpose and would therefore be disproportionate. "
“The Committee therefore decided to direct that, as a deterrent, Mr Paschalidis’ registration be suspended for a period of six months.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings/
The Codes of Professional Conduct for both veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses stress the need for effective communication with clients and ensuring that informed consent is obtained and documented before treatments or procedures are carried out.
At its January meeting RCVS Standards Committee approved changes to chapter 11 (‘Communication and consent’) of the supporting guidance to the Codes to provide further advice to the professions on matters that should be discussed with clients to ensure informed consent is gained, provide clarification on who can gain consent for a procedure and give some additional guidance on consent forms.
Nick Oldham, Standards and Advisory Manager at the RCVS, said: "We hope that this updated guidance is more accessible, readable and will aid members of the profession in developing a more comprehensive approach to gaining informed consent for treatments and procedures and therefore reduce the risk of miscommunication and misunderstanding which can lead to concerns being raised by clients.
"For example, we have updated our guidance to encourage veterinary surgeons to consider discussing a number of additional factors with a client before obtaining consent. This includes the nature, purpose and benefits of any treatment or procedures, the likely outcomes including potential risks, financial estimates, informing the client when other treatments may have available and checking that the client understands what they are agreeing to rather than assuming the client understands both the potential financial outlay and possible side effects.
"Furthermore, there is now additional guidance for veterinary surgeons on who should be seeking consent. While ordinarily it is expected that the veterinary surgeon undertaking the procedure or providing treatment is responsible for obtaining the client’s consent we know that this is not always practical.
"Therefore we clarify that the responsibility of obtaining consent can be delegated to another veterinary surgeon and, failing that, a registered veterinary nurse or student veterinary nurse could obtain consent provided that they are suitably trained, have sufficient knowledge of the proposed procedure or treatment and understand the risks involved.
"The RCVS Standards and Advice Team is also in the process of producing a series of fictional case studies based on informed consent issues encountered by the College’s Preliminary Investigation Committee which we hope will further help the profession."
The updated supporting guidance can be found in full at www.rcvs.org.uk/consent
The Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance can also be downloaded as an app for smartphones and tablets at www.rcvs.org.uk/codeapp
Members of the profession seeking confidential advice on matters relating to professional conduct can contact the Standards and Advice Team on 020 7202 0789 or advice@rcvs.org.uk
The Royal College is calling for views on the Day One Competences required of newly qualified veterinary surgeons, via an online survey.
The survey can be accessed from the RCVS website (www.rcvs.org.uk/consultations), and can be completed until 31 May.
The College says that the survey is the first step in a review of the Day One Competences, which define the level to be expected of new veterinary graduates when they first qualify. The competences set out in broad terms what is required of new graduates at the end of their veterinary degree, and provide the foundation for curriculum design and student assessment in UK veterinary courses.
RCVS Council member David Catlow, who chairs the Working Party undertaking the review, said: "The Day One Competences are deliberately general as they aim to convey the important principles that all students must master by the time they graduate, regardless of the precise curriculum they have followed, so they are safe to practise in a range of veterinary contexts from day one after they graduate.
"As it is over ten years since these competences were confirmed, we are reviewing them to ensure they remain valid, and to seek to ensure they reflect current and likely future expectations."
The Working Party will report to the Education Policy and Specialisation Committee (EPSC), and includes representatives from the veterinary schools and the British Veterinary Association (BVA), as well as a recent veterinary graduate.
Since being confirmed by the RCVS, the Day One Competences have also been adopted across Europe, through the European Association of Establishments for Veterinary Education (EAEVE), and in countries such as Australia.
Mr Kashiv first appeared before the Committee in December 2016 in relation to four charges against him regarding his inadequate treatment of a Scottish Terrier called Tanzy which was ultimately euthanased due to renal failure.
The first charge related to Mr Kashiv’s original consultation with the owner in March 2015 and his failure to investigate for renal disease; his failure to discuss with the owner investigations to assess metastatic spread; failure to discuss with the owner alternative options to surgery such as palliative care or euthanasia and failure to explain to the owner key factors with regards to the surgery he had suggested to her, including its nature and extent, the risks involved, the fact another vet would be performing the surgery, and what to expect post-operatively.
The second charge related to the fact that, having admitted the dog as an in-patient at the practice, he failed to conduct further investigations regarding her poor condition; provide any or any adequate pain relief, or fail to record the same; failed to discuss with the owner the dog’s poor prognosis and failed to discuss with the owner the option of euthanasia.
The third charge related to the fact that Mr Kashiv discharged the animal back into her owner’s care when she was not in a fit state for discharge. The fourth and final charge related to the fact that Mr Kashiv failed to keep sufficient clear, detailed and accurate clinical records for his treatment of the dog.
At his original hearing in December 2016, the Committee found the four charges proven and also found that charges 1 to 3 amounted to serious professional misconduct. However, the Committee decided to postpone the judgement for two years, whilst recommending that Mr Kashiv agree to undertake a structured programme to improve his clinical practice, including putting together a personal development plan, having a mentor, accepting regular practice visits and undertaking additional continuing professional development (CPD).
The resumed hearing took place on Tuesday 18 December 2018, during which the Committee heard evidence from Dr Writer-Davies MRCVS (the veterinary surgeon appointed to review Mr Kashiv’s practice and report back to the Disciplinary Committee over the two year period), Mrs Somers MRCVS, (his appointed mentor), and Mr Kashiv himself.
Dr Writer-Davies told the Committee that she had no concerns about Mr Kashiv’s abilities regarding patient safety and that, in her view, he now meets the standards of a reasonably competent veterinary surgeon. She cited the fact he had gained in confidence when communicating with clients, had undertaken a considerable amount of CPD focused on the areas of concern identified in the case, that she had observed more detailed record keeping from him and that a veterinary nurse had been appointed to assist in running Mr Kashiv’s practice.
The evidence from Mrs Somers also found that Mr Kashiv’s knowledge was in line with that expected of a reasonably competent veterinary surgeon and that she had observed a good quality of care for pets and their owners from him.
Mr Kashiv also gave evidence, which the Committee said demonstrated considerable insight into his previous conduct and a good attitude towards self-reflective practice. The Committee also felt that the testimonials provided by Mr Kashiv showed him to be a kind and caring veterinary surgeon.
Stuart Drummond, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee considers that, having successfully completed the undertakings, Mr Kashiv is now a safe practitioner. The last two years has allowed Mr Kashiv to develop his skills particularly in the area of communication.
"However, the Committee has not lost sight of the fact that this was a serious case and that there was substantial harm caused to Tanzy.
"The Committee considers that in the intervening two years Mr Kashiv has gained considerable insight, developed better communication skills and remains open to improving his practice. It therefore imposes a reprimand on Mr Kashiv. The Committee considers that a reprimand is the appropriate and proportionate sanction to uphold proper professional standards and to maintain public confidence in the veterinary profession."
Having sold Belgravia House – its Westminster offices since 1995 – to a private investor in March 2021 for £14.5m, RCVS Council agreed the purchase of the new building for £20.5m.
The additional cost has been funded from College reserves.
The new building is a converted Victorian warehouse with open-plan office space spread across six floors.
The new premises are large enough to accommodate more staff and for the College to host more meetings and events.
Alternatively, the space can be used for greater social distancing and hybrid working if needed.
The College says any unwanted space can be rented out.
Two existing tenants will continue to lease office space at the premises for the time being and some refurbishment work will need to be completed before the College and RCVS Knowledge teams can start moving in.
Following Council’s earlier decision to terminate the lease on Belgravia House at the end of March 2022, RCVS staff will continue to work either remotely, or in temporary office space leased from the workplace provider, WeWork, in Chancery Lane.
The College says this arrangement offers a significant saving over leasing back Belgravia House.
Chief Executive Lizzie Lockett said: “Like any property purchase, it has been an extremely long and difficult journey to get to this point, with many challenges to navigate along the way, but I am delighted that we are finally able to announce our new home.
“Whilst we will have to wait a while longer before we can enjoy everything 1-2 Hardwick Street has to offer, we are very much looking forward to welcoming members of the professions to visit our new offices, and being able to host a variety of meetings and new events there for them.
The RCVS has announced that the first members of its reconstituted Disciplinary and Preliminary Investigation Committees have been appointed and will join the Committees from July 2013.
Beverley Cottrell and Catherine Goldie (pictured right) have been appointed to the new Disciplinary Committee (DC), and are retiring as elected veterinary surgeons on Council to take up the posts. Veterinary surgeons Jane Downes and Charles Gruchy, and lay members Stuart Drummond, Ian Green, Chitra Karve and Mehmuda Mian, will also join the DC.
The new Preliminary Investigation Committee (PIC) members will include veterinary surgeons Andrew Ash and William Reilly, plus lay members Penny Howe, Sarah Pond and Elana Tessler.
These new appointments result from a legislative reform order (LRO) made to separate the RCVS disciplinary committees from the RCVS Council. The Royal College says this will improve the independence of the disciplinary process and bring it into line with regulatory best practice.
The LRO came into force on 6 April 2013, and amended the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 (VSA). The VSA now requires that the RCVS PIC and DC are made up of veterinary surgeons and lay members who are not RCVS Council members, and who are appointed independently. The change to the legislation ensures that the same group of people is not responsible for setting the rules, investigating complaints, and adjudication.
The LRO also brings lay people formally into the PIC and will increase the pool of people available to investigate complaints and sit on disciplinary hearings.
RCVS Registrar and Head of Legal Services, Gordon Hockey said: "The LRO fundamentally improves the way the veterinary profession is regulated, and will help to ensure public confidence in our disciplinary processes. I am delighted by the constructive and collaborative working relationship that we had with Defra and the British Veterinary Association (BVA), which has allowed this major reform to be introduced."
To make these appointments, a long-list of lay and veterinary surgeon candidates was put together by recruitment consultants, and a shortlist was referred to an independent selection committee chaired by Sir Michael Buckley and including Christopher Laurence and Dr Joan Martin. The selection committee's choices were then ratified by RCVS Council at the June 2013 meeting.
As part of a transition phase, both committees will also include some Council members; after a two-year period, members of RCVS Council will become ineligible for membership of either committee.
The RCVS has launched the recruitment process for new Practice Standards Scheme (PSS) Assessors, ahead of the Scheme's relaunch in November this year.
The College is looking to recruit 18 experienced veterinary surgeons as Assessors who will work directly with RCVS-accredited practices to help them comply with the Scheme and maintain the highest possible standards of veterinary care.
Successful candidates will be expected to actively assess and inspect veterinary practices at the different PSS accreditation levels - core, general practice and hospital - to encourage continuous improvement; they will work proactively with practice teams to ensure that the Scheme's standards are understood and being worked towards. The College is aiming to recruit Assessors from across the UK who have experience in small animal, equine and/or farm animal practice.
An Open Day will be held at the RCVS on Friday, 12 June 2015, to give prospective candidates more information about the roles. Anyone interested in attending should contact Alicia on 020 7202 0786 or email atAliciaM@rcvs.org.uk. As places are limited, they will be allocated on a first-come, first-served basis.
The recruitment process is being handled by Thewlis Graham Associates. Those interested in applying should contact them for a confidential discussion on 020 7850 4781. The deadline for applications is Monday, 29 June 2015.
Further information about the role, including the candidate brief and application form, is available at www.thewlisgraham.com.
The case was brought by the College after a member of the public raised a 'concern' relating to Mrs Mullen's practice in December 2015. The concern was not pursued by the College.
However, during its initial investigation, the RCVS case manager ascertained that contrary to the requirements of the Code of Professional Conduct, Mrs Mullen did not have PII.
In January 2016 Mrs Mullen was advised by the College that, in order to comply with the Code, she needed to ensure her professional activities were covered by PII or equivalent arrangements.
The matter was considered by the Preliminary Investigation Committee which asked, in October 2016, that Mrs Mullen produce evidence that she was now compliant with the requirement to have PII or equivalent. Mrs Mullen responded in November 2016 confirming that she had not put in place such arrangements.
The case was then referred to the Disciplinary Committee in January 2017.
During the hearing it was determined that, during the relevant time period (from November 2015 to November 2016) Mrs Mullen was practising but did not have professional indemnity insurance in place and therefore was in breach of the Code.
Mrs Mullen, who represented herself, told the Committee that she admitted that she did not have PII. She explained that she was 'ethically and morally opposed to it' as she felt that it did not give fair compensation to claimants and did not know it was a requirement of the Code of Professional Conduct until she was informed by the College in January 2016.
When giving oral evidence as to equivalent arrangements she disclosed that she kept significant funds in a bank account; these were not however specifically earmarked for use in the event of any possible claims, and were also required to pay practice expenses.
In light of evidence produced by the College and her own admissions, the charges against Mrs Mullen were found proved and she was found guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
In coming to this decision Chitra Karve, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The respondent failed to have PII in place for a period of about 12 months as specified in the charges. Moreover, she failed to remedy the situation when advised in January 2016 by the College that she was in breach of the Code and the supporting guidance. This remains a continuous course of conduct, which has still not been remedied. The respondent has chosen not to read the Code, or the supporting guidance, until very recently, in relation to her obligation to have PII or equivalent arrangements in place, and she failed to heed the advice of the College that she must rectify the position."
In considering the sanction the Committee took into account mitigating and aggravating factors. Aggravating factors included the fact that the misconduct was sustained over a significant period of time and that limited insight was shown by Mrs Mullen. While she did begin to display limited insight into the significance of her misconduct, the Committee said that this insight was "hampered by her ambivalence towards the College and the systems that regulate the veterinary profession."
In mitigation the Committee took into account Mrs Mullen’s long and unblemished career and the fact she was a sole practitioner who reported challenging personal circumstances and provided a unique service to a niche group of clients.
However, Chitra Karve said: "The Committee is unable to overlook the Respondent’s lack of commitment to obtaining PII or equivalent arrangements, even after being advised by the College that this was essential. The Committee is aware that a suspension could adversely affect her practice and her clients that she uniquely serves. However the Committee thinks it is necessary to send a clear message to the respondent and the public, that failure to obtain PII or equivalent arrangements is wholly unacceptable."
She added: "Accordingly, the Committee directs the Registrar to suspend the respondent’s registration for a period of two months. The Committee considers that this period of suspension will give the respondent an opportunity to rectify her breaches of the Code in relation to PII… and to reflect upon her attitude towards the College and the appropriate regulation of the veterinary profession."
The Information Commissioner has supported the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' decision not to publish the Overspend Review Group's report (aka the McKelvey Report) in full.
The verdict follows two challenges to the College's decision, one made by the British Veterinary Association and a second by a member of the College.
The College says its original decision not to publish the report in full was based on two sets of external legal advice that to do so would be unlawful under the provisions of the Data Protection Act. However, the College did publish the recommendations from the report (otherwise known as the McKelvey Report), which it says comprise more than half of the total.
The Overspend Review Group was tasked with considering all aspects that relate to the College's budgeting and expenditure processes and to propose lessons that should be learned. It was set up following overspends in two areas: the installation of a new data management system and building development work at the College's premises in London.
RCVS President Jacqui Molyneux said: "This verdict is welcome in that it supports our original decision. But I can appreciate that it may frustrate those members unhappy that they will not see the full report.
"When it was commissioned, it was intended that the report would be published in full; in the event, the document included information that would contravene the Data Protection Act if published. However, I would like to reassure members that the substance of the report was included in the published recommendations, and these have now, in the main, been acted upon."
Questions and answers about the Report, together with the recommendations, can be found here.
The decision was made after Council heard increasing reports that practices have not been keeping records of POM-V parasiticide prescriptions within patient records as has always been required by the VMD.
This created a bit of a problem when the new 'under care' guidance came into force at the start of this month, which requires that veterinary surgeons must perform a physical examination as part of their initial clinical assessment of an animal before prescribing POM-V anti-parasitics.
Failing a record of an existing prescription, that would have meant re-examining large numbers of animals at a time when resources in the profession are already stretched.
RCVS President, Sue Paterson, said: “While it has been both surprising and disappointing to learn of such widespread non-compliance with legislation that has been in place for many years, Council decided to postpone the implementation of this one aspect of our new under care guidance to allow practices additional time to bring their prescribing protocols into line."
The delayed implementation date of 12 January 2024 relates only to the prescription of POM-V anti-parasitics.
The rest of the new under care guidance remains in effect from 1 September 2023
There are nine candidates standing in this year’s RCVS Council election, including five existing Council members eligible for re-election and four candidates not currently on Council. They are:
Dr Linda Belton MRCVS
Dr Niall Connell MRCVS
Mr John C Davies MRCVS
Dr Joanna (Jo) Dyer MRCVS
Professor Timothy (Tim) Greet FRCVS
Professor John Innes FRCVS
Dr Thomas (Tom) Lonsdale MRCVS
Dr Katherine (Kate) Richards MRCVS
Mr Peter Robinson MRCVS
Following the changes made to the College’s governance arrangements last year, after a Legislative Reform Order changing the size and composition of Council was passed by Parliament, there will be only three elected places available for the candidates, as opposed to six in the years prior to the governance changes.
Ballot papers and candidates' details are due to be posted and emailed to all veterinary surgeons eligible to vote during the week commencing 25 March, and all votes must be cast, either online or by post, by 5pm on Friday 26 April 2019.
In order to give the electorate a better idea of why each candidate is standing and ask them for their views on particular issues, this year the College is again inviting members of the profession to 'Quiz the candidates' by putting their questions directly to the candidates. Each candidate will be invited to choose two questions to answer from all those received, and produce a video recording of their answers.
Recordings will be published on the RCVS website and YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos) on the week the election commences.
The biographies and statements for each candidate in the RCVS Council election can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/vetvote19.
Vets should email their question (NB only one per person) to vetvote19@rcvs.org.uk or send it to the College’s Twitter account @theRCVS using the hashtag #vetvote19 by midday on Monday 4 March 2019.
Noelle Lowry, a marathon-running vet from Lichfield has raised almost £2,500 for the RCVS Trust in the London Marathon.
Noelle beat her fundraising target of £1,500, to raise money for the Trust to use in its work to support veterinary education and research, and in providing library and information services.
She finished 4,594 out of the 11,037 women runners in the London Marathon, taking 4 hours and 36 minutes to run the 26.2 mile long course - and beating her time last year in the New York marathon.
Noelle said: "A lot of people chipped in at the last minute - my mum has been organising people back home in Ballymena and my friends and colleagues have all put their hands in their pockets - so a huge thank you to all of them.
"I'm a great fan of the RCVS Trust. It's not one of the big charity brands but the grant funding for veterinary research can really make a difference to animals - and we can all use the library and online resources - so I wanted to give it some help."
Click here for more about the work of the RCVS Trust
RCVS Knowledge says it first identified the need for an open access and easily accessible means of distributing veterinary evidence in early 2014. The concept for a new digital journal was announced at the 2014 EBVM Network Conference, and began with the mission statement of improving front-line clinical standards, funded initially by a donation from the RCVS.
In its first year Veterinary Evidence has published 58 papers which have been downloaded over 34,000 times by an international audience spanning 20 countries. It has also streamlined its submission process and added a range of new tools and resources. The tools include a downloadable submission template and a range of checklists and guidelines to help the practitioner conduct evidence-based medicine.
Looking to the future, the charity says that its website platform will be overhauled later in 2017, so practitioners can find articles quickly and implement their findings in practice.
RCVS Knowledge is now running a survey to find out what topics you'd like to see covered by Veterinary Evidence. All participants will entered into a draw for a new iPad.
Veterinary Evidence is also on the hunt for a new Editor-in-Chief, to move the journal into its next chapter. The Editor-in-Chief will have a passion for EBVM and engaging with the veterinary community and will help provide readers with the content they need. If you’re interested in applying for this role you can view the full job description here.
Changes to the registration procedure for veterinary surgeons, which are being put forward for approval by the Privy Council, have caused some concern in the profession.
Most contentious is the new requirement for veterinary surgeons to confirm their contact details annually, or face removal from the register.
Judging from the remarks in the VetSurgeon forums, many in the profession see this as just another example of bureaucratic-big-brother-pen-pushing-time-wasting (a perception that probably hasn't been helped by the RCVS stating that the change is driven by the need to meet EU Directive 2006/123/EC). Nor would Lynne Hill's remarks have done anything to calm the situation. She said: "If that [the requirement for vets to confirm their address once a year] is beyond the wit and the capability of supposed professional people that we expect to follow a guide to professional conduct, to act as professionals in everything that they do, then I really despair of this profession.
"I do not see anything wrong with the College asking people to confirm their address year in, year out when they make a payment. And if those people cannot be responsible for doing that then they deserve to go forward to be taken off the Register because, if they can't do that, God only knows what else they may well be doing in their professional lives!"
At face value, it's completely understandable why the new regulation was bound to get members' backs up. I mean, the threat of losing your license to practise because you didn't confirm something which hasn't changed anyway. It's a bit extreme isn't it?
The truth of the matter is probably a little more prosaic:
At present, many members pay registration fees by standing order, and may never have updated their contact details. You could argue that it is only right that the authority changed with regulating veterinary surgeons knows how to get hold of them. If a consequence of this is also that the RCVS is able to work more efficiently and cost-effectively (apart from anything else, it shouldn't have to spend so much time tracking down and chasing non-payers), then so much the better.
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has suspended a London-based veterinary surgeon from the Register for six months, having found that her falsification of clinical records amounted to serious professional misconduct.
At the two-day hearing, Dr Nicola Ersilova was charged with, and admitted to, three separate incidences of false and dishonest clinical record keeping following her treatment of a collapsed cat, whilst working at Vets Now in Thamesmead, London.
The Committee heard how Dr Ersilova had suspected that Lafite the cat, belonging to Mr Yingzhan Xiao, had been poisoned, so administered fluids and treated her with Lidocaine. A lay colleague, who was assisting with the treatment, subsequently observed Dr Ersilova standing staring at the cat, which had stopped breathing, then leaving the room to go and speak to Mr Xiao. The lay colleague's evidence confirmed to the Committee that Lafite's heart was still beating at this point, and that Dr Ersilova was then heard telling Mr Xiao that Lafite had died while being treated. The lay colleague later discovered that Dr Ersilova had listed calcium gluconate on Mr Xiao's bill and not Lidocaine and, when she questioned the entry, Dr Ersilova told her she was worried about getting into trouble if she had listed Lidocaine.
Whilst reporting these irregularities to the senior veterinary surgeon at Vets Now, the lay colleague noticed that Dr Ersilova had also written "CPR unsuccessful" in the notes, although she was certain CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) had not been attempted.
During a subsequent Vets Now investigation, Dr Ersilova admitted adding this false information concerning Lidocaine, calcium gluconate and CPR, saying during interview that she was aware it was serious professional misconduct and that she was prepared to take the consequences. Vets Now reported the matter to the RCVS.
The Committee considered that all evidence before it fully supported the charges against Dr Ersilova, that her conduct was clearly dishonest, and that her actions were inexcusable, especially for someone as experienced as she was. It stated that a veterinary surgeon's duty to make only truthful and accurate records was so manifest and well known to veterinary surgeons that there could be no real excuse to make such false, misleading and dishonest entries.
The Committee highlighted the comment by Dr Ersilova that she knew she had done something wrong but did not expect her colleague to report her, as providing no explanation, or excuse, for doing something which she knew to be wrong.
A number of submissions were made to the Committee in mitigation, including that Dr Ersilova had admitted her dishonesty to both her employers and the Committee; had an otherwise unblemished record over 22 years of practice; had received no immediate financial gain by her actions; and, did not cause any animal suffering.
Accepting these submissions, the Committee nevertheless felt it needed to balance them against other factors. Dr Ersilova's decision to falsify the records was premeditated and had not been taken without an opportunity for full reflection. There were numerous entries in the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct that highlighted the importance of professional integrity and accuracy, and, given the importance which the Code attached to the duty of veterinary surgeons to be truthful and honest in all their dealings with their clients, the Committee found Dr Ersilova's conduct to be "most reprehensible".
Speaking on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee, its Vice-Chairman, Professor Sheila Crispin, said: "It is of great importance that the public should be able to retain confidence in the honesty and integrity of members of the profession. Both the public and other members of the profession must be entitled to rely on the truthfulness of what a veterinary surgeon has written in the clinical records of any animal [they have] treated.
"It is [our] decision that the sanction of suspension adequately reflects the seriousness of the [Dr Ersilova's] conduct. The sanction imposed is ... the most appropriate to inform the profession how seriously such dishonest conduct will be taken, because such conduct clearly brings the profession into disrepute and ... cannot and will not be tolerated."
The Committee then concluded that the least period of suspension that could be justified was one of six months.
There will now be significant changes to the RCVS Council, as follows:
A gradual reduction in the number of elected members of RCVS Council from the current 24 to 13 by the year 2021.
A change of composition to include six lay members and two veterinary nurse members. Furthermore, the number of Council members appointed by each university whose veterinary degree is recognised by the RCVS will be reduced from two to one and Privy Council will no longer be required to appoint members. From 1 July 2020 university membership will undergo further changes as, from then on, veterinary schools will collectively appoint three members in total to serve on Council.
Members of Council will no longer be able to serve more than three consecutive four-year terms of office and, after serving three consecutive terms, they will not be eligible to re-stand as a candidate for two years.
Members of Council may be removed from office if they fail to satisfy any conditions about fitness to be a member, as determined by their peers on Council. If removed from office they will not be eligible to re-stand as a candidate for two years.
Introducing the LRO before the House of Lords last Tuesday, Lord Gardiner of Kimble said: "The proposed changes… reduce the size of Council and revise the balance of membership between vets and non-vets, including veterinary nurses and lay persons. They will bring the RCVS in-line with many other modern-day regulatory bodies and allow for greater efficiency, transparency and accountability to both members and the general public. For all the reasons I have outlined today, I commend the use of Legislative Reform Order to make changes that will benefit the veterinary profession."
The full text of the Legislative Reform Order can be found on www.legislation.gov.uk and the full transcript of the debate in the House of Lords can be found in Hansard Online (https://hansard.parliament.uk).
Professor Stephen May, RCVS President, said: "We have been looking at reform of Council as an issue of some urgency since 2013, in recognition of the fact that, with the formula-driven growth of Council, it was becoming unwieldy, which has an impact on the cost of each meeting and the frequency with which it could reasonably meet.
"This reform has been long in gestation and so we are glad that this has now been approved and that we can look forward to a more modern, agile and efficient governance structure, aimed as always at benefitting the professions, animal owners and animal health and welfare."
One immediate impact of the LRO relates to the results of this year’s RCVS Council election as the Ministerial sign-off now confirms that only the first three candidates (in order of number of votes) will take up their four-year terms at RCVS Day on Friday 13 July 2018. These are Susan Paterson, Mandisa Greene and Neil Smith, all of whom are current members who were re-elected.
The RCVS Veterinary Nurses Council agreed reforms to its own governance last year, including shortening the term of office from four years to three years; introducing a consecutive three-term limit for elected members; and, reducing the size and changing the composition of VN Council to six elected veterinary nurses, two appointed veterinary nurse members, two appointed veterinary surgeon members from RCVS Council, and four appointed lay members.
Over 1,200 members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, including around 800 UK-practising veterinary surgeons, have not yet paid their retention fees, and face being removed from the Register if they do not pay before 29 May 2010.
Veterinary surgeons must be registered with the College in order to practise legally in the UK. Retention fees are due by the end of March each year, and the College allows a further two-month period before removing veterinary surgeons from the Register, during which time reminders are issued.
There is still just time for payment to be made by credit card, bank transfer or cheque. Payments cannot be made over the telephone.
Those who have recently changed address, practice address or bank details are urged to check that payments have been properly processed. It is the responsibility of individual members to ensure payment has been made, even if an employer pays the fee. Those whose names are removed for non-payment after 29 May will no longer be able to practise legally in the UK, and would need to pay an additional fee if they wished to be restored to the Register.
Bill Mavir, VDS Chairman said: "Registration with the RCVS is a prerequisite for membership of the Veterinary Defence Society and the provision of professional indemnity insurance."
The RCVS played a proactive role in Mr Keniry’s arrest and trial after its Chief Investigator, Michael Hepper, was alerted to the fact that he was working at a veterinary practice in Taunton, Somerset.
Within 24 hours Mr Hepper reported this to Avon & Somerset Police and attended the practice with officers to assist in Mr Keniry’s identification and arrest. Mr Hepper continued to assist with police investigations and gave a witness statement.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar, said: "We are grateful to the veterinary professional who voiced her suspicions to us, to our Chief Investigator who reacted quickly to confirm his identity and report the matter to the police and to Avon & Somerset Police for taking matters forward so quickly.
"Mr Keniry was known to the RCVS as we have assisted in previous police investigations into him for similar offences. As with recent cases Mr Keniry impersonated a legitimate member of the veterinary profession using fraudulent documentation and this is why we have previously published photographs of him to raise awareness with veterinary practices and to try and stop him being employed in the future.
"We believe that Mr Keniry is a threat to animal health and welfare. He is a repeat offender and so we are glad that he has been handed a significant custodial sentence.
"While sophisticated and convincing fraudsters like Mr Keniry can be very difficult to prevent, we would urge veterinary practices to be vigilant. For example, we recommend that potential employers contact our Registration Department to make checks, always interview a potential employee face-to-face, ask to see supporting identity documents, prepare questions which confirm where and when they studied, obtain references and, if they are employed, mentor the new member of staff to oversee their performance.
"For members of the public we recommend that, if they have concerns about the legitimacy of their veterinary surgeon or veterinary nurses, they talk to someone else in the practice about their concerns or contact us so that we can make further enquiries. Members of the public can also check on the status of veterinary professionals using our Find a Vet search tool: www.findavet.org.uk.
"We would like to emphasise that cases such as that of Peter Keniry are, in our experience, extremely rare. There are around 23,000 veterinary surgeons registered to practise in the UK who are fully trained professionals dedicated to upholding and improving the health and welfare of animals under their care. We don’t believe that the unprecedented actions of this one fraudulent individual should in any way undermine the confidence and trust that animal owners place in their veterinary team."