They do defend him, they write about his actions positively and say that many other vets would do the same in the same circumstances. It was probably his attitude towards the case that counted against him, communication with the owners etc, and he hasn't helped himself by ignoring the investigation, but this is not apparent in the judgement, and is instead very alarming for all other vets, day or night.  If we take 90 minutes to reach a patient on a home visit, because we are trying to ensure the standard of care for patients already at the clinic or that may arrive at any time, we risk being struck off? If we try and give advice about moving a patient to the clinc that the RCVS deems inappropriate, we risk being struck off?  It has massive repercussions and needs clarification NOW!

I wonder what the VDS say about this.

They do defend him, they write about his actions positively and say that many other vets would do the same in the same circumstances. It was probably his attitude towards the case that counted against him, communication with the owners etc, and he hasn't helped himself by ignoring the investigation, but this is not apparent in the judgement, and is instead very alarming for all other vets, day or night.  If we take 90 minutes to reach a patient on a home visit, because we are trying to ensure the standard of care for patients already at the clinic or that may arrive at any time, we risk being struck off? If we try and give advice about moving a patient to the clinc that the RCVS deems inappropriate, we risk being struck off?  It has massive repercussions and needs clarification NOW!

I wonder what the VDS say about this.