View all veterinary jobs
The snappily titled "Veterinary Educator Training in Mental Health Integration and Nurse Development (VET-MIND) project" is led by Dr Faye Didymus, Reader in Sport and Performance Psychology, and Dr Jackie Hargreaves, Senior Lecturer in Sport and Exercise Psychology, both of whom are based at the Carnegie School of Sport at Leeds Beckett University.
VET-MIND builds on a previous Mind Matters-funded research project from Dr Didymus and Dr Hargreaves in 2023 that explored how mental health and wellbeing is integrated into the Student Veterinary Nurse curriculum, in order to produce a set of evidence-based recommendations for how mental health education could be improved.
The new three-year project takes the recommendations from the previous research with the aim of upskilling veterinary nurse educators in further and higher education on how to integrate mental health principles into their curricula.
The £40,000 funding will be used to design mental health training webinars, deliver interactive training to VN educators in higher and further education and evaluate the impact of learning over time.
Julie Dugmore, RCVS Director of Veterinary Nursing, said: “By equipping educators with practical tools and the confidence to integrate mental health principles into everyday teaching, the project supports more responsive, reflective, and psychologically informed learning environments.
“This benefits not only educators, but also students, who gain vital self-efficacy and wellbeing skills that strengthen their readiness for professional practice.
"The project provides evidence-based guidance that enhances curriculum design, supports learner welfare, and contributes to developing a future workforce that is both clinically competent and mentally resilient.”
www.vetmindmatters.org/research
The RCVS has released a short film animation to help raise awareness among the general public of the vital role played by registered veterinary nurses in animal care and treatment.
The video has been released to coincide with the BVNA National VN Awareness Month which is particularly significant this year as it is not only the organisation’s 50th anniversary, but also coincides with the new RCVS Royal Charter recognising veterinary nursing as a fully regulated profession.
The animation aims to explain to the general public what registered veterinary nurses do, the education and training that they go through to gain their status and what it means to be part of a regulated profession which abides by a Code of Professional Conduct.
The video also tackles the fact that, currently, ‘veterinary nurse’ is not a protected title, meaning that it is not illegal for someone to call themselves a veterinary nurse even if they do not have the requisite training and qualifications and are not registered with the RCVS. This is something which the RCVS, in partnership with the BVNA and British Veterinary Association (BVA), will be raising with MPs and Peers when Parliament reconvenes after the General Election.
Kathy Kissick RVN, Chair of VN Council, said: “It is important that the public understand that veterinary nurses are not ‘junior vets’ but that they complement the work of veterinary surgeons and enhance animal health and welfare in different ways.
“The video, for example, sets out the role that veterinary nurses play in providing care, in educating pet owners on issues such as diet and welfare and in carrying out medical treatment and minor surgery delegated to them by a veterinary surgeon.
“I would encourage all veterinary nurses, as well as vets and other veterinary professionals, to share this video on social media and with their clients so that they can find out more about the profession and understand how crucial it is that we secure protection of the title. Having untrained and unqualified people calling themselves veterinary nurses is not only misleading but potentially detrimental to animal health and welfare.”
More details of how to support the protected title campaign can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/vntitle.
As well as YouTube, the video is also available on the RCVS Facebook page (www.facebook.com/thercvs) and on twitter via the hashtag #vntitle.
For more details on what the BVNA will be doing for National VN Awareness Month, please visit www.bvna.org.uk/news/veterinary-nursing-awareness-month
The Committee has been named after the Supplementary Royal Charter 2015 which broadened the functions of the RCVS and allowed for a more flexible approach when dealing with complaints about professional conduct.
The Charter Case Committee can resolve cases where the conduct of a veterinary surgeon or nurse has fallen far below the level of conduct expected of them, but not so far as to warrant a full, public Disciplinary Committee hearing.
The Committee can deal with such cases without the need for a public hearing and can give veterinary surgeons or nurses either a confidential or a public warning about their future conduct.
A warning issued by the Charter Case Committee does not affect the individual’s registration status or their right to practise.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar, said: “The establishment of the Charter Case Committee plays a vitally important role in balancing our statutory role of upholding professional conduct standards and protecting animal health and welfare and public confidence in the professions, with our mission to become a compassionate regulator.
“The Charter Case Committee Protocol allows for the alternative resolution of certain cases where a veterinary surgeon or veterinary nurse has engaged in behaviour that amounts to serious professional misconduct or has been convicted of an offence, but where it is not in the public interest for the matter to be referred to a hearing of the Disciplinary Committee because it is at the lower end of seriousness.
“The type of cases we envisage being dealt with by the Committee are those where the Code has been breached but where there is no ongoing risk to animal welfare or public confidence, and where the level of insight and personal reflection regarding their conduct is such that it can be resolved without the need for an onerous, stressful and expensive Disciplinary Committee hearing.
"We estimate that the CCC will deal with around 20 such cases per year.
“The most serious cases of professional misconduct will, of course, continue to be referred to Disciplinary Committee hearings.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/who-we-are/committees/charter-case-committee.
Matthew's address looked at the significance of 2021 as veterinary nursing’s Diamond Jubilee – representing 60 years since the first RCVS-approved Auxiliary Nursing Assistant course.
He spoke about how this was likely to be a year of firsts for the profession, including the awarding of the first Certificates in Advanced Veterinary Nursing, the recruitment of the first VN Practice Standards Scheme Assessors and the first time there would be 20,000 veterinary nurses on the RCVS Register.
He also spoke about the planned activities to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee including webinars, podcasts and the publication of an eBook about the history of the profession.
Matt said: “For my own first podcast I interviewed Jean Turner who – I don’t think she’ll mind me saying – has been a member of the profession for a good chunk of the last 60 years.
“She’s a real professional hero of mine and I had a fascinating conversation with her about what has changed, what hasn’t changed and what really needs to change!
“Speaking to Jean reminded me that we all stand on the shoulders of giants. Where we are as a profession is down to those who came before us and we owe it to them, and future generations of veterinary nurses, to make sure we are always progressing and improving.”
Matt said that with RCVS Council’s adoption of the proposals for legislative reform in June this year, the veterinary nursing profession had a bright future ahead of it, with protection of title and a bolstered role in areas such as anaesthesia being included in any future legislation.
“I still sometimes hear my veterinary nursing colleagues refer to themselves as ‘just a veterinary nurse’. Whenever I hear it said, I challenge it.
“With the Diamond Jubilee celebrations this year I think we will be making a very big challenge to that mindset, and it will remind all veterinary nurses that we are brilliant professionals, with a long and proud history and that we are a force for good in society.”
Under the protocol trial, the RCVS can launch private prosecutions against unqualified people practising veterinary surgery or using the title 'veterinary surgeon'.
The College says that where breaches of the Veterinary Surgeons Act cross over to other criminal offences, for example, fraud by false representation, they will be more properly dealt with by the relevant police force.
Local authority trading standards agencies will also deal with issues around, for example, misleading courses that purport to lead to registration with the RCVS but do not; concerns about dog grooming businesses and concerns about dog breeding establishments (other than where there is illegal practice of veterinary surgery by unqualified persons).
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Director of Legal Services, said: “This protocol recognises that there are constraints on the time, resourcing, and budgets of both the police and public prosecutors which means that the pursuit of these breaches of the Veterinary Surgeons Act, both of which carry minor criminal penalties, is not necessarily a priority.
“While we are always willing to work with the police and other agencies to pursue such breaches, the protocol details how we can act independently where appropriate and ensure we are fulfilling our stated ambition to safeguard the interests of the public and animals, as well as the reputation of the professions, by ensuring that only those registered with us can carry out acts of veterinary surgery.
“We would like to manage expectations around this trial period as we will only be launching private prosecutions where they meet the criminal evidential standards of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ and it is judged to be in the public interest to do so.
"We will also be relying on members of the professions and the public to report breaches and provide sufficient evidence to us, as we have no statutory investigatory powers.”
The trial period will last for one year and the College has set aside £50,000 to pursue private prosecutions.
The trial will be overseen by the Disciplinary Committee/ Preliminary Investigation Committee Liaison Committee while decisions on whether to pursue private prosecutions will lie with the Registrar/ Director of Legal Services.
Suspected breaches of the Veterinary Surgeons Act can be reported to the RCVS Professional Conduct Department on breachvsa@rcvs.org.uk.
All RVNs were set an email with a voting link and a unique voter code.
The College says it will be writing to the few veterinary nurses for whom it has no unique email address with further instructions.
There are 3 candidates standing this year and you can now cast your votes for up to two of them by 5pm on Friday 26 April 2024.
The candidates are:
The individual candidate profiles are available to view at www.rcvs.org.uk/vnvote24 where you can also read the candidates’ answers to two questions of their choice submitted by the profession.
The two candidates with the most votes will join VN Council for their three-year terms at the College’s AGM in July.
Any vet nurses who have not received their voting email should contact CES directly on support@cesvotes.com.
The RCVS has released the results of a competition held at BSAVA Congress earlier this month, in which veterinary surgeons, veterinary nurses and other members of the practice team were asked to identify three animals from sound only.
The correct answers were a purring cat, a Chihuahua dog (the breed had to be specified) and a guinea pig.
Of 370 entrants, only 104 (28%) were correct. Some of the more outlandish answers included, for the cat noise: elephant, lion, whale and dolphin; and, for the guinea pig noise: ferret, meerkat, dove, chicken and frog. However, the majority of those getting it wrong were stumped by the requirement to specify the breed of dog, with Jack Russell Terrier or some 'yappy little thing ' proving a favourite.
The winner of the competition was Liverpool-based veterinary surgeon, Anna Rowntree, who won an iPod Nano. She said: "I thought the competition was good fun and a real novelty. It certainly drew me to the stand and was not what I would have expected from the RCVS - it proves they can be approachable! I was very excited to have won and I still can't believe I have."
The noises competition linked to the College's theme for the event, 'Falling on deaf ears?', which examined how the organisation takes account of responses to its consultations, debunking the myth that those who take the trouble to reply are not listened to. The topic was addressed by President Professor Sandy Trees in a presentation on the Saturday of Congress. Visitors to the stand were also given RCVS-branded earphones to reinforce the listening message.
Copies of all three presentations made by the RCVS at BSAVA Congress are now available on RCVSonline (www.rcvs.org.uk/ear_ear). They are:
The RCVS is to embark on a communications campaign over the next few months to raise awareness amongst the general public of the difficulties that vets face in providing out-of-hours emergency cover, and the responsibilities incumbent on animal owners to know what to do in a veterinary emergency.
Emergency cover has been high on the College's agenda for some time.
Over the last 18 months, the RCVS 24/7 Working Party has considered the ongoing desire of vets to continue to offer emergency care 24 hours a day, and the feasibility of delivering this, against a backdrop of the Working Time Regulations, geographical variations in animal and vet density, and increasing practice diversity.
Working Party meetings have been supported by a survey of how vets are currently meeting their 24/7 requirements, a seminar of stakeholders and regular informal polls at RCVS Question Time meetings.
It was agreed at the September 2009 meeting of Advisory Committee, to which the Working Party reports, that the majority of vets remain willing to deliver emergency cover 24/7. Advisory Committee recommended that a communications project be undertaken to help raise awareness amongst the general public and animal owners that although the veterinary profession continues to make this voluntary commitment, EU rules, geography and financial constraints impose some limitations.
This campaign will kick off soon and focus on spreading messages via animal-owner publications and websites. The responsibility of pet owners to know how they can access emergency care for their animal in advance of need will be stressed, as will the fact that in the absence of an NHS for pets, emergency care is a service for which practices must charge a realistic fee (which is likely to be higher than for day-time work).
The campaign will also outline vets' responsibilities as part of the Guide, so the public knows what it can reasonably expect. It would be helpful if practices could ensure they have clear information available on their 24/7 arrangements - as outlined in the Guide - should this campaign stimulate requests from clients.
Jerry Davies, who chaired the Working Party, said: "There is overwhelming opinion within the profession that we must continue to provide round-the-clock veterinary care. The main tenet of the Working Time Regulations is that workers should not have their health or, importantly, skills compromised by unreasonable working patterns. Vets, VNs and the animals they care for deserve the same level of protection.
"However, this legislation has made continuing to provide such care at a reasonable cost to the animal owner a significant challenge. Meeting this challenge will require the understanding and cooperation of the animal owning public.
"If clients can be flexible and accept slightly longer response times, an effective service can still be sustained. The key is for all animal owners to establish, in advance, exactly what will be involved should they need to access veterinary care in an emergency. This simple step will help optimise response times and eliminate the frustration, confusion and inevitable dissatisfaction that may arise if ill-prepared."
Dr Russell, 64, who waived his right to attend the hearing, was convicted in 2023 of three offences: making indecent photographs of a child, possessing 2,280 prohibited images of a child and possessing 109 extreme pornographic images that included moving images that were grossly offensive.
After pleading guilty to making indecent photographs/pseudo-photographs of a child, possessing a prohibited image of a child, and possessing extreme pornographic image/images portraying sexual acts with an animal, Dr Russell was sentenced at Winchester Crown Court to a two-year community order, a 30-day Rehabilitation Activity Requirement, 150 hours of community service and a forfeiture and destruction order of Seagate Drive, Toshiba hard drive and Lenovo tablet.
In addition, he was required to register with the police for 5 years and made subject to a Sexual Harm Prevention Order for five years.
He was also required to pay prosecution costs of £425 and £60 victim surcharge.
Counsel for the College submitted to the Disciplinary Committee that the nature and circumstances of the offences rendered Dr Russell unfit to practise as a veterinary surgeon.
The Committee considered there to be several aggravating factors including, actual (albeit indirect) injury to an animal or child; the risk of harm to an animal or child; sexual misconduct; premeditated conduct; and, that the offences involved vulnerable children and animals.
Neil Slater, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee has reached the conclusion that Dr Russell’s behaviour is fundamentally incompatible with being a veterinary surgeon, namely grave offences of a sexual nature.
"Dr Russell’s behaviour was so serious that removal of professional status and the rights and privileges accorded to that status is considered to be the only means of protecting the wider public interest and of maintaining confidence in the profession.
“The Committee has not taken this decision lightly, and, lest it be misinterpreted, it has not taken it in order to satisfy any notional public demand for blame and punishment.
"It has taken the decision because, in its judgment, the reputation of the profession has to be at the forefront of its thinking and ultimately this is more important than the interests of Dr Russell.
"The decision is not simply based on the fact that these offences were of a sexual nature but because they were repeated over a significant period of time and at a time when Dr Russell must have known, on his own plea of guilty, that what he was doing was wrong.
"Further, the Committee can discern no evidence that Dr Russell has insight into the gravity of the offence he has committed.
"The Committee has therefore directed the Registrar to remove his name from the Register forthwith.”
Dr Russell has 28 days from being notified of his removal from the Register to lodge an appeal with Privy Council.
Specifically, remote assessments will make sure that practices are continuing to meet Veterinary Medicines Regulations, the Core Standards of the PSS and other key standards relating to the practice's accreditation type and level.
Mandisa Greene, RCVS President and Chair of the Practice Standards Group, said: “We have introduced these remote assessments as a means of being able to quality assure veterinary practices that are either in the Scheme or who wish to join it, while still making sure that public health is safeguarded and that the burden our face-to-face assessments may place on practices is reduced.
"All our Practice Standards Scheme Assessors will be trained in carrying out remote assessments, and practices that are due an assessment will be given the full details of how it will work in advance, just like if a physical assessment of the premises were taking place.
"In the immediate-term we will be prioritising those practices that were due assessment visits in March, April and May this year which were cancelled due to the nationwide lockdown and they are currently being contacted to make arrangements. We will then start a rolling programme of visits for the other delayed assessments over the next few months. We will aim to give all practices at least one month’s notice before a visit takes place."
In order to help veterinary teams at RCVS-accredited practices understand the changes and its implications, the RCVS has produced a list of anticipated FAQs containing the details of how remote assessments will work. These can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/practice-standards-scheme/remote-assessments.
Those with any additional enquiries should contact the RCVS Practice Standards Team on: pss@rcvs.org.uk.
RCVS CEO Nick Stace has published a refreshingly candid acknowledgement of recent concerns voiced by the profession on his blog, www.nickstaceblogs.org.
In his post, he gives a firm commitment to listen to the profession, asking just that in return, MsRCVS get more involved in College matters, such as voting in the elections and getting involved in consultations (starting with this one).
Definitely worth reading the full post: http://nickstaceblogs.org/2014/05/06/receiving-you-loud-and-clear/
Mr Ng faced seven charges:
Mr Ng admitted some aspects of the charges against him, including that he had deleted two patient records and that this was dishonest and misleading.
The Committee then determined the facts of the rest of the charges after hearing evidence from witnesses and Mr Ng himself, as well as expert witnesses.
Having considered all the evidence, it determined which elements of the charges were proved, and which were not.
The Committee then considered whether the admitted and charges found proved amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In doing so it considered that the charges against Mr Ng fell into three broad categories – deficiencies in clinical care, deficiencies in record keeping, and dishonesty.
In respect of all three, it found the admitted and charges found proved amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In terms of aggravating factors, the Committee found that Mr Ng’s conduct had directly caused harm to animals and also created risk of further harm, and noted that there were three instances of dishonesty.
Paul Morris, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee noted that there were three instances of dishonest behaviour in relation to clinical records.
"The amendment of the clinical record in the labradoodle’s case was particularly serious.
"This alteration was made at a time when the respondent knew that the owner was dissatisfied with the treatment the dog had received and was complaining about the lack of therapeutic intervention.
"The alteration presented a false account of the owner’s attitude towards immediate therapeutic intervention.
"Conduct of this kind was liable to damage trust in the profession.”
In mitigation, the Committee took into account the sense of pressure Mr Ng felt following a financial dispute with his relative in respect of the veterinary practice, his long career as a veterinary surgeon and the high regard with which he was held by those who provided testimonials on his behalf.
The Committee acknowledged Mr Ng’s assertions that he now understood his failings and his expressions of remorse for the harm he had caused and that these indicated the beginnings of insight.
However, in respect of the clinical deficiencies, the Committee found that various aspects of Mr Ng’s approach to treating conditions such as diabetes and cherry eye were inadequate and out-of-date, and that there was little in his continuing professional development (CPD) record or his statements to suggest he had attempted to improve these deficiencies.
Ultimately, the Committee found that Mr Ng’s conduct was so serious that removal from the Register was the most appropriate sanction.
Paul Morris added: “The Committee has concluded that the respondent’s behaviour was fundamentally incompatible with being a veterinary surgeon.
"In view of the nature and gravity of the Committee’s findings in this case, removal from the Register is necessary to ensure the protection of animals and the maintenance of public confidence in the profession and the regulatory process.”
www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
Miss Herdman faced three charges.
The first was that she indicated to a friend that she would supply diazepam and/or tramadol for use by their husband.
The second was that she supplied diazepam and/or tramadol and/or gabapentin.
The third was that she gave advice on the dosages of diazepam and/or tramadol and/or gabapentin.
Miss Herdman was not present at the hearing and was unrepresented, but the Committee determined that it was appropriate to proceed in her absence as she had been notified, was aware that the hearing was taking place and her absence was voluntary.
However, Miss Herdman had been in contact to indicate her pleas to the charges.
She admitted the intention to supply diazepam and/or tramadol and that she had provided advice on the dosages.
She also admitted that she had supplied diazepam but strongly denied that she had supplied tramadol and/or gabapentin.
Taking all the evidence into account (including messages sent by Miss Herdman and her admissions), the Committee found proven the charges in relation to the intent to supply and the advice on dosages.
The Committee also found proven the charge in relation to the supply of diazepam, but found not proved the charge relating to the supply of tramadol and gabapentin for several reasons, including the fact that the messages sent by Miss Herdman did not point unequivocally to her actually suppling each of the drugs to which she referred.
There was no suggestion that the diazepam was stolen from her place of work.
The Committee found that Miss Herdman’s actions had breached paragraphs 1.5 and 6.5 of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Nurses.
The committee judged that there were a number of aggravating features of Miss Herdman’s conduct, including that she was not qualified or authorised to prescribe medication to animals, let alone to human beings and that providing a controlled drug to a person who was already taking various painkilling medications was reckless.
The Committee also felt that a reasonable and informed member of the public would be very concerned to learn that a veterinary nurse had supplied a controlled drug to a friend for their personal use.
Regarding the sanction for Miss Herdman, Paul Morris, chairing the Veterinary Nursing Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “Drawing all the material together, and considering the matter as a whole, the Committee had to impose a proportionate sanction for an isolated incident of serious professional misconduct which arose out of a misguided attempt to help a friend.
"The conduct in question was entirely out of keeping with Miss Herdman’s usual practice and there is no real risk that it will be repeated.
"However, this case was much too serious to take no further action and no useful purpose would be served by postponing a sanction.
“The Committee considered that a warning or reprimand would not be sufficient to satisfy the public interest as veterinary nurses are trusted by the public to deal with medication responsibly and failure to do constitutes a severe breach of trust.
“The Committee therefore considered a period of suspension sufficient to meet the public interest in maintaining the reputation of the profession and declaring and upholding proper standards of conduct for members of the profession.
“The Committee also considered whether a removal order would be appropriate but concluded it would be disproportionate and that such a step would remove from the profession an experienced, competent and valuable veterinary nurse for no discernible benefit.
“It was decided that Miss Herdman’s registration be suspended for a period of three months – a period which is sufficient to mark the gravity of the misconduct while taking into account the circumstances in which it arose.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings/
The RCVS is reminding all veterinary nurses intending to remain on its List/Register of Veterinary Nurses that it needs to receive any outstanding retention fees on or before 31 December.
The College says it will be writing to all VNs whose fees have not yet been received, and will not remove anyone from the List/Register whose fees have been paid and cleared by 31 December.
You can pay your fees online using the individual log-in numbers on the fee letters sent in October.
If you have mislaid your log-in number, you can email webadmin@rcvs.org.uk, including your full name, date of birth, address on the Register/List, and badge number (engraved on the back of your VN badge). Payments can also be made by bank transfer, using the details from the fee letter. If paying by cheque, please write your name and Register/List number on the back. Cheques need to be received by the RCVS before 21 December, and the payment to have cleared by 31 December. The retention fee for veterinary nurses is due annually by 1 November.
The RCVS is inviting nominations from veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses who are eligible to stand for RCVS Council and Veterinary Nurses (VN) Council, respectively, in next year’s elections.
The College says next year’s elections will not be affected by the current Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) consultation on the College’s governance arrangements and so, as always, six seats will be contested for RCVS Council, while two places are available on VN Council. Successful candidates are expected to serve four-year terms and will take up their places at RCVS Day in July 2016.
The nomination period for both RCVS and VN Councils runs until 5pm on Sunday 31 January 2016. In order to stand, candidates for either Council will need to complete a nomination form, submit a short biography and personal statement and supply a high resolution digital photo.
Each candidate will also need to have two nominators. For RCVS Council candidates, these should be veterinary surgeons who are on the RCVS Register but are not current RCVS Council members; for VN Council candidates, the nominators must be registered veterinary nurses who are not currently on VN Council.
Gordon Hockey, RCVS Registrar, said: "We are looking for committed and motivated veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses who are dedicated to their respective professions and who, through the Councils and their various committees and subcommittees, wish to have direct input in decisions relating to how the College sets and advances standards of education and professional conduct. If this sounds like you then please find out more about standing as a candidate."
Liz Cox, Chair of VN Council, added: "I would strongly encourage all those want to have a say and play a leadership role in veterinary nursing to stand up and be counted and put themselves forward as a candidate. It is a very exciting time to join VN Council as the new Royal Charter has formalised the Council’s powers to regulate education and our professional standards, meaning that the decisions you make can have a very real impact on the profession."
The election period will start around mid-March and run until 5pm on Friday 29 April 2016. Ballot papers will be sent to all registered veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses who are eligible to vote and, during the election period, the College will be sourcing questions from the professions to put to the candidates.
Nomination forms, guidance notes and frequently asked questions for prospective RCVS Council candidates can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/rcvscouncil16. The equivalent documents for VN Council candidates are available at www.rcvs.org.uk/vncouncil16.
Prospective candidates for either Councils are also invited a ‘Meet the RCVS Day’ at the College’s offices in Belgravia House on Tuesday 15 December 2015, where they will have the opportunity to find out more about the role of the College and RCVS and VN Councils.
RCVS President Dr Bradley Viner and Chair of VN Council Liz Cox will also be on hand to answer questions about the duties and responsibilities of members of the respective Councils. Those interested in attending should contact Emma Lockley, Events Officer, on e.lockley@rcvs.org.uk or 020 7202 0773. Reasonable expenses for travel will be reimbursed.
The College points out that there is a new voting platform this year, designed to make it easier to vote online.
The new system includes regular personalised email reminders from Electoral Reform Services which include a link to the voting platform and the ability to log in securely straight away, without having to refer to the ballot paper in order to find the security codes. Using the email address provided the College, veterinary nurses can also ask ERS to reissue the security codes if needs be.
Voting for both of this year’s elections opened on Friday 24 March with an email sent to all those eligible to vote for whom the College holds an email address. Ballot papers have also been despatched to all eligible voters along with booklets containing the candidates’ biographies, contact details and manifestos. Instructions on how to vote online and by post are included with the ballot papers.
Four veterinary nurses are contesting two places in this year’s VN Council elections. Two of these are existing VN Council members eligible for re-election while two candidates are not currently on VN Council. They are:
All votes must be cast, either online or by post, by 5pm on Friday 28 April 2017.
Once again this year the College invited members of both professions to ‘Quiz the candidates’ by putting their questions directly to all those standing for election. Some of the key themes this year included Brexit, complementary/ alternative therapies, the structure of the veterinary industry, out-of-hours work and veterinary nurse remuneration among others.
Each candidate was invited to choose two questions to answer from all those received and produce a video recording of their answers.
These videos, along with biographies and statements for each candidate, are available to view on the RCVS website at www.rcvs.org.uk/vnvote17.
Mr Kane was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, suspended for 18 months in September 2024.
He was also disqualified from driving for two years until he had passed an extended driving test, and was ordered to undertake 200 hours of unpaid work within 12 months, and to pay a victim surcharge of £187.
It was alleged that the conviction rendered Mr Kane unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
From the outset, Mr Kane admitted the facts contained in the charge, but did not accept that this rendered him unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
After the criminal proceedings, Mr Kane wrote to express his deepest regret for his actions and the pain and guilt they had caused, stating that there was not a single day that had passed that he had not thought about the family that was affected by his actions, and the lifelong consequences that they now face.
He went on to express that he understood that as a member of a trusted profession, his conduct must reflect not only his clinical competence, but also his integrity and accountability.
He also noted that he had sought to recognise and address the consequences of his actions and that he is determined to make a positive contribution to society and to the profession.
The Committee found the charge proved on the basis of Mr Kane’s admission and the Certificate of Conviction.
The Committee found a number of factors relevant to the case:
The question for the Committee was whether Mr Kane’s conviction of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, when put into proper context, rendered him unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
This was not a conviction in any way linked to his practise and there was no suggestion that he represented any sort of a risk to animals in his care.
The Committee was not, therefore, concerned with any issues arising out of the need to protect animals, but rather with whether a finding of unfitness to practise was needed to uphold standards of conduct and behaviour in order to maintain public confidence in the profession.
Kathryn Peaty, Chair of the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee took into account the public interest which includes maintaining public confidence in the profession and the regulator and upholding proper standards in the profession.
"The public interest also includes allowing an otherwise competent veterinary nurse to continue in practice, where appropriate.
“Agreeing with the judge that this was indeed an exceptional case, the Committee did not consider that Mr Kane’s conduct was liable to have a seriously detrimental effect on the reputation of the profession and concluded that the public, in full knowledge of the circumstances of this particular case, would not expect a finding that the conviction renders him unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
"Rather, the public would recognise that whilst the consequences were appalling and tragic for the family involved, in terms of Mr Kane’s culpability this was a momentary piece of dangerous driving, categorised by the judge as a ‘mistake’ rather than anything more blameworthy.
“The Committee therefore concluded that Mr Kane’s conviction does not render him unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
"This is not to in any way detract from the catastrophic consequences for the family, but rather is to reflect the context, exceptional circumstances and level of culpability in this case.”
Underlying the plan are three 'Brexit Principles', devised by the College and formally adopted by RCVS Council, which will guide the College’s relationship with the Government during the forthcoming Brexit negotiations.
The College says each Principle is supported by a number of specific policies that the College will lobby for in the coming months, all designed to positively engage with the post-referendum reality and with government policy.
The Principles are:
RCVS Chief Executive Nick Stace said: "It is crucially important for the College and the profession as a whole to think boldly about the post-Brexit future; we cannot expect government to give us all of the answers, instead we must work to find solutions ourselves so as to shape the future of the profession from within."
The College has also asked the Institute for Employment Studies (IES) to undertake research into the attitudes and intentions of all EU-graduated veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses currently working in the UK. They will all have receive a personalised email from IES with a link to this online survey, and their answers will help inform the College’s approach to Brexit. This research will help the College to understand better the impact that Brexit may already be having, how it can support EU veterinary professionals working in the UK, and build an evidence base regarding the potential impact that Brexit may have on the veterinary workforce.
For more information on the College’s Brexit activities, visit: www.rcvs.org.uk/brexit
Louise is the first to receive the Award since it was relaunched in 2015 to make it more leadership-focused and exclusive to veterinary nurses.
Liz Cox, Chair of VN Council, was on the selection panel. She said: "The Golden Jubilee is awarded to members of our profession that actively demonstrate outstanding leadership, commitment to veterinary nursing and play an ambassadorial role. Speaking on both national and international stages Louise O'Dwyer has widely influenced nursing practice in particular with relation to infection control and patient care. She is a true pioneer for veterinary nursing holding, and her passion for pushing our profession forward clinically makes her a most deserving winner of the award."
Louise received the award in recognition of her pioneering role in veterinary nursing, acting as the first veterinary nurse Clinical Director within the CVS Group and the first UK veterinary nurse to be voted on to the US-based Academy of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Technicians’ Board.
She has also lectured around the world and volunteered for several years at the Bella Moss Foundation, worked on a variety of British Small Animal Veterinary Association (BSAVA) Committees, contributed to over 35 journal and magazine articles in the UK, USA and Canada, written three nursing textbooks, and contributed chapters to numerous textbooks in the UK and US.
Fellow veterinary nurse Kathryn Latimer nominated her for the award. In her submission she said: "I feel Louise is a shining example of everything the Golden Jubilee Award encompasses – she has demonstrated exception abilities as a leader, not only to veterinary nurses, but to veterinary surgeons... [and] has demonstrated personal commitment to her personal education, and therefore to patient care, by pursuing a remarkable range of qualifications."
Louise said: "Nursing is about making your mark, about being there for your patients, and for me that’s what my career has been about. It’s a bit of a cliché, but we really are the voice of our patients, and so when people ask me ‘why do you spend so much time with getting extra qualifications?’, it’s really about making sure I’m better able to help my patients.
"As I get older it’s also about educating the next generation of veterinary nurses, helping to train them to do the same and to spread our knowledge and training. Our training is something British vet nurses can really be proud of, and it’s humbling to receive this Award when I know just how many other dedicated, passionate vet nurses are out there, but I am truly grateful that the RCVS, and my colleagues, think that I am a worthy recipient."
Louise will be presented with the Golden Jubilee Award at RCVS Day – the College’s Annual General Meeting and Awards Day - on Friday 15 July. A limited number of tickets are available for veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses. To order these contact Emma Lockley, RCVS Events Officer, on e.lockley@rcvs.org.uk
Last year, a cohort of 1,077 veterinary nurses responded to the request for their CPD records, which took place in June 2019 and which also included a random sample of 761 veterinary nurses sourced from across all UK postcode areas. The audit found that 854 (or 79%) respondents were compliant with the annual CPD requirement – a 7% increase on last year’s compliance rate and the highest compliance rate yet from a veterinary nursing CPD audit.
Amongst vets, 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.
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 RCVS has announced the candidates standing in the RCVS Council and Veterinary Nurses Council elections this year and is inviting veterinary surgeons and nurses to put their questions to them directly for a video reply.
There are eleven candidates standing for election to RCVS Council in 2015. Overall there are six men and five women, which include two existing Council members eligible for re-election and nine new candidates. They are:
Three veterinary nurses are standing in this year's VN Council elections, including one existing VN Council member eligible for re-election. They are:
Ballot papers and candidates' details are due to be posted to all veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses eligible to vote during the week commencing 16th March, and all votes must be cast, either online or by post, by 5pm on Friday, 24 April 2015.
Once again the College is inviting members of both professions to 'Quiz the candidates' by putting their questions directly to all those standing for election. Each candidate will then be invited to choose two questions to answer from all those received, and produce a video or audio recording of their answers. All recordings will be published on the RCVS website on Thursday 19 March.
Vets and nurses should email their question (NB one per person) to vetvote15@rcvs.org.uk or VNvote15@rcvs.org.uk, or post it on twitter using the hashtags #vetvote15 or #VNvote15, respectively, by midday on Monday 9 March.
Gordon Hockey, RCVS Registrar said: "It's important that members of the veterinary professions choose who they want to sit on their governing Councils, so we always try to make the elections as interesting and engaging as possible.
"This year, we hope the provision of short videos, to accompany the usual written information, will encourage people to find out a little more about all those standing for election, and then use their vote."
The Disciplinary Committee heard that Mr Samuel had been convicted of five animal welfare offences at Leeds Magistrates' Court in January 2016. The charges related to causing unnecessary suffering to a number of animals including twelve dogs and four cats, and failing to take steps to ensure that the needs of the animals for which he was responsible were met. The animals were kept at the Armley Veterinary Practice, for which Mr Samuel was, at the time, practice principal.
Mr Samuel was sentenced to 12 weeks' imprisonment suspended for 12 months on the condition he completed 150 hours' unpaid work and paid a fine of £100. He was also ordered to pay costs of £500 and a victim surcharge of £80. He was also made subject to a disqualification order for three years.
Dr Samuel subsequently appealed against his conviction in April 2018. His appeal was dismissed in respect of five of the charges but was upheld in respect of one charge, which, as a result, did not form part of the College’s case.
Dr Samuel declined to attend the hearing in person and was not represented before the Disciplinary Committee. In considering the facts of the charges against Dr Samuel the Committee found them proven.
The Committee then went on to consider whether the proven charges, both individually and cumulatively, rendered Dr Samuel unfit to practise as a veterinary surgeon.
The College’s case was that the convictions concerned animal welfare and therefore went to the heart of his practice as a vet, that Dr Samuel behaved in a manner incompatible with being a veterinary surgeon, that he failed in his core responsibility as a veterinary surgeon to protect and act in the best interests of animal welfare, and that he maintained he had no responsibility for the animals on his practice premises – an assertion referred to as ‘an extraordinary position for a veterinary surgeon to take’.
Ian Green, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "ust as the judgment of the Crown Court and the Magistrates Court had found, the Committee also found that Dr Samuel must have known that the animals were in distress and were in a neglected state. The Committee was sure that Dr Samuel must have been aware of the animals notwithstanding his continued denial. The Committee concluded that Dr Samuel was unfit to practise because of the facts underlying the convictions. Dr Samuel had an overriding duty of care for the animals and to take action in relation to their health and welfare because they were living under the roof of his veterinary practice."
In considering its sanction against Dr Samuel, the Committee concluded that removal from the Register was the most appropriate option. It took into account the fact that the animals were found starving in a cellar without water, that Dr Samuel had not demonstrated insight into the serious nature of his offences, that he continued to deny responsibility and, furthermore, found no evidence that he no longer posed a risk to animals in the future.
Ian Green added: "The Committee decided that the behaviour found proved was fundamentally incompatible with being a veterinary surgeon because in this case there had been a serious departure from standards as set out in the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons…. Furthermore, there had been serious harm caused to a number of animals and a risk of harm to a number of other animals."
Dr Samuel has 28 days from being informed of the Disciplinary Committee’s decision in which to make an appeal to the Privy Council.
The Committee’s full decision and findings can be found here
The two candidates were VN Council Vice-Chair Liz Cox and newcomer Jane Davidson.
Both Liz and Jane will start their three-year terms on VN Council at Royal College Day on Friday 12 July 2019.
Racheal Marshall, Chair of VN Council, said: "First, I would welcome our new VN Council member Jane Davidson who is well-known to many in the profession as @JaneRVN, a prolific tweeter on all things #planetrvn and a powerful advocate for the veterinary nursing profession through her work with the media, including her regular Vet Times blog. I also wish to congratulate Liz who I am sure will continue to be a great asset to VN Council for a further three years.
"However, it is disappointing that there were not enough candidates standing for us to hold an election this year and give the profession the opportunity to exercise their democratic right and decide who they wish to elect. We will be taking stock of the situation over the next few months and considering how we can do more to promote the activities and decisions of VN Council and its members in the hope that, next year, we will see an increase in the numbers standing as candidates."
The Committee had found Dr Elefterescu guilty of serious professional misconduct in relation to a number of charges which covered issues such as dishonesty, poor record-keeping, and failure to carry out adequate clinical examinations.
The full charges and findings of the RCVS Disciplinary Committee can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary.
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council held the appeal hearing in October last year with three Justices of the Supreme Court - Lord Kerr, Lord Carnwath and Lord Kitchin – comprising the Board.
The basis of the appeal to the Privy Council was that the Committee’s findings on the facts of the case were flawed, with his counsel saying that Dr Elefterescu 'strenuously disputes the findings by the Committee of his dishonesty and lack of professional competence and submits that there is no adequate basis for them in the evidence’.
His counsel also told the Board that the Disciplinary Committee’s sanction failed to take into account mitigating factors and that the decision to remove Dr Elefterescu from the Register was disproportionate.
In relation to the appeal against the Disciplinary Committee’s findings on the facts, the Board was not persuaded by any of the arguments put forward on behalf of Dr Elefterescu. These arguments included that the RCVS had failed to call relevant witnesses and had failed to make Dr Elefterescu aware of the significance of some evidential matters, disclosed to him.
In respect of the sanction, the Board was also unpersuaded by the arguments put forward by Dr Elefterescu’s counsel, namely that it was too harsh in its assessment of aggravating factors, did not give adequate weight to mitigating factors, and that it failed to distinguish lack of competence from misconduct.
In its judgment on the arguments put forward by Dr Elefterescu’s counsel, the Board said: "It is the opinion of the Board that these criticisms are not well founded. The Committee considered with care Dr Elefterescu’s proven and admitted conduct in relation to each of the charges and whether it fell below or far below the standard to be expected. It is to be noted in this regard that a number of the charges which were either admitted or upheld were not the subject of any challenge on this appeal.
"Overall, the Committee found that Dr Elefterescu’s clinical failures were very serious, involved failures in the basics of animal care, resulted in animal suffering and involved widespread breaches of the respondent’s [RCVS] code of professional conduct. It also expressed particular concern about its findings of dishonesty, and rightly so. That conduct was, in its view, ‘at the top end’ of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect. What is more, Dr Elefterescu had a lack of insight into his failings and a wholly unjustified confidence in his abilities which constituted an ongoing risk to animal welfare."
"These were findings which the Committee was clearly entitled to make and, in the light of them, the Board is firmly of the view that the decision of the Committee to direct the removal of Dr Elefterescu’s name from the Register cannot be impeached. The Board rejects the criticisms made of the Committee’s reasoning and the conclusions to which it came. The direction that Dr Elefterescu’s name must be removed from the Register was appropriate and proportionate."
The Judicial Committee’s full findings can be found at www.jcpc.uk/cases/docs/jcpc-2018-0060-judgment.pdf.
The course offers practical tips and is also designed to help veterinary professionals understand their obligations under the Code of Professional Conduct when discussing costs with clients.
RCVS CEO Lizzie Lockett said: “Discussions around the costs of veterinary treatment are not always easy and can sometimes give rise to misunderstandings or lack of clarity between clients and veterinary teams.
"We recognise the challenges these conversations present and the pressures veterinary professionals face.
“Meanwhile, the ongoing Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigation has highlighted that animal owners are not always satisfied with the level of information they receive in order to make an informed choice about treatment options.
This course supports the development of veterinary surgeons’ and veterinary nurses’ communication skills so that they can discuss treatment costs more transparently with their clients, helping to reduce potential misunderstandings and build trust.”
The course takes 45 minutes to complete and features an interactive scenario as well as expert video advice from experienced veterinary surgeons.
https://academy.rcvs.org.uk