View all veterinary jobs
Mr Samuel had been removed from the Register in 2018 for causing unnecessary harm to numerous animals.
After being tried and convicted of several animal welfare offences alongside his former partner at Leeds Magistrates Court, Mr Samuel was sentenced to 12 weeks’ imprisonment, suspended for 12-months on the condition that he did 150 hours of unpaid work.
He was also ordered to pay a £100 fine and subjected to a disqualification order under the Animal Welfare Act for three years.
Mr Samuel’s application for restoration was based on the facts that he accepted the seriousness of his actions and that he did not challenge the DC’s 2018 decision.
The Committee also heard evidence that since his removal from the Register, Mr Samuel - who had run a first opinion veterinary practice for nine years prior to being struck off - has undertaken 340 hours of work experience with other veterinary surgeons and 20 hours of CPD.
Dr Samuel was represented by Counsel who outlined in his submissions to the Committee how Dr Samuel’s former partner had sole responsibility for the animals and that she was involved in rehoming dogs and cats and that their relationship was ‘stressful’, that this made Dr Samuel neglect his professional obligations, and that Dr Samuel was now in a different relationship and his life had been ‘transformed’ since his conviction.
The College opposed Dr Samuel being restored to the Register.
Ms Curtis, Counsel on behalf of the College, submitted to the Committee that Dr Samuel continued to represent a risk to the welfare of animals and that to allow him to be restored to the Register would undermine public confidence in the profession.
She explained that even though his sentence and Animal Welfare Act Disqualification Order had come to an end, and he was now legally able to own animals, this should not be equated with him now being fit to return to the Register.
Dr Austin Kirwan MRCVS, chairing the Committee, and speaking on its behalf, said: “Where a veterinary surgeon has shown himself to be capable of such indifference to the welfare of multiple animals, there remained, in the Committee’s view, a real risk of that indifference manifesting itself again.
"A registered veterinary surgeon is entrusted with the care of animals, often when they are at their most vulnerable, and sometimes for prolonged periods of time.
"Given the nature of the animal welfare offences committed by Dr Samuel, the Committee considered there would be a real and significant risk to animals if the high level of responsibility and trust that comes with registration were returned to him.
“For a veterinary surgeon, conduct involving neglect of animals is at the highest end of the spectrum of serious professional misconduct.
"For the reasons outlined above, the Committee considered Dr Samuel continued to represent a risk to animal welfare and thus allowing him to be restored to the Register would seriously undermine public confidence in the profession.
"For all these reasons the application to restore Dr Samuel to the Register is refused.”
The Committee’s full findings can be viewed at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS CEO, said: “It’s clear that there are a number of workforce issues affecting the professions, such as high vacancy rates that employers are struggling to fill and a resultant increase in pressure on the professions in terms of caseload and hours worked, together with an increase in the number of people choosing to leave the professions.
“While many of these issues are long-standing, and due to complex and multifactorial reasons, the scale of the problem has been exacerbated by three things: the UK’s exit from the EU and the impact this has had on overseas registrants; the ongoing impact of the pandemic in areas such as staff absence and burnout; and an increase in demand for veterinary services.
The reports were published in advance of the College's Workforce Summit, held at the end of November to discuss potential solutions to the problems.
They can be downloaded here: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/events/workforce-summit-2021/
A further report of the Workforce Summit is expected in due course, which the College says will include an action plan with commitments from a range of stakeholders.
Chair of the Standards Committee, Dr Melissa Donald, said: “We were very aware of the likelihood that both practice staff and clients will increasingly have to isolate over the coming weeks due to direct infection or positive contacts, particularly with the rise in cases amongst school children.
“Added to this, we know there are already workforce pressures across the profession, which will be exacerbated by reduced staffing levels over the Christmas and New Year period.
“We therefore felt it was appropriate to reintroduce these temporary remote prescribing measures at this time to help relieve pressure on practising professionals, and to provide them with the means to continue to look after the health and welfare of their patients in all circumstances.”
As before, the temporary dispensation is subject to the specific guidance found in FAQ4 (www.rcvs.org.uk/covidfaq4), including that veterinary surgeons must be able provide a 24/7 follow-up service involving physical examination, for example where the animal does not improve, or suffers an adverse reaction, or deteriorates, subsequent to the remote prescription of medicines.
The Committee agreed that the position should be reviewed in February 2022 at its next meeting.
The elections will again be held completely online this year.
Veterinary nurses have until 5pm on Monday 31st January 2022 to put themselves forward as candidates for the elections which will take place in March and April 2022.
The full eligibility criteria can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/vncouncil22, where prospective candidates will also find further information about the role of the RCVS, RCVS VN Council and RCVS VN Council members, guidance notes, and frequently asked questions about standing as a candidate.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer for the elections, said: “We look forward to hearing from prospective candidates and are happy to give further information about what being an RCVS VN Council member means and what the role entails to those who may be considering standing for office.”
Prospective candidates for RCVS Council can also contact VN Council Chair Matthew Rendle for an informal conversation on what it means to be an RCVS Council member on vncchair@rcvs.org.uk
Matthew said: This 60th anniversary year for the veterinary nursing profession has been a time to take stock about how far the profession has come and where it is going.
"One thing I have appreciated is the important role both VN Council and its committees will continue to have in this development process, by making key decisions on areas such as student training and wellbeing, continuing professional development, post-registration qualifications and statuses, and registration of veterinary nurses.
“I would be happy to talk to anyone who might be interested in joining VN Council about its role and how you could contribute both to it, and to the wider profession.”
Anyone interested in the work done by Council can also visit: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/who-we-are/vn-council/vn-council-meetings/ to see the agendas for previous meetings.
Because of the pandemic, the College reduced the number of CPD hours required from 15 to 11 in 2020.
Nevertheless, it's still impressive that 92% of veterinary nurses who had their records audited had completed their CPD.
The data was gathered by the RCVS Education Department, which audited the records of 1,249 RVNs who had been registered and practising without a break for at least three years.
Jenny Soreskog-Turp, RCVS Lead for Postgraduate Education, said: “This is an incredibly impressive CPD compliance figure, especially considering all the challenges that vet nurses faced throughout 2020.
"I want to thank everyone that took part in our audit as this is a really important data source which helps us understand what the profession needs from us to help them complete their CPD.
“I know that sometimes vet nurses are unsure as to what counts towards their CPD target and often they discover that they’ve completed their CPD quota for the year without realising it.
"Things that take place within practice, like formal case discussions, clinical audits and in-house training, all count towards someone’s CPD target.
"If anyone is unsure as to what counts as CPD, I would encourage them to get in touch with the RCVS Education team and we’ll be happy to answer any questions.”
There is also a CPD guidance document available at: www.rcvs.org.uk/document-library/cpd-guidance-for-vns/
There is also guidance, including webinar recordings on topics including Workplace-based CPD and Reflecting on your CPD, available on the RCVS website at www.rcvs.org.uk/cpd
The College sold the premises in March this year, with an option to lease it back for up to two years, giving time for Council to consider the future building requirements of the organisation and how they might have changed following the coronavirus pandemic.
Following easing of government restrictions this summer, the RCVS says that Council members and staff have started using the building for some meetings and day-to-day working, but occupancy has not yet returned to pre-pandemic levels.
RCVS Council therefore agreed at its meeting earlier this month that there is now a clear financial benefit to moving out at the first opportunity under the existing terms of lease.
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS Chief Executive, said: “As we all gradually emerge from the restrictions of the past 18 months, one of the things we, as an organisation, have learned from the pandemic is that we can cope well with remote and hybrid working, whilst continuing to provide a high level of service to the professions and the animal-owning public.
“Retaining the use of our current offices over the last few months has certainly helped us to do this, but our Estates Strategy Group recommended to Council that there was now little to be gained and much to lose financially if we continued to lease Belgravia House for another year.”
“In the coming weeks, we will be drawing up detailed plans for the safe removal and storage of our effects, including the library, historical collection and archives, which are maintained by RCVS Knowledge.
"To support the team until we can move into a permanent building, we will hire serviced office space and meeting rooms around London and elsewhere in the UK as and when we need them.
“We also plan to take Council meetings ‘on the road’ over the next 12 months to enable Council members to engage with more veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses around the country.
“Meanwhile, we remain fully committed to the purchase of a new permanent London home for the RCVS and are seeking a building that not only meets the needs of the professions both now and well into the future, but also aims to be a sound financial investment for the College in the years ahead.”
The College says the consultation, which closes on 22nd December, reflects its commitment to keep reviewing its requirements for newly-qualified VNs to ensure they remain up-to-date and reflect the standards and expectations of current veterinary nursing practice.
Participants will be asked to comment on a proposed new set of requirements, which is divided into three parts:
Day One Competences: the minimum essential competences that the RCVS expects all student veterinary nurses to have met when they register, to ensure that they are safe to practise on day one.
Day One Skills Lists: the essential clinical skills that veterinary nurses are expected to possess on entering clinical practice.
Professional behaviours and attributes: this encompasses the behaviours newly-qualified veterinary nurses are expected to demonstrate on entering the profession.
Julie Dugmore, RCVS Director of Veterinary Nursing (pictured right), said: “With this consultation we want to gain an effective representation of what the professions desire from future RVNs in term of their range of skills and knowledge and professional behaviours from their first day in clinical practice.
"Any feedback we receive on the proposed new requirements will be vital in helping to ensure that student vet nurses receive the appropriate education and training, and that our RVNs are fully prepared and armed with what is necessary to thrive in and add value to current veterinary clinical practice.
Once the consultation is complete, the responses will be reported to the working group, which will then have a final opportunity to amend and agree the proposals, before being submitted to VN Council for consideration.
The aim is that VN Council will agree to the new version of the requirements in its February 2022 meeting.
The deadline for completing the consultation is 5pm on Wednesday 22 December 2021. A PDF document with the proposed new requirements as well as the link to the online survey can be accessed from www.rcvs.org.uk/VNdayone.
To take part, visit: www.rcvs.org.uk/VNdayone
The College says the reforms will make for a clearer and more streamlined process, and offer an alternative, more compassionate way of resolving cases that might otherwise go to a full Disciplinary Committee hearing.
The College will now establish ‘Stage 1 Preliminary Investigation Committees (PICs)’ to replace the current Case Examiner Group stage of the concerns investigation process.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar, said: “Setting up Stage 1 PICs will streamline and clarify the early stages of the concerns investigation process and could also potentially, once sufficiently bedded in, reduce the amount of time taken for a number of cases.
“Currently, Stage 1 of a concerns investigation is carried out by a Case Examiner Group who determine if there is an ‘arguable case’ for serious professional misconduct before referring it on to the Preliminary Investigation Committee.
"However, under these reforms, the Stage 1 PICs will close cases where there is no realistic prospect of finding a case of serious professional misconduct.
"Where cases require formal statements and/or expert opinion they will be referred on to Stage 2 PIC to determine if, based on the additional evidence gathered, a case is serious enough to warrant referral to either the Charter Case Committee [see below], or a full, public Disciplinary Committee hearing.
“In essence this change means that there will be one consistent threshold of seriousness in all our investigations, meaning it is likely that fewer cases will be unnecessarily referred to Stage 2 of the process.”
The second reform involves the implementation of the new ‘Charter Case Protocol’ to provide an alternative way to resolve suitable cases meeting certain criteria which, though they meet the threshold to go to the Disciplinary Committee, it is considered that the public interest can still be served without a full hearing.
The ‘Charter Case Committee’ to which these cases will be referred will be able to issue written warning notices.
Eleanor added: “The establishment of the Charter Case Protocol and Committee is important for the RCVS in being able to get the balance right between upholding professional conduct standards and protecting animal health and welfare and public confidence in the professions, while also being a compassionate regulator.
“The type of cases we envisage being dealt with by the Committee are those where the conduct of the veterinary surgeon or veterinary nurse has fallen far short of what is expected of them under the Code, but where there is no ongoing risk to animal welfare or public confidence, and where the level of insight and contrition about 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 Charter Case Committee will deal with around 20 such cases per year.
“Of course, the most serious cases of professional misconduct, for example around dishonesty and criminality, will continue to be referred to Disciplinary Committee hearings.
“It is worth noting that Charter Case Protocol and Committee are working titles, describing the fact that we are implementing this process under the remit of our Royal Charter.
"RCVS Council has agreed that the name should be changed in due course to something that better reflects its function and remit."
Unlike the Disciplinary Committee, the Charter Case Committee will not issue to the press the full details of cases as a news article.
Instead, it will publish a warning notice on the RCVS website summarising the area of concern, the relevant sections of the Code that were breached and supporting guidance it referred to, and the reasons for issuing the warning.
These warning notices will remain on the RCVS website for a maximum of two years and will not change the registration status of the individual.
The College says that the reforms are likely to take some months to implement and it will be looking to recruit additional Preliminary Investigation Committee members in due course.
The dispensation was brought in during the spring 2020 lockdown to safeguard animal health and welfare, the health & safety of the veterinary team, and public health, by allowing prescriptions to be made by veterinary surgeons without having first physically examined the animal.
Since it was brought in, the temporary dispensation has been under constant review and, in September, was extended to midnight on Sunday 31st October 2021.
Last week, the Standards Committee met and decided to end the dispensation, although it has put back the end date for the guidance to midnight on Sunday 21 November to allow sufficient time for veterinary practices to change their protocols and policies accordingly.
Melissa Donald, RCVS Junior Vice-President and Chair of the Standards Committee, said: “Due to a number of factors, including evidence that there has been a decline in the amount of remote prescriptions taking place, the Committee took the decision to end the dispensation, albeit with a three-week extension period to allow those practices that are still prescribing remotely to change their policies, inform their clients and so on.
“While the dispensation is ending, it is worth noting that it will still be kept under review in light of any changes in the circumstances around the pandemic, including government advice and regulations.”
The full details about the temporary dispensation can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus.
Those with any questions about the guidance should contact the RCVS Standards & Advice Team on advice@rcvs.org.uk or 020 7202 0789.
The survey asks EU nationals about their experience of practising in the UK since the referendum and will seek to find out what their career expectations and aspirations are now.
The survey will also ask how they feel that the RCVS has supported EU vet nurses to practise in the UK since the transition period ended on 31 December 2020.
The survey is being conducted by the Institute for Employment Studies (IES), an independent, not-for-profit research institute.
Respondents are encouraged to be as open as possible, as individual responses will not be seen by the RCVS and all survey data will be analysed independently by IES.
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS CEO said: “We are hearing anecdotal feedback from EU veterinary professionals about the impact of the EU Exit on their working lives, but it is important for us to have direct feedback as evidence for our recommendations.
"I would encourage everyone who receives the survey to share their thoughts with us, as the feedback we receive from this and the previous surveys, will help us to plan what training, resources and support the professions need from us post-EU Exit."
Everyone eligible to take part in the survey is being sent an email today from Dilys Robinson at the IES, with a link to the survey.
You have until Tuesday 16th November 2021 to complete it.
If you have any questions, contact Sara.Butcher@employment-studies.co.uk.
The interviews give an insight into the career advice the interviewees got from their school, what steps they took to secure their place to study for their qualification, what hurdles they had to overcome and what can be done to address issues around the under-representation of some groups within the profession.
The College says the aim is to help inspire school age children to consider a veterinary career through frank conversations with role models who have chosen a vet or vet nursing career.
The first film is an interview with Rheanna Ellis, a 2021 Nottingham Vet School graduate who is now working as a veterinary surgeon at a West Midlands practice. In her interview she talks about her passion to become a vet from a young age, how she went about researching and preparing for her job, and the importance of perseverance.
To help promote the videos and the College’s ongoing work on diversity and inclusion, the RCVS has partnered with the official Black History Month campaign and website which will also be hosting the videos.
Many of the interviews have been carried out by Mandisa Greene, RCVS Senior Vice-President, who helped lead the RCVS Black History Month activities last year as the College’s first ever black President.
Mandisa said: “It’s important that we demonstrate commitment to diversity and inclusion and have a role in acknowledging and accentuating diverse voices within the professions. Throughout these video interviews I’ve had the opportunity to speak to some inspiring newly qualified and student veterinary professionals who are all clearly very passionate about supporting animal health and welfare.
“I hope that school children from all backgrounds who watch these videos will get the chance to see how rewarding and enjoyable a veterinary career can be and that they’ll be inspired to consider becoming a vet or vet nurse in the future.”
The RCVS will be publishing more video interviews on its YouTube channel through October and beyond.
The project was launched as a joint initiative between the RCVS and the BVNA in 2016. Its objectives included highlighting veterinary nursing as a career, encouraging more people into veterinary nursing, improving retention, expanding the scope of the VN role, and providing more opportunity for career progression.
The report begins by highlighting perhaps the biggest challenge facing the profession, that in 2019, 25% of veterinary nurses said they plan to leave the profession in the next five years, largely because of poor pay, because they don't feel sufficiently valued, lack of career opportunities and because of a poor work/life balance.
The main achievements of the project, which should certainly help with some of these issues, include:
Jill Macdonald, VN Futures Project Coordinator, said: "The report is a culmination of years of hard work, putting in place measures to champion the veterinary nursing profession and safeguard it for the future. Through the introduction of initiatives like the School Ambassador Development Programme and the introduction of the CertAVN, to name but a few, we have put in place steps to inspire the next generation of veterinary nurses and support the training and development of people currently working in the profession."
You can read the full VN Futures Interim Report at https://www.vnfutures.org.uk/resource-items/vn-futures-interim-report-2021
The award categories that someone can be nominated for are:
The closing date for the awards is Friday, 7 January 2022.
For more information, visit www.rcvs.org.uk/awards.
The work done by vetnurse.co.uk and vetsurgeon.org attempted to identify the sorts of unpleasant behaviour that veterinary surgeons and and nurses found themselves on the receiving end of, and the impact that it had on them. It was not, however, able to quantify the prevalence of these types of behaviour other than to the extent that there were 677 reports.
The new survey of over 650 vet nurses and student vet nurses found that not only did 96% agree or strongly agree that bullying and incivility is a serious problem in the profession, but 70% of respondents had personally experienced a mental health concern as a result.
Other findings from the survey were:
The full findings of the survey will be revealed at the MMI Student Veterinary Nurse Wellbeing Discussion Forum, taking place on Wednesday 3rd November.
Attendees will have the opportunity to discuss the challenges highlighted in the survey and how they can be addressed. The results will also be published at a session led by Jill McDonald, VN Futures Project Coordinator at BVNA Congress, taking place Saturday 2nd – Monday 4th October.
Lisa Quigley, Mind Matters Initiative Manager, said: “A number of our survey findings are extremely concerning, particularly the high levels of bullying, incivility and discrimination reported by participants. We conducted the survey with the intention of finding out more about what systemic issues across workplace practices were impacting on the profession’s mental health.
"We want to thank everyone who took part and shared their experiences with us. There were some upsetting accounts shared with us about experiences of bullying and discrimination – no one should go through this at any point in their life, let alone at their place of work.
"Decisive action needs to be taken to tackle this and we will be using the findings of the survey to help form our 2022-2027 strategy and decide what resources and training we create for the profession. Supporting the wellbeing of veterinary nurses and student veterinary nurses is one of our key priorities, and will be part of all future MMI activities.”
“I would encourage as many veterinary nurses and student veterinary nurses as possible to attend the upcoming Student Veterinary Nurse Wellbeing Discussion Forum and our session at BVNA to have your voice heard about what steps need to be taken to improve the mental wellbeing of the profession.
"We recognise that these results may bring some difficult emotions to the fore for many people, and we would encourage anyone who has experienced bullying or discrimination to seek help from an organisation such as Vetlife or the National Bullying Helpline.
"I would urge anyone who witnesses bullying or discrimination in the workplace to speak out, wherever it is safe to do so. This takes immense courage, but it is only by calling out this behaviour that it can begin to be addressed. We will be launching Active Bystander training in early 2022, to equip people with the confidence to call out unacceptable behaviour, and the skills to proactively support colleagues who have been targeted.”
Matthew Rendle, Chair of the RCVS Veterinary Nurses Council, added: “As a veterinary nurse some of these results were a difficult read and I would like to thank those student vet nurses and newly qualified vet nurses who came forward with great honesty and bravery with their views and experiences, as it couldn’t have been easy.
“We take these matters very seriously and opening up the conversation is an important first step. I hope that, following these results, we can take look at things such as strengthening reporting mechanisms for bullying and discrimination and encouraging better workplace practices to mitigate against these incidents.
“While it’s easy to focus on the negatives, I do think that these survey results have given us positive steps to build on, not least that people know how to access mental health support so they’re not suffering in silence and the role that our amazing clinical coaches are playing in supporting people with their mental health, and how we can better give them the tools for this support.”
The meeting follows growing concerns expressed both within the profession and in the national media about the shortage of veterinary surgeons in the UK.
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS CEO (pictured right), said: “Workforce shortages within the veterinary sector has been a concern for some time, however, in the past few months there has been a ‘perfect storm’ of circumstances, which have come together to exacerbate the problem. The issues include the ongoing impact of the pandemic, burnout and fatigue within the profession; the UK’s exit from the European Union, which has seen a significant reduction in the number of EU vets joining the Register as well as an associated increase in the need for veterinary certification; and an increase in pet ownership, and therefore demand for veterinary services, over the course of the pandemic."
In advance of the meeting, which is due to be help in November, the College will be conducting research to better gauge the extent of the problem both nationally and regionally.
The meeting will then consider how recruitment, retention and return to work might address the problem.
Lizzie added: “While there has already been a lot of focus and discussions around recruitment and retention, something less spoken about is return, and the summit will consider the reasons why members of the profession may move away from clinical practice, and if there’s more scope for different ways of working that could bring people back into clinical practice.
“Ahead of the summit we will be reviewing all the latest data that we and other organisations have shared to better understand the gap between capacity and demand, the push and pull factors on decisions to either join or leave clinical practice and build a more evidence-based picture of veterinary workforce trends.”
The summit itself, the date of which is yet to be confirmed, will involve key veterinary stakeholders including the veterinary schools, veterinary employers and representative bodies, coming together to ensure that there will be a joined-up approach in finding solutions to the issues confronting the profession.
Lizzie said: “It may not necessarily be easy to identify all the solutions in one day, and they won’t all come from the RCVS, but opening up the conversation and getting the professions focused on taking appropriate action is an important first step.”
Meanwhile, RCVS President Kate Richards this week wrote to all vets and nurses to reassure them them that the RCVS was aware of the problem and the additional pressures they are under as a result.
In the letter she wrote: “In the face of current shortages, I would like to stress that we support practice teams in prioritising cases strictly according to the health and welfare needs of their patients, and in informing their clients of the need to do so.
“We would also urge veterinary surgeons to share their caseload as much as possible, delegating permitted procedures to their veterinary nurse colleagues wherever appropriate to do so.
"And, we would like to remind veterinary surgeons that their current 24/7 emergency cover obligations, as set out in the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct, are limited only to taking steps to provide 24-hour emergency first-aid and pain relief to animals according to their skills and the specific situation."
She also added that, while members of the profession may be anxious about a potential increase in the number of concerns being raised by clients because they are not able to offer the level of service they would ideally like to, the RCVS would always take into account the entire circumstances surrounding a complaint as part of its investigation process.
She also said that the College would also continue to raise awareness amongst animal owners of the acute challenges currently facing veterinary teams around the country, and to request their ongoing patience and understanding.
To assist the profession, a series of FAQs have been produced to help with different situations that vets may encounter at the moment, particularly around the provision of 24/7 emergency cover, and to provide further guidance on delegating procedures to veterinary nurses. These can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/news/
Professor Susan Dawson (pictured right), Chair of the Mind Matters Taskforce, will introduce the event and will be followed by the symposium’s plenary speaker, Rory O’Connor, Professor of Health Psychology at the University of Glasgow and President of the International Association for Suicide Prevention.
Rory's talk: ‘When It is Darkest: Understanding Suicide Risk’ will draw upon his research and work on the psychological processes which precipitate suicidal behaviour and self-harm, an area of expertise that has seen him advise the Scottish Government, as well as other national and international organisations, on suicide prevention strategies.
The next presentation will be from Dr Victoria Crossley from the Royal Veterinary College and Navaratnam Partheeban, co-founder of the British Veterinary Ethnicity & Diversity Society (BVEDS), on their research into the mental health impact of racism and discrimination on Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) veterinary surgeons.
They'll be followed by Professor Neil Greenberg and Dr Victoria Williamson from King’s College London, who will talk about their research into the impact of ‘moral injury’ on the mental health and wellbeing of vets.
The day will then split into different research streams with presentations on a variety of topics including: the impact of cyberbullying and harassment; the wellbeing of veterinary interns and residents; stigma and stress in veterinary nursing; mental health awareness training in the undergraduate veterinary curriculum; and the relationship between ‘patient safety culture’ and staff burnout.
Lisa Quigley, Mind Matters Manager, said: “As with previous years the Mind Matters Mental Health Research Symposium promises to be a very informative and important day in terms of international researchers coming together to share their research, their conclusions, areas for further work and study, and best practice.
"Some of the topics we will be discussing, such as suicide, will be difficult, but research into issues affecting the international veterinary community is a vital first step to putting in place strategies and support mechanisms to help those in need. This is why research will be one of the key strategic priorities for the Mind Matters Initiative and our forthcoming actions in this area will be published later this year in our Mind Matters Initiative Strategic Plan.
“I would like to thank Dr Rosie Allister, a veterinary mental health researcher from the University of Edinburgh and manager of Vetlife Helpline, for putting together an excellent programme.
"As with previous years we are also offering free attendance of the symposium to those who have lived experience of mental ill-health, those who are currently not working, and veterinary and veterinary nursing students. If you have any queries about the event, please don’t hesitate to contact me on l.quigley@rcvs.org.uk to discuss further.”
Registration for those not entitled to a free ticket is £10.
To register for the event visit: www.vetmindmatters.org/events.
The new Mind Matters Initiative (MMI) Kite App is the result of a collaboration with The Kite Programme. It offers a series of bespoke microlearning modules - known as 'kites' - about mental health and wellbeing.
Microlearning is a type of learning which delivers content in bite-size modules. It usually combines a mixture of interactive activities, images and videos, which can be worked through in as little as five minutes.
The first ‘Kites’ available on the app will cover subjects like breathing activities, mindfulness, time management and physical activity for mental health.
New modules will be added over the weeks and months ahead, in response to feedback from users.
Angharad Belcher, RCVS Director for Advancement of the Professions, said: “Veterinary professionals undertake vital work for animal health and welfare, but the intensity and pressure of their work can take its toll on mental health and wellbeing. Sadly, research shows that compared to the general population, veterinary professionals are more likely to experience mental health distress, including depression and anxiety.
“We recognise how hard it can be for veterinary professionals to fit wellbeing activities into their busy workdays and understand that everyone’s mental health needs are different. By collaborating with The Kite Program, we wanted to create a wellbeing platform that was accessible, flexible and had a range of activities to meet a variety of mental health and wellbeing needs. This app will be another useful tool for the professions, and we are pleased to be able to offer it free of charge.
“We are really looking forward to hearing feedback from the professions about the platform and creating more modules based on their wants and needs.”
The College highlights that users cannot input any personal information into the app and the only data it will hold is a record of active users.
To register for the app, visit: https://www.vetmindmatters.org/mmi-app.
The app will also be demoed at BEVA Congress 2021 (5th-7th September, Birmingham ICC).
At the start of the hearing the RCVS applied for it to take place in the absence of Mr Dobson, who had failed to respond when informed about the hearing. The application was granted by the DC on the basis that Mr Dobson, by refusing to respond to communications from the College – including by letter, telephone and email – had voluntarily waived his right to attend.
There were three sets of charges against Mr Dobson. The first charge was in June 2018, while he was not on the Register of Veterinary Surgeons, Mr Dobson had carried out an equine pre-purchase examination (PPE) and used the postnominals MRCVS to sign the associated PPE certificate and covering letter.
The Committee found this charge proven after it was presented with evidence of the certificate and covering letter alongside the fact that Mr Dobson had been removed from the Register on 1 June 2018 for non-payment of the annual renewal fee needed to remain on the RCVS Register. He was only restored to the Register upon paying his outstanding fee in late November 2018.
The second charge was that Mr Dobson did not have any professional indemnity insurance (or PII) or other equivalent arrangements in between June 2018 and August 2020. He also failed to provide adequate details of his PII when requested by the RCVS.
The Committee was presented with evidence that Mr Dobson had failed to confirm that he had PII arrangements or other equivalent arrangements in place prior to August 2020 and that he had failed to respond to numerous requests for evidence from the College. On this basis the Committee found the charges proven.
The third and final charge was that Mr Dobson had failed to respond to numerous requests from the RCVS, including: failing to provide written comments on concerns relating to the equine PPE; failing to provide written comments on the concern that he had carried out the PPE and used the postnominals MRCVS while not on the Register; failing to provide details of his continuing professional development (CPD) for the previous three years; and failing to provide copies of his Day Book and/or Controlled Drugs Register. All elements of this charge were found proven when the Committee was presented with evidence of numerous attempts to contact him that went unacknowledged and unanswered.
Regarding the first charge, the Committee recognised that Mr Dobson had not intentionally allowed his registration with the College to expire and that it was down to administrative error. However, it also considered that he had not responded to or taken action upon receiving numerous reminders to pay his fees. It considered that Mr Dobson had therefore acted recklessly in not only allowing his registration to expire but in continuing to practise veterinary surgery while not registered, a criminal act in contravention of the Veterinary Surgeons Act. The Committee therefore found that the first charge amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee also found that the remaining charges constituted serious professional misconduct.
Cerys Jones, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf said: "The respondent demonstrated a pattern of behaviour in not responding, which was sustained and persistent. He asked for extensions of time but did not make good on his assurances that he would provide information. Due to the length of time during which the respondent failed to comply with the requests, as well as the proliferation of issues in respect of which he did not comply, the Committee was of the view that he demonstrated a wilful disregard of the role of the RCVS and the regulatory processes. This was particularly serious in light of the reliance which the RCVS places upon its members to cooperate with providing it with information relating to their professional practice which is relevant to the RCVS’s regulation of the profession.
"There was no harm caused to animals or the public, and the Committee acknowledged that practice circumstances have been made more difficult in general by the Covid-19 pandemic. However… the respondent’s failures to comply were serious and undermined the functions of the RCVS. The Committee was satisfied that the respondent’s failures fell so far below what was expected as to amount to serious professional misconduct."
Having found that all the charges amounted to serious professional misconduct the Committee then considered the most appropriate sanction for Mr Dobson. In terms of aggravating factors, the Committee considered Mr Dobson’s recklessness in failing to renew his registration and practising while it was lapsed, his pattern of not responding to the RCVS, the fact that financial gain was obtained as a result of misconduct, a wilful disregard to the RCVS and regulation, and limited evidence of insight. In mitigation the Committee considered Mr Dobson’s previous good character, a long and otherwise unblemished career, the fact that no animals were harmed and increased demands on time and processes due to Covid-19.
However, taking all of the information into account, the Committee decided that removal from the Register was the appropriate and proportionate sanction due to the sustained and prolonged nature of the misconduct.
Cerys Jones said: “The respondent demonstrated a wilful disregard of the role of the RCVS and the regulatory processes by way of his disgraceful conduct. In addition, his lack of engagement with the hearing process indicates to the Committee that he is not engaging with his regulator and, along with the limited insight and lack of remediation with respect to the disgraceful conduct, this demonstrates a lack of insight into the seriousness of his actions or their consequences.”
As well as marking the 60th anniversary of the first RCVS-accredited Animal Nursing Auxiliary training scheme, the profession has also recently reached another milestone: 20,000 veterinary nurses on the Veterinary Nurses Register.
The Diamond Jubilee events include a series of webinars covering the past, present and future of the profession, with presentations from eminent veterinary nurses, including:
The RCVS will also be running a series of podcasts with prominent members of the profession. Each podcast episode will have a different host, reflecting on an area of veterinary nursing that they are passionate about.
The first webinar and podcast episode are available to watch and listen to on the Diamond Jubilee webpage www.rcvs.org.uk/VNdiamonds.
Matthew Rendle RVN, Chair of the Veterinary Nurses Council, said: “The veterinary nursing Diamond Jubilee celebrations are a fitting way of paying tribute to veterinary nursing – a profession that does so much for animal health and welfare. The celebrations will look back on all that has been achieved by the profession and give us an opportunity to engage with RVNs to come up with ideas for how we can continue to advance and develop our amazing profession.
“I am particularly happy about the fact that, earlier this month, I was informed that we have reached the milestone of 20,000 veterinary nurses on the Register which is an amazing achievement. When the VN Register was launched in 2007 there were just over 7,000 members of our profession – the fact we have almost trebled in number since then shows just how far we have come in a short space of time as invaluable members of the veterinary team providing professional care for the nation’s animals.”
Anyone wishing to take part in the celebrations can share their memories or pictures of veterinary nursing on social media, using the hashtag #VNDiamonds
The updated standards document applies to the awarding organisations and higher education institutions that set the veterinary nursing curricula, the centres (such as further education colleges) that deliver the courses, and the affiliated RCVS-approved training practices where SVNs undertake their placements.
The updated standards were approved by RCVS Veterinary Nurses (VN) Council in February 2021 after feedback from stakeholders.
There are six overarching standards within the framework, which also provide guidance on how the individual standards can be evidenced. The overarching standards are: learning culture; governance and quality; student empowerment; educators and assessors; curricula and assessment; and effective clinical learning.
The College says the new Standards Framework, which draws together all the previous separate guidance for awarding organisations, centres and training practices, allows greater flexibility for how training can be delivered.
Julie Dugmore, RCVS Director of Veterinary Nursing, said: “During 2020, accreditations and quality monitoring audits were conducted against the RCVS Standards Framework for Veterinary Nurse Education and Training. Feedback from all involved was positive but reflected a need for clarification in some areas and further examples to assist with evidencing compliance.
“Since February 2021, four accreditations have been conducted against the updated standards, the results of which demonstrate a positive move towards the outcomes based approach to accreditation and quality monitoring.”
The full set of standards can be read online at www.rcvs.org.uk/standards-framework-vn.
The Disciplinary Committee heard that in 2018, when Dr Dyson was employed as Head of Clinical Orthopaedics at the Animal Health Trust (AHT), she completed a research project: ‘Influence of rider: horse body weight ratios on equine welfare and performance – a pilot study’, for which she had previously been given the go-ahead by the AHT’s Clinical Research Ethics Committee. The results of the study were then submitted to the Journal of Veterinary Behaviour: Clinical Applications and Research for publication.
After peer-reviewing the project paper at the request of Journal Editor Karen Overall, Dr Matthew Parker, a Senior Lecturer in Behavioural Pharmacology at the University of Portsmouth, was concerned by the lack of a Home Office licence and asked for details of the licence or an explanation of why the project didn’t need one, and for the paper to be re-submitted.
In reply, Dr Dyson then emailed Ms Overall saying: “We have a former Home Office Inspector on our AHT Ethical Committee and two current licence holders (Named Veterinary Surgeons) who are fully conversant with the current legislation ... I also sought informal advice from a current Inspector. All were fully aware of the protocols to be employed and gave me assurance that in their opinion Home Office approval would not be required”.
Ms Overall then asked Dr Dyson to obtain a letter from the Home Office to support this position.
On 24 December 2018, Dr Dyson sent Ms Overall a letter purportedly from a Home Office Inspector called Dr Butler who, she explained, had advised her during the planning phase of the project. In the letter, the fictitious Dr Butler confirmed that their advice was sought for the project and that in their opinion, a Home Office Licence was not required.
Ms Overall then sent the letter to Dr Parker for further review, who decided to contact Dr Martin Whiting, Head of Operations at the Home Office Animals in Science Regulation Unit (ASRU) to ask if he knew of Dr Butler.
Dr Whiting confirmed that the Home Office had no record of employing a Dr Butler as an Inspector and that they were in the process of making further inquiries into the matter.
After Dr Whiting’s reply was forwarded to Dr Dyson, she replied to him saying that she thought the studies’ procedures did not meet the criteria for the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA), but that this was questioned by peer reviewers.
She said that her decision to send Dr Butler’s letter was one that she would ‘eternally regret’ and that she was ‘an inherently honest person’.
She explained that she was under a huge amount of pressure in her personal and professional life and that she was ‘fully aware that [she] acted completely inappropriately and she requested the incident be overlooked’.
In March 2019, Dr Dyson sent a letter to William Reynolds, Head of the Home Office ASRU, in which she expressed remorse for writing the letter. Mr Reynolds subsequently raised a concern with the RCVS about Dr Dyson’s alleged behaviour.
Dr Jane Downes, who chaired the Disciplinary Committee, and spoke on its behalf, said: “The Committee heard from Dr Dyson that she had no recollection of several events detailed in the charge, including writing the letter from Dr Butler and sending the email to Ms Overall which contained Dr Butler’s letter. She accepted that the letter was dishonest and that it should not have been sent. However, she also claimed that, as she could not remember writing the letter, she did not act dishonestly.
The Committee heard testimonials from several witnesses who held Dr Dyson in high regard, including colleagues from the AHT, who attested to her integrity.
However, there were many dubious claims made by Dr Dyson throughout the hearing, including that the Home Office Inspector that she referenced as ‘my friendly inspector’ was someone who could have given informed consent to a project as Dr Dyson confirmed that she had met the individual briefly, around two and a half years ago at a drinks reception.
In reaching its decisions, the Committee considered Dr Dyson’s previously impeccable character, the written and verbal testimonies from witnesses. They also considered that during the hearing, Dr Dyson explained that at the time she fabricated the letter, she was under a lot of work and personal pressures, including managing a workload amidst colleagues’ resigning or going on maternity leave and it being the anniversary of her dog having to be humanely destroyed.
However, it did not accept Dr Dyson’s claims that she had amnesia at this time, and considered that she had not owned up to her wrongdoing until it was discovered. Although Dr Dyson maintained her actions were not pre-meditated, the Committee considered that, in the case of the forged letter, a certain amount of planning and careful thought was involved. The Committee believed that Dr Dyson knew what she was doing at the time, but acknowledged she may subsequently have blanked out what she did.
The Committee found all but one of the allegations proved and confirmed that it “was satisfied that the writing and sending of that letter was the culmination of a course of dishonest conduct.”
Committee Chair Dr Downes said: “In assessing [the evidence of] Dr Dyson the Committee took into account the difficulty faced by any Respondent appearing before their Regulator and also the various interruptions occasioned by issues which had to be dealt with during her evidence. Whilst [Dr Dyson is] undoubtedly highly qualified and highly respected, the Committee nevertheless considered her evidence lacked credibility and was not reliable.”
The Committee found that Dr Dyson’s conduct had breached parts of the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons and amounted to serious professional misconduct.
Dr Downes continued: “The Committee determined that it was important that a clear message be sent that this sort of behaviour is wholly inappropriate and [was] not to be tolerated. It brings discredit upon Dr Dyson and discredit upon the profession.
"For whatever reason, Dr Dyson chose not to respond to Ms Overall’s email on 30th November 2018 in an honest and straightforward way. Instead, she lied about the makeup of the AHT Ethical Committee in order to cloak her response with authority.
"She also lied about having received advice from a current Inspector for the same reason. In the Committee’s view, she made a conscious decision to provide a dishonest response. She no doubt believed that would be the end of the matter.
"When that did not work, she lied further in the email to her co-author, Andrew Hemmings, claiming to have a letter from her friendly Inspector. When that too did not work, she impersonated a Home Office Inspector in creating the ‘Dr Butler letter’.
"She then added a false declaration to the manuscript, which she subsequently submitted to the Journal along with an email containing yet further lies. That was all done in a blatant and wilful attempt to deceive Ms Overall ... into believing the contents of the correspondence to be true, that confirmation a Home Office Licence was not required had been obtained and all was therefore well with the submitted manuscript.
"There was no rush, or urgency to have the paper published and the actions were not done in a moment of panic. No doubt she had not planned the entire course of events in advance, but instead reacted to each new obstacle that came her way, but her overall course of dishonest conduct spanned over three weeks.
“The Committee was well aware of the impact and ramifications for Dr Dyson of any decision to remove her from the Register but had to weigh her interests with those of the public.
"In doing so it took account of the context and circumstances of the case, all matters of personal mitigation, as detailed above, Dr Dyson’s undoubted distinguished international career and reputation and the need to act proportionally.
"However, for all the reasons given above, the Committee was of the view that the need to uphold proper standards of conduct within the veterinary profession, together with the public interest in maintaining confidence in the profession of veterinary surgeons, meant that a period of suspension would not be sufficient and that the only appropriate and proportionate sanction in all the circumstances of this case was that of removal from the Register."
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.”
Mr Seymour-Hamilton made previous unsuccessful applications for restoration in 1995, 2010, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020.
Mr Seymour-Hamilton was originally removed from the Register in 1994 following an inspection of his veterinary practice premises in Orpington, Kent, that found that the condition of the practice, including the equipment and facilities, were of such a risk to animal health and welfare that it brought the profession into disrepute.
In considering his current application, the Committee had to take several factors into account, including: whether Mr Seymour-Hamilton had accepted the findings of his original hearing; whether he demonstrated insight into his past conduct; protection of the public and the public interest; the future welfare of animals committed to his care should he be restored; length of time off the Register; his conduct since removal; and evidence that he’d kept up-to-date in terms of the knowledge and skills required of a practising veterinary surgeon.
Mr Seymour-Hamilton accepted the facts of the original charges but did not accept the conclusions of the two veterinary surgeons who inspected his practice, who, he claimed, had falsely accused him.
As a result, the Committee concluded that Mr Seymour-Hamilton did not accept the seriousness of the original findings against him, nor had he demonstrated any insight into either the original charges, nor what was required of him to enable a successful application for restoration.
Judith Webb, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee is driven to the conclusion that the applicant has displayed total disregard for rules and regulations. In his evidence he stated that he is professionally competent to spay a cat and he had done so in Calais. This was in recent years and whilst struck off by the RCVS, and after more than 25 years out of the profession. He was unable to see that he had done anything wrong in this.”
As to protection of the public and the future welfare of animals committed to his care, the Committee found that Mr Seymour-Hamilton continued to display a lack of understanding of the role and purpose of regulation. He had shown no insight into previous decisions or of what was required of him to enable a successful restoration, despite being given advice in that regard. He presented no compelling evidence to indicate that he would be safe to practise veterinary surgery were he to be restored to the Register.
Regarding Mr Seymour-Hamilton’s conduct since removal from the Register, the Committee found he did not demonstrate sufficient relevant conduct in relation to his fitness to practise. The Committee noted that, on previous occasions, he had indicated he had illegally practised veterinary surgery and admitted using his own animals to experimentally administer new and untested remedies.
The Committee found that, in relation to the 27 years since removal from the Register, Mr Seymour-Hamilton had not undertaken the prolonged, intensive and formal retraining needed to ensure he was now fit to practise. It also found that, since the last restoration hearing in 2020, Mr Seymour-Hamilton had undertaken very little continuing professional development, maintaining that he was too busy with his work relating to herbal remedies to attend formal veterinary training.
Judith Webb added: “He claimed that he does not find it difficult to keep up-to-date, because he is able to perform online searches if he is in need of information. He thinks that he is competent to operate even after 27 years out of the profession, and maintains that he could operate now. In the view of the Committee, the applicant is totally unaware of current veterinary principles such as it being an evidence-based profession, use of clinical audit and reflective learning. He does not appear to have accepted the purpose of the regulator in protecting public interest, including maintaining public confidence in the profession, nor its role in upholding professional standards and promoting animal welfare.
The Committee considers that where some 27 years have passed since the applicant has practised, there will inevitably be a serious risk to the welfare of animals if he is restored to the Register. In addition, the Committee is firmly of the opinion that it would not be in the public interest for the application for restoration to the RCVS Register to be granted in this case.”
The full documentation from the restoration hearing can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
Dr Henry faced one charge, that in January 2020 she wrote and/or signed an undated letter confirming that a ewe had died in transit to the surgery due to dystocia and peri-parturient stress, when in fact she had euthanised the animal at the veterinary practice the day before. The letter, which was addressed 'To whom it may concern’, was on practice letterheaded paper and signed "Louise Henry MRCVS".
The second part of the charge outlined that her conduct concerning the letter was dishonest.
The Committee heard that the ewe was lambing and brought to the practice by a client. Dr Henry was on-call at the time and advised a Caesarean section. The client agreed and Dr Henry delivered two live lambs and one dead lamb.
Dr Henry was concerned about the welfare of the ewe post-surgery because of the risk of peritonitis and advised that the ewe should be euthanised.
The client agreed to the ewe being euthanised and then asked Dr Henry to write a letter in which it was stated that the ewe had died in transit on route to the practice. Dr Henry agreed to write the letter in which she falsely certified that the ewe had died in transit.
The letter came to light when the practice director found it in an insurance file. The practice arranged an investigatory meeting with Dr Henry where she admitted that writing the letter was an error of judgement. When asked about her conduct, Dr Henry explained that the client had subsequently been dissatisfied with the letter she had written and asked her to change it. She refused to amend the letter and told him that it was wrong of her to have written it in the first place and that she regretted having done so.
Dr Henry told the Committee that she valued integrity very highly and that she was deeply ashamed that she had been prepared to write the dishonest letter.
The Committee heard several testimonials from people who had worked with or studied alongside Dr Henry, who all attested to her skill as a veterinary surgeon and that they had no concerns about her integrity and honesty. She self-reported her actions from January to the RCVS and from the outset admitted the facts of the charge. During the hearing, Dr Henry submitted that her action of dishonest false certification amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
Dr Martin Whiting, chairing the Committee, and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee considered that, in this case, the aggravating features were limited and the mitigating factors extensive. There was no premeditated dishonesty or financial gain involved, there was no actual harm or risk of harm to an animal or human and this was a single incident in an otherwise unblemished 13-year career. The Committee found that the shame and remorse expressed by Dr Henry were entirely genuine. Her conduct on this occasion was entirely untypical of her practise.
“After careful consideration, the Committee concluded that the substantial mitigating features permitted it to take the somewhat unusual course of issuing a reprimand in a case involving dishonesty. In taking this course, the Committee attached significant weight not only to the isolated nature of the event but also to the genuine insight shown by Dr Henry and the lasting impact this event has had upon her. In the Committee’s assessment, a reasonable and fully informed member of the public would, in this particular case, regard a reprimand as a sanction which protected the public interest in the profession and upheld its standards.”
The full documentation for the hearing can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
Ms Benson faced six charges.
The first was that between January 2018 and November 2019 she took a number of bags of dog food and two horse wormer syringes from the practice without paying for them.
Charge 2 alleged that between November 2018 and November 2019 she took a number of items of animal food and one or more boxes of horse wormer and paid less than the correct amount for them.
Charge 3 was that between October 2018 and November 2019 she arranged for or allowed a friend to receive a discount on items from the practice, without consent from the practice.
Charge 4 alleged that in December 2019 she asked a veterinary surgeon colleague to input details of treatment and/or medicine for her cat into the clinical records of another of her animals that was also registered to the practice.
Charge 5 was that in relation to charges 1, 2 and 3, her conduct was dishonest.
Charge 6 alleged that in relation to charge 4, her conduct was dishonest, potentially compromised the integrity of a professional colleague and was potentially detrimental to animal welfare.
At the outset of the hearing, Ms Benson admitted to charges 1,2,3,4 and 6 of the allegations and the Committee accepted these admissions. The Committee considered evidence from Ms Benson’s colleagues including witness statements, written testimonial and clinical records for her animals.
When asked about taking items from the practice, Ms Benson explained that she did not intend to take items without paying for them and that she had not realised how much she had taken. She also explained that she had paid back in full what she owed to the practice. The Committee considered that Ms Benson’s conduct had involved a degree of premeditation as she had repeatedly taken items over an extended period. They also considered that there had been a potential risk of injury to animals resulting from Ms Benson’s request to incorrectly write up her animal’s veterinary records.
The defence attested that no actual harm had come to any animal because of Ms Benson’s actions and that she previously had an unblemished career in veterinary nursing. She had also admitted most of the charges against her and paid for the items she had taken in full.
Cerys Jones, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee considered that in the case of Ms Benson, there had been a potential risk to animals had her pet’s records been incorrectly completed, although no harm resulted. The request to alter the records had been a short, single event, but the taking of items had been repeated over a period.
"The Committee also considered that Ms Benson had abused the trust placed in her as a senior nurse with managerial responsibility. We took into account that there was some evidence of Ms Benson being overloaded by work, but there was no evidence of any health condition during the time of the misconduct which might explain her actions.”
The Committee therefore found Ms Benson guilty of serious professional misconduct and decided that a nine-month suspension from the Register was the most appropriate sanction.
Cerys Jones said: “The Committee accepted that Ms Benson had developing insight in making her admissions and we give her credit for her long unblemished career. She admitted to a large part of the allegation, expressed remorse for her actions and has repaid the practice. We have also heard a number of positive testimonials which spoke positively of Ms Benson’s recent conduct.
“However, dishonesty is a serious matter in relation to professional practice and taking no action in response to the serious nature of Ms Benson’s disgraceful conduct would not be proportionate or serve to protect animals and maintain public confidence in the profession.
“Having carefully considered matters, the Committee decided that the appropriate and proportionate sanction, was to suspend Ms Benson’s registration for nine months.”
Ms Benson has 28 days from being informed of the outcome of the hearing to appeal the Committee’s decision.