View all veterinary jobs
Mr Seymour-Hamilton was originally removed from the Register following an inspection of his Kent practice in 1993 which found that his operating theatre “showed a total disregard of basic hygiene and care for animals and was such as to bring the profession into disrepute”.
Since being removed from the Register, Mr Seymour-Hamilton has made applications for restoration in 1995, 2010, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019. Each was rejected.
In his latest application, Mr Seymour-Hamilton said that he did not want to re-join the Register in order to practise but to facilitate his research in the area of herbal medicine.
The Committee found that while Mr Seymour-Hamilton had accepted some of the findings of the original case, he disagreed with important facts, such as whether or not his surgery was open at the time of the inspection, and showed ‘minimal insight’ into the seriousness of the findings.
The Committee also voiced concerns over public protection and animal welfare should he be restored, saying that he had demonstrated little or no understanding of the purpose of regulation. The Committee also noted that he had, by his own admission, spayed two cats at a practice in Calais in recent years despite his long absence from the Register and unregistered status as a veterinary surgeon in the UK or France.
In considering his conduct since leaving the Register, the Committee found that Mr Seymour-Hamilton had admitted to a number of instances of conduct which it found ‘reprehensible’. This included carrying out spays; not self-isolating after testing positively for coronavirus and, in fact, travelling through France and Spain in breach of the lockdown put in place due to the pandemic; deliberately trying to re-infect himself with coronavirus and then visiting a vulnerable person without maintaining social distancing; treating his own animals with untested herbal remedies; and using his own remedies to treat people, which, in one case, included a nine-year-old boy in Greece.
In summing up Judith Way, who was chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee has concluded that he has not satisfied it that he is fit to be restored to the Register. He has exhibited a disregard for regulation and compliance with the law. He lacks an understanding as to why he has not been restored in the past. He has not set about addressing any of his shortcomings. He relies wholeheartedly on his research, yet he does not support that research with any real peer-reviewed publications and he fails to acknowledge the consequences of being out-of-practice for so long. He has misplaced confidence in his own abilities and does not recognise that his approach and/or actions can represent a danger to animals and to the public. The Committee has therefore reached the conclusion that the applicant is not a fit person to be restored to the Register.”
The full findings of the restoration hearing for Mr Seymour-Hamilton can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
The survey was held in mid-June and gathered 196 responses from UK practices. That compared with the 532 responses to the initial survey conducted early in April and 251 responses to the second survey conducted at the start of May.
One of the main findings was a marked increase in the number of practices running a near-normal caseload, from 3% in May to 32% in June. Practice turnover data similarly reflected a shift back towards normality, with 46% now reporting a reduction of less than 25%, compared with 19% last month.
Other findings included:
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS CEO, said: "This latest survey has demonstrated a continuation of the previous survey’s positive trends including an increase in practice turnover with more practices approaching a ‘near normal caseload’ and with a reduction in the number of practices impacted by staff self-isolating or with confirmed cases of Covid-19.
“In this survey we also asked about what difficulties practices may be experiencing with EMS placements for vet students and VN training placements as a result of Covid-19, and this will help us to understand how we can better support students and practices in these areas.
“We will continue to monitor the situation via these regular surveys, with the next one planned for later this summer. I would urge as many practices as possible to continue to complete them, so that we can build up a stronger evidence-base on how veterinary businesses have been affected and how they are recovering.
"This information is not only vital for our own policy decisions but also allows us to present a stronger case to the Government and other public bodies where we wish to influence the decisions they make that will impact the veterinary professions and businesses.”
The survey results can be read in full at www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus-resources.
Mr Wood pleaded guilty to three charges of making indecent images of children at Portsmouth Magistrate’s Court in December 2017. Following his conviction, Mr Wood was given a community sentence, fined and made subject to a sexual harm prevention order for five years.
Mr Wood’s application for restoration was based on the argument that he was professionally competent to be restored to the Register, that he had strong mitigation for his original conviction (for which he had demonstrated remorse), that he had a low chance of reoffending, had engaged proactively with the Probation Service and rehabilitative courses, and that had completed his community service.
In considering Mr Wood’s application, the Disciplinary Committee took into account a number of factors including Mr Wood’s acceptance of the Committee’s original findings, the seriousness of the original findings, protection of the public, the future welfare of animals in his care should he be restored, the length of time off the Register, his conduct since removal from the Register, efforts by Mr Wood to keep up-to-date with his continuing professional development (CPD), the impact of removal from the Register on Mr Wood and public support for his restoration.
However, on balance, the Committee decided that Mr Wood was not currently fit to be restored to the Register.
Ian Arundale, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "In essence, the Committee decided that the facts of the charge justifying removal from the Register and the underlying criminal behaviour were too serious for Mr Wood to be restored at this time. It concluded that because Mr Wood continued to be subject to a sexual harm prevention order, notification requirements for sexual offenders and because he remained on the Barring List by the Disclosure and Barring service until January 2023, he was not fit to be restored to the Register at this time.
"The Committee accepted that Mr Wood had made significant efforts to rehabilitate himself but it was not persuaded that he was fit to be restored to the Register because ancillary orders relating to the underlying criminal offences remained in force. The Committee noted that at the time those orders were made Mr Wood was described as having an addiction and although the Committee accepted that there was a low risk of future reoffending, it decided that because the orders were still in place for public protection reasons, Mr Wood was not fit to be restored to the Register."
The full report of Mr Wood’s restoration hearing can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
Matthew has been a veterinary nurse since 1989 and, throughout his career, has had a focus on nursing exotic animals, particularly in the zoo setting, with experience of nursing everything from ‘ants to elephants’. He regularly lectures to veterinary nursing and veterinary surgeon undergraduates at the Royal Veterinary College as part of their core modules on topics such as herpetological husbandry, and some areas of zoo and wildlife diagnostic imaging and anaesthesia. He also lectures extensively on herpetology throughout Europe and America.
Matthew has been an elected member of VN Council since 2016 and was re-elected this year. He was chosen to be Chair at last week's meeting of VN Council. He said: “I am very proud to be the first male veterinary nurse to hold the position of Chair of RCVS VN Council. In this position I will continue to work hard to support and progress the profession of the veterinary nurse.
"It is fundamental we give the general public, as well as our fellow veterinary professionals, a greater understanding of the excellent work we do. We have a positive impact on animal health and welfare, whatever the clinical environment or species. The lack of understanding of what veterinary nurses do is often cited as a chronic issue within my profession and it is something I plan to prioritise during my tenure as Chair of VN Council."
Joining Matthew will be Belinda Andrews-Jones RVN who was elected as Vice-Chair of VN Council. Belinda has worked in veterinary nursing for almost 30 years with a focus on emergency & critical care and is currently Director for Nursing at CVS, where she leads the more than 2,000 nurses in the group. Belinda has been an appointed member of VN Council since 2018.
Belinda said: “I am delighted to have been elected as Vice-Chair of VN Council by my fellow Council members. It is a huge honour and privilege to be contributing to the RCVS and the profession, in protecting and upholding the high standards of the UK veterinary nurse profession, while progressing the profession forward.
“I feel I can make a positive contribution to the already fantastic work that the college has achieved. I am passionate about progressing the profession forward and expanding the role of UK veterinary nurses."
Both Matthew and Belinda will take up their appointments as Chair and Vice-Chair respectively at this year’s RCVS Annual General Meeting which takes place on Friday, 10 July 2020. On that day the RCVS will also be saying farewell to the current VN Council Chair Racheal Marshall who was not re-elected in this year’s VN Council election.
More information about this year’s AGM can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/events/royal-college-day.
VN Council set up a special OSCE Taskforce in April this year to draw up proposals for an alternative to the OSCEs which would allow students and examiners to practise social distancing and remain safe.
While some awarding organisations and universities have since developed methods of holding their OSCEs within social distancing guidelines, others have had to cancel the OSCEs indefinitely on the grounds it would not be safe or practical to hold them.
In response, the Taskforce developed a new ‘Patient-based Assessment’ (PBA) method, which was approved by VN Council at its meeting last Wednesday, which will allow student veterinary nurses to prove they meet the Day One Competences and Skills, making them eligible to join the Register.
Racheal Marshall, Chair of VN Council (pictured right), said: “After much hard work, deliberation and consideration over a number of different options, we have developed an alternative assessment method for student veterinary nurses that is safe and complies with the social distancing guidelines, while still upholding our standards and ensuring student veterinary nurses are competent to join the Register.
"The alternative, called a Patient-based Assessment, will involve building up a small portfolio of case reports and supporting evidence to prove how those who use this assessment method meet the Day One Competences and Skills. Once this has been signed-off and submitted, students using this assessment method will undertake a detailed and structured discussion about their involvement with the cases they have described.
"There will be two examiners present for the interview, however, students will only have to discuss their cases with one of them. The outcome of the discussion will determine whether students can be awarded their licence to practise qualification and subsequently apply to join the RCVS Register of Veterinary Nurses."
The alternative assessment method may not be relevant to all student veterinary nurses as they may have an awarding body or university that has decided it can safely hold its OSCEs under the current conditions, or they may be training through the apprenticeship route. Those who are unsure whether this assessment method is applicable to them should contact their educational establishment for further advice and clarification.
Racheal added: “We recognise the difficulties student veterinary nurses have faced and that this has been an unsettling time, so we are pleased that the taskforce and VN Council has come together to develop a workable and deliverable alternative.”
A detailed handbook containing further information about the criteria and process for the Patient-based Assessment has been published on the RCVS website at www.rcvs.org.uk/document-library/veterinary-nurse-patient-based-assessment-student-handbook.
It is recommended all student veterinary nurses read this to get a full understanding of how the assessment method will work. The RCVS Veterinary Nursing Department can also be contacted on VNPBA@rcvs.org.uk
The recommendations were proposed by the Legislation Working Party (LWP), which was set up in 2017 to consider the principles governing any new legislation affecting veterinary regulation and come up with recommendations for what innovations could and should be included in any future replacement for the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966.
The LWP comprises members of RCVS Council, RCVS staff and representatives from the BVA and the BVNA.
The approved recommendations were grouped into five key headings: embracing the vet-led team; enhancing the veterinary nurse role; assuring practice standards; introducing a modern ‘fitness to practise’ regime; and, modernising RCVS registration processes.
The recommendations include:
Professor Stephen May, RCVS Council member and Chair of the LWP since its inception in 2017, said: “The scale of the changes that are recommended in this report are very significant indeed and, if implemented via new primary legislation, would really change the face of veterinary regulation, bringing it up to date with that of other healthcare professions, and ironing out many of the oddities and closing many of the gaps in our current regulatory regime.
"Changes to the legislative framework for veterinary regulation have been mooted for some time. While the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 has served the profession well for over 50 years, and we have been able to make some changes to it – for example, reducing the size of Council, the separation of the Disciplinary Committee from Council and introducing the concept of delegation to veterinary nurses via Schedule 3 of the Act. However, there are limits to how much we can continue to tinker around the edges, and it has become increasingly clear that new legislation is needed if we are to make progress.
"I have been very grateful to my colleagues on the Legislation Working Party for their hard-work over the past three years. There has been a lot of robust debate on how we can move veterinary regulation forward, but ultimately we have a consensus that there are significant deficiencies, imperfections and blind-spots in the current regime and, in order to ensure that the professions are able to best fulfil their mandate to protect animal health and welfare, and that the RCVS is able to meet its mission to set, uphold and advance veterinary standards, significant changes are needed.
"I am delighted that members of RCVS Council have agreed to put our recommendations to a full consultation and I look forward to seeing how this report and its, sometimes quite radical, recommendations will spark important debate of these big ideas.”
A full public consultation process on the recommendations is expected to take place later this year. After this has taken place, and depending on its outcome, and Council’s final decision on how to proceed, a full set of proposals on legislative reform will be put to the Department for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs in the hope of seeking support for new legislation.
While RCVS Council approved, in principle, the report as a whole, there was a separate debate on some of the report’s recommendations concerning reform to the RCVS disciplinary regime which do not require changes to primary legislation, but could be made through powers granted to the College via its 2015 Royal Charter. Further details on this will be announced separately.
The full Report of the LWP is available to view in the papers for the June 2020 meeting of RCVS Council at: www.rcvs.org.uk/document-library/rcvs-legislation-working-party-report-to-council-2020
The RCVS has also published a blog from Professor Stephen May explaining, in more detail, the workings of the LWP and the rationale behind its recommendations. This is available to view at: www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/blog/a-step-change-in-veterinary-regulation
Professor May’s presentation from the Council meeting is also available to view on the RCVS YouTube channel at www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos
At the meeting, which took place last Thursday, Council members were asked to decide how to proceed with three specific proposals on reforming the disciplinary system:
Acknowledging some of the concerns that have been raised about changing the standard of proof, RCVS Registrar Eleanor Ferguson said: “The RCVS is now one of just a few regulators that still uses the criminal standard of proof in determining the facts of a case. We have sought these changes as part of our ongoing aim to develop a compassionate and forward-looking disciplinary system with the protection of the public absolutely at its heart, whilst also acknowledging the huge toll the process takes on the mental health of veterinary professionals.
"Research that we carried out into the impact of changing the standard of proof indicated that it would not lead to a major increase in cases being referred from the Preliminary Investigation Committee to the Disciplinary Committee. Importantly the number is likely to be very low because the standard of proof only applies to proving the facts of a case; the judgement as to whether proven facts amount to serious professional misconduct will follow the same process as at present.
"We estimated that during 2019, there could have been just two more cases brought to DC under a altered standard of proof, with an additional three cases that were borderline but probably wouldn’t have proceeded any further. Conversely, we also estimated that three cases that did go to DC during 2019 would probably not have done, had the ‘Charter Case Committee’ option been available.
"Ultimately, the aim of the RCVS in regulating the veterinary professions is to protect the public and animal welfare as well as upholding the reputation of the professions. We believe these changes will better achieve that aim."
The consultation on whether to change the standard of proof as well as to introduce the Charter Case Protocol and ‘mini-PICs’ is now planned for later this year.
Further information about the proposals, including some of the arguments for and against changing the standard of proof, can be found in the papers for RCVS Council at: www.rcvs.org.uk/who-we-are/rcvs-council/council-meetings/4-june-2020/ (pages 70-97).
On 9 April, the College published a flowchart to help veterinary professionals to decide whether or not to carry out a particular type of work, whilst ensuring the health of their teams and clients, and working to uphold animal health and welfare.
The flowchart has been updated as follows:
Firstly, the box that previously said:
‘Can you effectively support the case while maintaining social distancing for your team and the public?’
now says:
‘Can you effectively support the case while abiding by the appropriate social/physical distancing guidance for workplaces to protect your team and the public?’
The College says this new wording better reflects the different language and varying guidance in place across devolved nations. It also recognises that the new government guidance is not just about maintaining a 2m distance, for which ‘social distancing’ appears to become a shorthand, but accepts that other biosecurity measures might be appropriate if the 2m rule cannot be followed in the workplace.
Secondly, the box that previously said:
‘Could the planned intervention have animal health and welfare or public health implications if not carried out within two months?’
‘Could the planned intervention have animal health and welfare or public health implications if not carried out?’
This change recognises that this phase of lockdown-exit may carry on for longer than a two-month period; it therefore leaves it to the clinician’s professional judgement in terms of the implications versus the risk, rather than seeing it within a specific time-period.
RCVS President Niall Connell said: "I’m grateful to the members of our Covid-19 Taskforce for continuing to keep under review our key guidance to the profession during the ongoing pandemic. Whilst these latest changes do not represent any significant changes for vets and vet nurses as they continue to care for the nation’s animals, it is important that we continually keep our guidance in line with that of the UK’s governments."
The updated flowchart is available to view and download from www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus.
As part of its review, the College had planned a series of focus groups of veterinary surgeons and nurses across the UK. However, these have had to be delayed both because of social distancing rules and because of the pressures that practice teams are currently working under. However, the agency tasked with hosting the focus groups is now exploring alternative options and it is hoped there will be a revised timetable soon.
In the meantime, the College says it now plans to commission an additional independent agency to survey veterinary surgeons about their experience of remote prescribing during lockdown.
In March, RCVS Council agreed to temporarily allow veterinary surgeons to prescribe prescription-only veterinary medicines remotely, without first having physically examined the animal, subject to a number of conditions and safeguards being in place.
This position is due for review by 30th June, and the College will be looking for feedback and data from veterinary surgeons about your experience of remote prescribing, in order to determine whether these arrangements can continue, with or without any extra safeguards.
Because remote prescribing is also one of the most important aspects of the planned under care review, feedback gathered now will help inform future discussions too.
RCVS President Niall Connell said: “We recognise the current conditions that veterinary practices are working under in no way represent normal practice life. Most practices will not have been set up to offer remote services and remote prescribing in a way that they might have chosen, given sufficient time and appropriate detailed guidance, if indeed there are any future guidance changes after the review.
"However, we feel it would be remiss of us not to seize the opportunity arising from this current crisis to ask about the experiences – good or bad – of those on the frontline of clinical veterinary practice in providing remote services to their clients.
"Whilst this will be no substitute for the formal evidence gathered by the research agency in due course, whatever data and feedback we can collate from veterinary practices at this unique time for our professions will, I’m sure, be extremely valuable to our ongoing discussions."
The survey was held between the 1st and 5th May and was sent to the 3,139 UK veterinary practices for which the RCVS holds a unique email address. In total it gathered 251 responses (a response rate of 8%) compared to the 532 responses to the initial survey conducted between 3rd and 7th April (a response rate of 17%).
The main changes compared to last month's survey were:
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS CEO, said: "This latest survey has identified some positive trends in terms of a slight uptick in business, including turnover, and fewer incidences of staff having to take time off with COVID or COVID-like symptoms.
“I am glad to see that the framework we published in April has, so far as we can see, provided veterinary professionals with greater guidance and reassurance regarding the fact that if it is feasible to do something safely under social distancing guidelines, then they can go ahead, if they choose to.
"We left plenty of scope for veterinary professionals to use their clinical judgement as to what services actually offer, depending on their facilities, level of staffing, availability of protective equipment, local disease pressures and so on.
"However, it is also clear that we are, by no means, out of the woods and that veterinary businesses are still struggling financially, with some of them reporting a very acute impact of the coronavirus and the associated restrictions on their businesses.
“We will continue to monitor the situation via these regular surveys, with the next one planned for early June. I would urge as many practices as possible to continue to complete them, so that we can build up a stronger evidence-base on how veterinary businesses have been affected. This information is not only vital for our own policy decisions but also allows us to present a stronger case to the Government and other public bodies where we wish to influence the decisions they make that will impact the veterinary professions and businesses.”
3,112 of the 18,228 veterinary nurses eligible to take part in the elections cast their votes, a turnout rate of 17.1%. While there were no VN Council elections in 2019 and 2018, this compares to a turnout of 14.5% in 2017 and 10.9% in 2016.
The results of the election are as follows:
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer for both elections, said: "Many congratulations to all those who were elected this year and we look forward to welcoming them to their places on their respective Councils at our Annual General Meeting later this year.
"Regarding VN Council, I would like to thank Racheal Marshall for her service, including her tenure as Chair of VN Council since 2018, during which there was the launch of the new Certificate in Advanced Veterinary Nursing and the development of a new VN qualification accreditation framework.
532 veterinary practices responded to the survey, which was sent to 3,096 veterinary practices for which the RCVS had a unique email address, on 3rd April.
The survey found that:
Three-quarters of those who responded to the survey answered a question on how the RCVS could better support veterinary practices through the crisis. The most frequent response (27%) was that the RCVS needed to provide clearer guidance, in particular as to what services it was permissible for veterinary practices to provide [the College published its updated guidance and flowchart on 9 April].
Of those who responded to the question, 15% felt that the RCVS was doing a good job or that there was nothing more it should do, while just 2% of responses expressed negative sentiment towards the RCVS.
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS Chief Executive, said: “I would like to thank all those practices who took the time in what is already a very fraught situation to respond to our survey and provide the evidence we need to gain a holistic picture of coronavirus’ impact on the business and economics of veterinary practices. We plan to continue running these surveys on a regular basis in order to gauge impact over time and the findings will feed into our policy and decision-making.
"This ongoing research will also be a vital tool when we are talking to Government and other bodies about the impact of policy on the veterinary sector. On this note, we are aware of the challenges of a minimum furlough period of three weeks given the need for practices to take steps to offer 24/7 emergency and critical care, and have written to government on this with some case studies around the impact this is having.
"To those on the ground it won’t come as too much of a surprise that the impact of the coronavirus has been profound in areas such as practice turnover and staffing, with many vets, veterinary nurses and other support staff being furloughed with the aim of signing them up to the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme.
"There are some bright spots in the data we’ve gathered – very few practices reported that they had made or were planning to make staff redundant, and many practices reported mitigating the challenge of social distancing by carrying out consultations with new and existing clients remotely.
"Since the survey took place we have also taken steps to meet some of the requests for greater clarity and guidance from the RCVS with the publication of our flowchart helping practices to decide what treatments it is appropriate to carry out safely amidst the COVID-19 pandemic."
The survey results can be read in full at www.rcvs.org.uk/publications.
The next practice impact survey is planned for early May.
The Queen’s Medal - the highest honour that the RCVS can bestow upon an individual veterinary surgeon - was given to Dr Mary Stewart MRCVS, a retired academic who spent most of her career at the University of Glasgow where she was responsible for the development of the modern vet school.
Dr Stewart was nominated by Professor Stuart Reid, the Principal of the Royal Veterinary College and former Dean of the Glasgow Veterinary School. In his nomination he said: “Mary Stewart is one of the unsung heroes of the veterinary profession. A veterinarian graduating from Cornell in 1949, Mary has been MRCVS since 1951 and without doubt has been one of the major influencers of ethical approaches in the vet-client-patient environment and, in particular, the impact of euthanasia on both owners and attending veterinarians. Conducting nearly all her professional career in the UK, the vast majority at the University of Glasgow, Mary was of the generation selected by Sir William Weipers to create the modern school at Glasgow, an institution in which Mary played a pivotal role that would have reach nationally and internationally.”
The Inspiration Award is given to vets or nurses to recognise their ability to inspire and enthuse others consistently throughout his or her career. This year, it has been awarded to Dr Freda Scott-Park MRCVS. Freda is a former president of both the British Veterinary Association (BVA) and the British Small Animal Veterinary Association (BSAVA) as well as the current coordinator of the Highlands & Islands Veterinary Services Scheme and a campaigner for identifying the links between animal and other forms of abuse through The Links Group.
The Impact Award is given to vets and nurses who have recently made a considerable impact that has affected the profession at large, animal health or welfare, or public health. This year two Impact Awards have been bestowed. The first is to Dr Rosie Allister MRCVS, a leading campaigner and researcher for and about veterinary mental health, as well as a veterinary educator, the manager of the Vetlife Helpline and a member of the RCVS Mind Matters Initiative Taskforce.
The second Impact Award recipient is Hannah Capon MRCVS, the co-founder and director of Canine Arthritis Management (CAM), a self-funded social enterprise that provides advice to both other veterinary professionals and animal owners on the treatment and management of arthritis in dogs.
This year the RCVS is also awarding three Honorary Associateships, bestowed upon those who are not veterinary surgeons or veterinary nurses but who are making a considerable impact in the veterinary sphere, whether in the field of campaigning, charities, research, politics or journalism, for example.
This year’s first Honorary Associate is Professor Maureen Bain, Professor of Comparative Anatomy and Histology at the University of Glasgow’s Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health & Comparative Medicine, and an Associate of Glasgow Vet School who has dedicated her career to research on improving the quality and safety of eggs for human consumption.
The second Honorary Associate is Mike Flynn, the Chief Superintended of the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SSPCA), for his collaborative work with the veterinary profession in areas such as the illegal puppy trade and the Links Group.
The third and final Honorary Associate is Professor Roberto La Ragione, the Deputy Head of the Surrey Vet School where he is also Professor of Veterinary Microbiology and Pathology and Head of the Department of Pathology and Infectious Diseases. Professor La Ragione was nominated for his contribution to veterinary education and research.
RCVS President Niall Connell (pictured right) said: “My hearty congratulations to all of this year’s award winners. Once again, it was a very strong field of people who have made and are making an indelible impact on veterinary science, the professions, animal health and welfare, food safety, public health, and plenty more besides."
Normally RCVS Awards & Honours are presented at Royal College Day in July. However, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the 2020 awards ceremony will instead be part of the proceedings of a combined Royal College Day and Fellowship Day, which will take at the Royal Institution on 2 October 2020. This event may be subject to cancellation and postponement depending on the latest Government advice and restrictions on the prevention of transmission of coronavirus.
Earlier this month, the government had exempted veterinary surgeries from the requirement to close their doors during the pandemic. Strictly speaking, the exemption meant that practices could carry on offering the same level of service as before, provided they followed further government guidelines on social distancing.
However, the College then advised that non-essential treatments should not be carried out until further notice, and that animals should only be seen in emergency, or if their health was likely to deteriorate as a result of inaction.
This included vaccination, where RCVS advice stated that whilst routine vaccinations were considered not urgent, there "may be scenarios where, in your professional judgement, vaccines are being given to reduce a real and imminent risk of disease; this includes in the face of an animal disease outbreak, or in a scenario where part of a vaccine course has been given and the animal may be exposed to the disease."
The updated College guidelines, issued last Thursday evening, appeared little changed, except to say that its advice concerning vaccinations is under review. Meanwhile, its new flowchart gives a very clear framework for veterinary professionals to work within, essentially leaving it to your own professional judgement to weigh up the risks.
However, the BVA went further, declaring amongst other things, that:
Vaccinations – we are now recommending that primary vaccinations and year 1 boosters in dogs and cats go ahead due to the increased risk of disease outbreak over a longer period of time, and annual leptospirosis vaccination due to the zoonotic risk. If additional component of the core vaccine is due at the same time, it should also be administered. In addition, we’re recommending rabbit vaccinations go ahead due to the seasonal disease risks. Rabies vaccinations should be carried out if required for certification reasons
.... leading to an outcry that the BVA's advice appeared to be being relaxed at precisely the point when the government is imploring the public to stay at home, and that:
To add further fuel to the flames, the British Small Animal Veterinary Association then issued a statement to the effect that it had not been consulted during the preparation of the new BVA guidelines, which BVA past President Robin Hargreaves felt was so economical with the truth that he resigned his BSAVA membership on the spot.
COMMENTAt the end of it all, there is but one simple truth for every veterinary surgeon who is working in these difficult times, and it is this: The government and the RCVS guidance gives you the freedom to exercise your professional judgement concerning whether or not an animal needs to be seen for whatever reason. Provided you can explain why you reasonably concluded that an animal should or should not be seen, that is all that matters. It trumps everything else.
This whole farago has highlighted a number of important issues in the profession, starting with the social media conspiracy theories that the new guidance came after pressure from corporate practices when as far as I can tell, it appears to have been driven by a genuine concern that that failure to vaccinate could cause significant welfare issues in the future.
That seems a reasonable argument, and very much in line with the College advice. But that in turn raises a far bigger question, which is what on earth the BVA (a voluntary membership organisation) was doing issuing what appeared to be instructions ostensibly for all members of the profession. Notwithstanding the fact that BVA recommendations have no legal weight, having all these chefs running around with different recipe books is itself a recipe for muddled communications and confusion over leadership.
In turn, that raises the even bigger question of what the BVA's role should be. Should it be snuggling up in bed with the RCVS, issuing joint edicts? Or should it instead be holding the College to account, challenging its decisions and demanding clarification where clarification is necessary. I would argue the latter. In this situation, the ONLY organisation issuing guidelines about vaccinations for practising vets should be the regulator. And it is the role of the BVA to challenge those guidelines if necessary, or to demand clarification.
Which leads me on to the next thing, which is that increasingly, members of the profession seem to demand explicit rules or guidelines to operate within. There are lots of hypotheses for why this might be true. Perhaps because we live in a more (or seemingly more) litigious world and veterinary professionals like the reassurance rules provide. Perhaps it is because the younger cohort of vets lack the self-confidence needed for decision-making. Perhaps corporatisation has a part to play, in that employees of larger organisations tend to play more by the rules. Or perhaps it is a consequence of the growth in the 'refer everything’ culture which means vets take fewer clinical risks.
Whatever the reason, it seems clear that in some cases, the RCVS tack of "you're a professional, decide for yourself" is perfectly reasonable, whereas on other occasions, such as Schedule 3, more explicit guidelines are demonstrably necessary. Once again, surely the role of the BVA as the "Voice of the profession” is not to issue its own advice, but to press the College for more explicit guidelines as necessary.
Lastly, there is the role of Facebook in all of this. Quite obviously vets are no more immune to conspiracy theories than members of the public who think that coronavirus is spread by 5G telephone masts. Sadly, the truth is usually far less exciting. However, the problem at the moment is that the growth in social media and Facebook groups has left the regulator and the representative associations on the back foot, such that it is often left to individuals from those organisations who 'happen to come across OK online' (rather than having any properly defined role) to firefight.
Photo: https://www.scientificanimations.com/wiki-images/
The annual minimum requirement for veterinary nurses will be reduced from 15 to 11 hours, while that of vets will be reduced from 35 to 26 hours of CPD. The reduction comes into force immediately.
The decision to reduce the hours was made by the new RCVS Council COVID-19 Taskforce, chaired by RCVS President Dr Niall Connell, which was set up in order to make temporary policy decisions related to the pandemic in a quicker and more agile way. The proposal had previously been considered and supported by the RCVS Education Committee, VN Council and CPD Policy Working Group.
Niall said: "A number of veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses expressed concern that it may be difficult to undertake CPD at present and so, in order to give the professions some breathing space, we decided we would reduce the minimum hours required for 2020. We also recognise that some practices are having to make the difficult decision to reduce their CPD budgets this year in response to falling footfall.
"However, it is worth reiterating that CPD need not be expensive or require physical attendance at lectures, congresses or other events. There are many online providers of CPD and other resources such as articles and webinars, some of which may be free. The key is that the CPD is relevant to you and enhances your professional practice and so we would still encourage all our members to undertake CPD as and when they can."
The policy will be under regular review and may be extended further if the circumstances demand. Those with any questions on the policy change should contact the RCVS Education Department on cpd@rcvs.org.uk
A full range of FAQs on the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact on the veterinary profession are available to view at www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus
On 23rd March, the Government demanded that the majority of public-facing businesses close their doors. Veterinary surgeries, however, have been exempted and are allowed to remain open.
However, the number of clients seen face-to-face should be kept to an absolute minimum and veterinary teams must insist on strict social distancing measures at all times.
In addition, the RCVS/BVA say that:
Routine treatments should not be carried out until further notice.
You may offer your clients advice and consultation services via remote means, including prescribing POM-V medicines where appropriate.
Clients and/or veterinary professionals should only travel to see animals if judged essential to do so.
Animals should only be seen in emergencies or where, in the judgement of the veterinary surgeon, urgent assessment and/or treatment is needed in order to reduce the risk of patient deterioration to the point where it may become an emergency in the near future (ie within the three-week time frame currently laid out by the Government for these measures).
Veterinary professionals should exercise judgement as to when it is necessary for you to see an animal and/or their owner in person. has updated its FAQs for veterinary professionals, which can be found here:
The College has updated its FAQs for veterinary professionals, which can be found here: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/advice-and-guidance/coronavirus-covid-19/
The BVA is now developing some further guidance to provide examples of what constitutes routine, urgent and emergency care.
There are 13 candidates standing in this year’s VN Council elections, including two existing VN Council members eligible for re-election and 11 candidates not currently on Council. They are:
Samantha AndersonJessica BeckettKirsten CavillRebecca ClarkDorothy (Dot) CreightonLindsey DoddEmma ForemanRacheal MarshallMegan OakeySusannah PhillipsMatthew RendleClaire RobertsCathy Woodlands
Ballot papers and candidates’ details for both elections have been posted to all veterinary nurses who are eligible to vote. Voters have also been emailed unique links the secure voting websites.
All votes must be cast, either online or by post, by 5pm on Friday 24 April 2020.
All candidates were invited to produce a video in which they answered up to two questions submitted to the RCVS by members of the electorate. The videos received so far have been published on the RCVS website at www.rcvs.org.uk/vnvote20 and on the College's YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos). The candidate statements and biogs, and the questions submitted by members of the profession have also been published on the vnvote20 page.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer, said: "With all that is happening currently, we are glad to say that we have been able to continue with business as usual as far as the RCVS and VN Councils elections are concerned, albeit with some minor delays on publishing the candidate videos.
"It is very encouraging that, after a two-year absence, the VN Council elections have come back stronger with a field of 13 candidates, and we hope that this will translate into increased turnout."
Those who are eligible to vote in the RCVS VN Council election but have not received either an email or ballot paper should contact Annette Amato, Deputy Head of Veterinary Nursing, on a.amato@rcvs.org.uk
Julie Dugmore, RCVS Director of Veterinary Nursing, said: "We have been in discussion with veterinary nursing education providers regarding a number of concerns they have raised regarding the support for student veterinary nurses and the progression with their licence to practise qualifications.
"These include concerns that, under the current circumstances, student veterinary nurses would not be able to fulfil their clinical placement requirements, as well as not being able to undertake the required assessments. Furthermore, institutions offering veterinary nurse education would not be able to continue their programme of approving and quality monitoring Training Practices.
"Therefore the following temporary arrangements and guidance have been approved by both the Veterinary Nurses (VN) Education Committee and VN Council. We ask that all student veterinary nurses, veterinary nursing education centres and Training Practices read the guidance.`'
The temporary arrangements and guidance are as follows:
Clinical placements
Several universities have expressed concerns regarding student veterinary nurses’ attendance in clinical placement over the coming weeks, due to the precautions around transmission of Coronavirus. This applies, in the main, to full-time students in all years of a programme, although there are particular concerns as to the impact this will have on final-year students being unable to complete the required number of hours in order to complete their programme and graduate.
Universities and awarding organisations have requested a degree of flexibility around the RCVS VN Registration Rules and completion of the RCVS Day One Skills, in light of the Covid-19 situation. The following therefore applies:
We recognise that it should not be compulsory for students to complete clinical placements within the next eight weeks, after which the situation will be reviewed. This will apply to students in any year of their studies.
We recognise that for students in their final year of study, it may be difficult for them to make up the hours of clinical placement missed prior to graduation. Universities and colleges should continue to support students and explore alternatives, however any shortfall relative to the requirements should not be a barrier to completion of the programme.
For BSc students in years 1 to 3 of their studies and FdSc students in years 1 and 2 of their studies, we would expect that there will be sufficient time for them to make up the number of hours prior to completing the programme. However we will review this as the Covid-19 pandemic progresses.
Student veterinary nurses will still be required to complete the Day One Skills for Veterinary Nurses in their totality as these seek to assure competency at the point of registration. Where a student has completed the Day One Skills in less than the 1,800 hours, this will be assessed on a case by case basis on application to register.
Assessments
We note that accreditation standards require veterinary nursing programmes to include an OSCE or similarly robust, objective and evidence-based form of practical examination to test safe and effective acquisition of a broad range of skills and competences as outlined in the RCVS Day One Competences and Skills for Veterinary Nurses.
There has been some concern regarding the number of examiners required for OSCE assessments in light of announcements from some organisations that are not allowing staff members to attend large gatherings.
Universities and awarding organisations may need to explore alternatives to the current delivery of the unseen and Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) used for assessment of the RCVS Day One Competences and Skills for Veterinary Nurses, as a result of measures to protect students and staff and reduce the risk of Coronavirus transmission. In this respect, the RCVS Examinations Manager and Chair of VN Education Committee will review proposals for changes to the assessment.
As universities and awarding organisation explore alternative methods, they should continue to consider the robustness of their processes in assessing practical skills.
Universities and awarding organisations will still be required to assure us, through subsequent analysis and evaluation, that all their assessments were sufficiently met Day One Competences and Skills.
Training Practice Approval and Quality Monitoring activities
The College says it will, however, continue to operate as close to normality as possible, with the main support services for veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses such as advice, lifelong learning (including qualifications and the new 1CPD platform), finance and Practice Standards available as usual over the phone, on email or via the website.
The College’s main statutory activities around accreditation, registration and regulation of the professions will also be largely unaffected, with most Committee, Sub-Committee and working group meetings held by telephone or video conference.
Apparently, however, the April meeting of RCVS Council was going to be too big to be held remotely, so it has been cancelled.
The things that were up for discussion, such as the standard of proof and the report of the Legislation Working Party, will be moved to a subsequent meeting. Should there be any urgent business to consider, Council members have been asked to remain available via email on the date originally scheduled.
The College says it will be deciding whether to proceed with forthcoming DC hearings on a case-by-case basis, to balance maintaining the health and welfare of all involved with the College’s responsibility to protect animal health and welfare and public health.
The College is having to postpone or cancel an increasing number of its events; latest updates and advice for the profession is at: www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus.
RCVS Chief Executive Lizzie Lockett, pictured right, said: "We have been planning for this eventuality for some time, so whilst Monday’s announcement from UK Government came a little sooner than expected, we are in a strong position to be able to operate as close to normal as possible.
"We have an excellent and highly committed team of staff and Council members at the College, who I know will continue to work hard from kitchen tables, studies and living rooms over the coming days and weeks to serve the veterinary professions and the animal-owning public.
"Whilst we are fortunate that much of our work can be carried out remotely, we fully appreciate that this is not the case for most veterinary professionals who themselves are currently facing many significant challenges in their daily work to care for the nation’s animals whilst also prioritising the health and welfare of their own teams."
The College is urging all veterinary surgeons, nurses and practices to check they have supplied it with their most up-to-date email address via www.rcvs.org.uk/myaccount so it can relay its latest advice as the situation evolves.
The review, which had been due to start in late 2019, will now start in April 2020.
Melissa Donald, Chair of the RCVS Standards Committee (pictured right), said: "Regretfully, as the scope and complexity of the review became clearer following Council’s approval of the project, it was also apparent that the original methodology, and the timetable set for it, was not going to be suitable to the task.
"Therefore, over the past few months, the Standards Committee and College staff have been working hard with the external research agency to revise the methodology and we have now reached the stage where we are confident we have got it right, and can now proceed with the review.
“While we regret the delay, as this review relates to fundamental principles about the provision of veterinary care, it is vital we get it right and that the process is as comprehensive as possible. It is better that it is right than rushed.”
Under the new methodology the review has been split into the following stages:
Melissa added: “Invitations to our regional focus group discussions, which will be selected randomly from amongst the professions by our research agency, will be going out soon and I would urge anyone who receives an invitation to come along and share their views and ideas.”
For further information, see: www.rcvs.org.uk/undercare
Kit, who has served on Council as an elected member since 2013, is currently the Chair of the RCVS Finances & Resources Committee and has been RCVS Treasurer for the past three years.
He is also a member of a range of committees and project groups across the RCVS including: the Audit and Risk Committee; the PIC/ DC Liaison Committee; the Certification Subcommittee; the Estate Strategy Project Board; the RCVS Knowledge Board of Trustees; and the Advanced Practitioners Panel.
Since 2003 Kit has been working as an internist (he is an RCVS-recognised Specialist in Small Animal Medicine) in private referral practice. In 2006 he became a founding partner in a multidisciplinary referral centre that he saw grow from five to 65 members of staff within five years.
His interests include workforce issues, communicating the diverse clinical and non-clinical skills of veterinary surgeons to the general public and government, and facilitating life-long learning through achievable further professional qualifications and effective CPD.
Kit said: "It was a great honour to be elected as the next Junior Vice President by my fellow council members. I feel that I can make a positive contribution to the work that the RCVS is already undertaking in ensuring the veterinary team remains healthy and respected. In particular I am keen to look at how the RCVS can help find solutions to our workforce issues - improving retention as well as encouraging and facilitating vets and nurses back into the profession."
In addition to Kit being elected as JVP, the current holder of that office, Dr Mandisa Greene, was confirmed as President for 2020-21 and current President, Dr Niall Connell, was confirmed as Senior Vice-President for this period.
Professor Susan Dawson was voted in as RCVS Treasurer, and she will be formally invested in this role at Royal College Day on Friday, 10 July.
Professor David Argyle has been elected as Chair of Advancement of the Professions Committee for a second year, Dr Susan Paterson has been elected as Chair of Education Committee for her second year, and Dr Melissa Donald has been elected Chair of Standards Committee for her second year.
Kit and Melissa's positions are subject to their successful re-election in the 2020 RCVS Council Elections
More information on the RCVS Council and its members can be found on the RCVS website: https://www.rcvs.org.uk/who-we-are/rcvs-council.
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 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 College says the event is aimed at RVNs who are interested in upholding standards of veterinary nursing professional conduct and who would like to help the RCVS maintain public confidence in the veterinary nursing profession. Prospective applicants for these roles should ideally have a minimum of five years' experience in veterinary nurse practice.
Attendees will have the opportunity to chat to representatives of the committee, and the staff involved in handling cases that go to disciplinary hearings. There will also be a short presentation on the application process from Thewlis Graham Associates – the external agency handling the recruitment.
RCVS staff and DC members will present some anonymised VN DC / DC example cases to talk through in small informal groups, to help convey an idea of the work involved and the challenges one could expect to face when making decisions on allegations of serious professional misconduct or fitness to practise.
The overall programme will be run in the afternoon from 3pm – 5pm and repeated in the early evening from 6pm – 8pm, to suit differing diaries and travel times. Snacks and refreshments will be provided on the day, and the RCVS will reimburse reasonable travel expenses for attendees.
Places at the information day can be reserved by contacting Deborah Rowlanes, RCVS Events Manager, via D.Rowlanes@rcvs.org.uk or 020 7202 0773. The deadline for registering is Friday 21 February 2020.
Alternatively, if you can't attend on the day itself, but would like to speak to the RCVS Registrar and Director of Legal Services Eleanor Ferguson about the vacancies, you can contact Deborah to arrange a convenient time.
Prospective committee members will then have until 5pm GMT Monday 2 March to submit their applications. Applications can be submitted through the Thewlis Graham Associates website: www.thewlisgraham.com/assignment-briefings.
This is the first VN Council election since 2017. There was no election in 2018 due to governance changes and there were too few candidates in 2019.
However, this year, 13 registered veterinary nurses have put themselves forward to compete for the two available places. They are:
Samantha Anderson RVN
Jessica Beckett RVN
Kirsten Cavill RVN
Rebecca Clark RVN
Dorothy Creighton RVN
Lindsey Anne Dodd RVN
Emma Foreman RVN
Racheal Marshall RVN (incumbent)
Megan Oakey RVN
Susannah Phillips RVN
Matthew Rendle RVN (incumbent)
Claire Roberts RVN
Cathy Woodlands RVN
The RCVS has uploaded each of the candidates’ biographies and election statements on to its website: www.rcvs.org.uk/vnvote20.
The elections will start from Monday 16th March when the ballot papers and candidates' manifestos will be posted and emailed to all members of the profession who are eligible to vote.
All votes, whether postal or online, must then be cast by 5pm on Friday 24 April 2020.
As with previous years, the RCVS is also inviting members of the profession to get a better idea of why each candidate is standing by taking part in 'Quiz the candidates' and submitting a question which will then be put directly to the candidates.
Each candidate for both elections will be invited to choose two questions to answer from all those received, and produce a video recording of their answers.
Recordings will be published on the RCVS website and YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos) on the week the election starts.
The College says only question per person is allowed, and any which it deems offensive, inappropriate, misleading, libellous or otherwise unlawful will not be distributed to the candidates.
You need to email your question to vnvote20@rcvs.org.uk or tweet to the College’s Twitter account @theRCVS using the hashtag #vnvote20 by midday on Friday 28 February 2020.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer for the election, said: "After two years without an election for VN Council it is fantastic to see that a record number of veterinary nurses have put themselves forward as candidates. It demonstrates that there is a desire amongst the profession to engage with VN Council and the important issues it decides on around veterinary nursing education, continuing professional development and registration. It is also the first year that the number of veterinary nurse candidates has outnumbered the number of vets standing for RCVS Council.
"We look forward to launching both elections next month and hope to see record turnouts in both elections. In the meantime please make sure to engage with the process and scrutinise the candidates and their views by submitting a question about an issue of interest to you."