Vet struck off for Somerset home-visit refusal

Please note
This is an archived news story.

The Disciplinary Committee of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons yesterday [19 July 2007] directed that a veterinary surgeon who had been practising in Somerset, should have his name removed from the Register of Veterinary Surgeons having found him guilty of disgraceful professional misconduct.

Mr William Angus Baird was convicted of the charge at the conclusion of a one-day hearing.  Mr Baird did not attend but agreed to the Inquiry taking place in his absence.

The charge related to his refusal to attend a 14-year old German Shepherd-cross bitch, 'Cassie', at the home of Mr and Mrs McConnell, when he knew, or ought to have known, that the visit was necessary.

The Committee heard that, on the evening of 22 February 2005, the McConnells telephoned the clinic where Cassie was registered and spoke to Mr Baird to request a home-visit when their elderly dog had suddenly collapsed and appeared distressed and in pain.

Mr Baird suggested that they bring Cassie to the surgery. They explained that they were unable to do so as both suffered from back problems: Cassie was heavy and they were unable to lift her.  They also explained that no assistance was available from neighbours as they were elderly. 

When later phoned by a second veterinary surgeon, Mr James Watson, whom the McConnells had found via the Yellow Pages and who had agreed to intercede on their behalf, Mr Baird still refused to visit the McConnells: "I am not doing a visit, I don't give a stuff, if you want to go, you go," Mr Baird was reported to have said to Mr Watson.

Mr Watson then promptly visited the McConnells and, quickly realising that Cassie's condition was terminal, decided to euthanize the dog. Mr Watson and his wife then took Cassie away for cremation and followed up with a condolence card to the McConnells, all of which the Committee commended as "an example of good veterinary professional conduct."

Meanwhile Mr Baird, although he did not deny the events had taken place, denied the charge of disgraceful professional misconduct. In a letter submitted to the Committee he stated that he did not consider that it was his duty to supply an ambulance service or attend the case away from the clinic. 

He denied that he knew or should have known that a visit was necessary and considered that Cassie would have been better served if she had attended the clinic, but how she was to be transported was not his concern.

It was the view of the Committee that Mr Baird had disregarded one of the fundamental guiding principles of the veterinary profession: "Veterinary surgeons must make animal welfare their first consideration in seeking to provide the most appropriate attention for animals committed to their care." (RCVS Guide to Professional Conduct)

Mr Baird's decision also ran contrary to guidance regarding the provision of 24-hour emergency cover that had been in place at the time. In a letter of 5 July 2007, Mr Baird submitted that he supplied 24-hour emergency cover at the clinic and he did not consider this to be inadequate.

Although the Committee recognised that the charge related to a one-off incident, it took account of the fact that Mr Baird had ample opportunity to say all he wanted to about the case and had chosen not to do so.

Chairman of the Committee, Mr Brian Jennings, said: "Not every case of a refusal to make a home visit out of hours, even if unjustified, would merit the severest sanction, but in this case the Committee has been unable to avoid it.  Mr Baird's conduct demonstrated, the Committee judges, a flagrant refusal to acknowledge or abide by the fundamental principle of the profession set out above.

"The Committee has therefore decided to instruct the Registrar to remove Mr Baird's name from the Register."

ENDS

For more information please contact:
Lizzie Lockett, Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons
020 7202 0725 / [email protected]