Vet Board Turns Down Petition

The proposal to require owner consent for student practice was on the agenda of the Board of Veterinary Medicine for their October 22 meeting, and they made short work of it – the decision took about 10 minutes, even though the comments in support outweighed the comments in opposition by almost two to one. Discussion began with a motion to deny the petition (made by Dr. Joseph May, Kings Mountain Animal Clinic, Collinsville, VA.) One member seems to have an open mind on the subject, and the other four who were present said little or nothing. When the vote was taken, it was unanimous – but at the same time the issue was referred to a committee for further study. So does this mean that the Board didn’t like the language I used but thinks the proposal has some merit and wants a committee to take a closer look at it? Or have they referred it to a committee in the hope that it will die a quiet death out of the public eye? I haven’t watched this group in action long enough to draw a conclusion. At this time, I think the best course of action is to wait for the committee to meet (I plan to attend) and then assess the situation. If it looks like this is not a good faith effort, or if it will drag the process out inordinately (the regulatory process itself takes 18-24 months to complete and we aren’t even close to that yet), then I have Plan B organized and ready to launch. Stay tuned, because I’ll need your help if we come to that point. In the meantime, if your vet is on the list below of individuals who commented in opposition to requiring owner consent for student practice, you might want to have a talk with him or her about your expectations: David K. Bruce, Read Mountain Animal Hospital, Roanoke Dunbar Gram, Animal Allergy and Dermatology, Virginia Beach Betsy Henly, Leesburg Veterinary Hospital, Leesburg Tracy McKenzie, Carroll Veterinary Clinic, Hillsville Brett VanLear, Animal Health Care Center, Waynesboro (he is also director of the veterinary technology program at Blue Ridge Community College) Lisa Wilson, Brandon Animal Hospital, Roanoke Some of the comments in opposition surprised and shocked me. This from a veterinarian: “With this new proposed regulation, if an owner declines can the student then not do a physical exam?” (Correct, “no” means “no.”) This from another vet: “I agree to notification but NOT to consent.” And this from a veterinary technology student: “I also believe that owners would be uncomfortable letting students work with their pets even under the supervision of a veterinarian.” (And this justifies hiding what you’re doing from owners?) The Virginia Veterinary Medical Association also submitted comments in opposition, and misstated the facts in the process. They claimed that the current regulations cover all surgical procedures, when in fact owner consent is only required when a student performs surgery unassisted by a licensed veterinarian. They ended by stating “the VVMA does not support the changes requested by the petitioner.” On a related subject, the Board also approved a proposal from the VA Tech vet school to allow students to begin supervised practice before their fourth year, in spite of many negative comments from the non-veterinary public. Follow this link for more information (scroll down the page until you come to the updates; it will be the first one that you find.) http://www.change.org/p/virginia-tech-stop-letting-vet-school-residents-practice-without-faculty-supervision-2 As always, I welcome your opinions; you can contact me at LeeHenkel01@gmail.com.