20 Nov 2023
A disciplinary panel was told the nurse removed the heads from two cats before putting them in bags and freezing them.
Allister Webb
Job Title
Image © stadtratte / Adobe Stock
An RVN has been reprimanded after she removed the heads from two dead stray cats before taking them home and keeping them in a freezer.
The nurse, who has not been named following a successful anonymity application, admitted two charges at an RCVS hearing earlier this month.
But the committee concluded other possible sanctions were not merited for what was described as a “one-off” incident, despite acknowledging the wider health and biosecurity risks.
The incidents occurred while the nurse, known only as B, was working at an unnamed veterinary practice in February 2022.
A report of the hearing said that, during an interview with a senior manager, she stated she had been sorting bodies in the practice cold store with colleagues when she asked if she could take “a couple of skulls from the strays”.
She said she shared an interest with a friend who owned mealworms and “cleaned up” strays and wildlife, displaying the skulls at home.
She also claimed another RVN present at the time had permitted her to remove the skulls.
The college argued that her actions should be seen as serious professional misconduct due to a lack of respect for the animals concerned, the health risks associated with her failure to meet biosecurity requirements and the undermining of public confidence in the profession.
But, while she conceded her actions fell short of expected standards of conduct, B argued her actions were misjudged rather than malicious and were not intended to show a lack of respect.
However, the committee said she had “abused” her position to pursue an individual interest rather than fulfilling her professional duties.
The report continued: “Whatever permissions she received should not have made her believe she had a licence to act as she did.”
In her application for anonymity, B said she feared the potential backlash from publicity around the case could leave her at risk of verbal or physical attack.
Although the college opposed the application, the committee said the case “could easily be misconstrued as representing conduct of a scandalous nature when in reality it may only have been a matter of inappropriate behaviour”.
On sanctions, the committee said it took account of the nurse’s early admissions, her relative youth and inexperience having been in the profession for four years, the length of time that had passed since the incidents and her efforts to avoid any similar wrongdoing.
It said it had no concerns about whether B would fail to abide by the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct in future and claimed a suspension would remove her from practice “wholly inappropriately”.
Seven character references, five written by RVNs who either trained or worked with B, were submitted to the panel who said they suggested she had a “bright future” in the profession.
The report added: “In the circumstances she ought to be allowed to continue in practice.”
