17 Apr 2020
“We felt it was right to give practices the option of doing work that would help reduce or manage significant animal welfare problems“ – president Daniella Dos Santos.
James Westgate
Job Title
The BVA has denied its controversial new guidance has created an ethical “free for all” that risks leaving vets and nurses in a moral minefield.
On the day almost 1,000 people died due to coronavirus (10 April), the RCVS and the BVA issued new guidance allowing veterinary practices to carry certain procedures that two weeks earlier had been deemed inappropriate and “against the spirit” of the COVID-19 lockdown.
A flow chart (pictured – click to view) has been issued by the RCVS for clinicians to work through before deciding if treatment is required, but many feel this leaves veterinary practices, owners and staff in an invidious position.
Kate Higgins owns the Village Veterinary Centre, an independent practice in Formby, Merseyside, and said: “Like me, many of my colleagues in small practices are shocked by this apparent sudden change in guidance. Sadly, many of them will feel forced to start performing vaccinations in order to not lose clients.
“We are supposed to be guardians of public health as well as animal health. I would risk my life for a suffering animal but I will not risk my life to vaccinate one, and I certainly would not ask my team to do so.”
However, speaking to Vet Times in the wake of her latest webinar in which she and RCVS president Niall Connell responded to some of the backlash caused by the decision, BVA president Daniella Dos Santos pointed to the impact that sustaining an emergency-only position might have on animal welfare.
She said: “Some form of Government lockdown restrictions is likely to continue for months and it would not be sustainable to only do emergency and urgent work. We felt it was right to give practices the option of doing work that would help reduce or manage significant animal welfare problems.”
Ms Dos Santos also strongly refuted the suggestion made by some vets that the Major Employers Group, that represents the interests of some of the UK’s largest practice groups, influenced the BVA’s decision, adding: “My personal ethics are something that I hold very dear and there is no way that I would be BVA president if I thought BVA were in the pockets of commercial interests.”
Many practice owners are concerned the new guidance will create an unfair playing field, with some practices continuing to exercise caution and leave many staff furloughed while others interpret the guidance differently.
The RCVS flow chart makes it clear that responsibility lies with clinicians on a case-by-case basis. College advice for those worried neighbouring practices may be operating outside the guidance is for those practices to be contacted by concerned parties.
However, should this prove unsuccessful, the RCVS has created a confidential reporting line for people to report those considered in breach. It is not yet clear what penalties – if any – will be imposed on practices deemed to have cross the line.
RCVS president Niall Connell said: “As part of our investigations of any concerns raised, we would be turning to those responsible for clinical policy and we would expect them to be able to justify any of the decisions they have made with reference to the Government’s public health advice as well as our own published advice.”
