27 Jan 2022
Marthinus Ryk Botes, who had denied two of nine charges against him relating to performing (or recommending) inappropriate total hip replacements on dogs, has been removed from the RCVS register.
Vet Times
Job Title
Image © Chinnapong / Adobe Stock
A Kent vet has been removed indefinitely from the RCVS register after carrying out total hip replacements (THRs) on four dogs that did not uphold their health and welfare – and without consulting their owners on alternatives or gaining informed consent.
Marthinus Ryk Botes faced a total of nine charges related to performing (or recommending) inappropriate THRs on five dogs without adequate investigation and without getting informed consent from the owners.
One of the charges also related to a failure to keep adequate, clear and detailed clinical records relating to the five dogs.
Dr Botes denied two charges related to a Labrador retriever called Cola, but admitted seven others and that these charges amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
Both the college’s and Dr Botes’ counsel requested charges one and two be dismissed as Cola’s owner did not attend the RCVS disciplinary committee (DC) hearing to give evidence and would, therefore, not be available to be cross-examined. The DC agreed and dismissed these charges, finding them not proved.
However, it found remaining charges – involving a male Staffordshire bull terrier called Kilo, a female cocker spaniel named Daisy, a West Highland white terrier-Japanese akita inu-cross called Sora and a bichon frise-cross called Penny – proved.
In considering whether the admitted charges amounted to serious professional misconduct – both individually and cumulatively – the DC considered an expert report from John Innes, RCVS specialist in small animal surgery (orthopaedics) and Duncan Midgley, RCVS advanced practitioner (small animal orthopaedics). The DC also considered Dr Botes had admitted both to the charges and that they amounted to serious professional misconduct.
Ian Arundale, chairman of the committee, said: “In coming to its decisions, the committee took into account Prof Innes’ opinions that it was not reasonable for Dr Botes to have carried out the THR without sufficient investigation into Kilo’s pain; that the THR undertaken in respect of Sora was not in the animal’s best interests; and that it was ‘entirely unnecessary’ to recommend the THR in respect of Penny.
“In addition, the committee has found that both THRs performed in respect of Daisy were not in her best interests. Thus, in the committee’s view, Dr Botes’ actions and omissions did not ensure the animals’ health and welfare.”
The DC took into account that the THRs in question were a source of financial gain, that Dr Botes’ conduct was repeated over a considerable period of time, and that he was in an increased position of trust and responsibility because of perceived expertise in small animal orthopaedics and its education.
However, it took into account, as a mitigating factor, that Dr Botes had indicated some insight into some aspects of the charges in his written communications to the college, in his witness statement, and in his admissions at the start of the inquiry. The DC subsequently found all the factual matters proved to amount to serious professional misconduct.
The DC considered other sanctions, including suspension and a request – by Dr Botes’ counsel – for postponement of judgement with undertakings. However, it directed Dr Botes should be removed from the register indefinitely.
Mr Arundale added: “In light of the gravity of the conduct, and all of the factors taken into account, any lesser sanction would lack a deterrent effect and would undermine public confidence in the profession and the regulatory process. Removal was the only appropriate and proportionate sanction.”
For full charges and further details, visit the RCVS website.
