An amendment to regulations establishing grounds for unprofessional conduct (Section 140) is adopted to include “committing an act constituting fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation in dealing with the board or in the veterinarian-client-patient relationship.”

Question: If this regulation were to beome part of unprofessional conduct, Would telling the pet owner that the pet needs to stay overnight in the clinic to "keep an eye on her" when the vet knows the clinic will not be staffed overnight be considered "misrepresentation"?

Especially in light of the fact, that when the client signed the disclosure that staff was not on site 5 years earlier, it was not given to the client as a separate document as is currently required by the regulations but was included in all the initial documentation that goes with the first visit to the clinic.

Especially in light of the fact, that the a copy of the discloure regarding staffing is not given to the client at the time the client signs the document.

Since, the staffing disclosure is given with other documents, the owner is only notified at the inital visit, since the owner is not given a copy of the document at the time of the initial visit and then 5 years later is told the pet has to stay overnight so they can "keep an eye on the pet" when they know that they are going to turn off the light and leave the helpless kitten all alone to die in the dark,  I believe that this scenario rises to the level of deceit and misrepresentation and possible fraud, when in cases the owner is charged for overnight "care".

This Board believes that it would be redundant to provide the owner a copy of the disclousre statement, to have a new disclosure statement signed at the time a pet is being left alone with an exception for a true emergeny situation or to post signs clearly notifying the owner as to the real truth as to what "keeping an eye" on the patient really means.

And this does not even begin to discuss the deceitful action of the vet promising to notify the owner of any changes, when the pet is waking up at 2:30 and is "non responsive" at 4:40 and the vet does not notify the owner.  I would think this also rises to deceit and misrepresentation.  But I think this already violated the duty to provide a reasonable standard of care, but this Board believes it is a reasonable standard of care to leave a non responsive helpless innocent kitten all alone to die, without notifiying the owner.

Just my thoughts.  Thank you for this forum.  Respectfully submitted.