I am against Petition 333 (To amend section 172 to allow an unlicensed veterinary assistant to place an intravenous catheter) for the following reasons:

Placing an intravenous catheter requires extensive training and knowledge of anatomy and physiology, aseptic preparation and placement technique, and a thorough understanding of implications regarding this procedure.  Intensive training is required to understand how to place the catheter in the least painful manner possible and to understand the repercussions of doing this procedure incorrectly. For example, an unlicensed assistant or other member of the public would not be sufficiently aware of the implications of administering drugs in a improperly placed IV catheter, or vein that has 'blown', to include causing pain and dangerous drug reactions in the body.  Improper preparation technique can cause infections at the IV site, leading to possible drug-resistant bacterial infections and even sepsis in a patient.

Training on-the-job is not sufficient to prepare those without formal schooling to perform this invasive procedure.  Rarely, is there direct oversight for training non-licensed individuals in practice, and this can be a danger to the patient.

Licensed veterinary technicians and veterinarians have gone through extensive schooling and oversight to learn the how's and why's for performing invasive procedures in their patients.  When they are licensed by the Board of Veterinary Medicine they have proven that they have done the schooling and training to perform tasks such as IV catheter placement, and are the only people qualified to administer certain drugs, including controlled substances, to a patient. It makes little sense to allow assistants to place IV catheters when they are not allowed to handle the majority of drugs that would be administered through an IV.

This amendment would endanger patient safety and undermine public trust in veterinary care by allowing untrained individuals to perform invasive procedures.