| Complaint: | Complaint 18-19 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Stephen Gilson |
| Premises: | Pet Urgent Care |
| Related: | 18-47 |
The complainant's dog ate a bunch of baby wipes and then stopped eating or defecating at all. Their family veterinarian diagnosed a blockage and felt it needed dealt with quickly. They took the dog to Pet Urgent Care where the veterinarian there, Stinnett, wasn't sure that he had a blockage at all. They did a barium study to confirm and sent the dog home. Soon the dog had "white stuff" coming out of "both ends". The dog declined overnight and surgery wasn't performed back at Pet Urgent Care until 5:00 PM the following day. The complainants found it difficult to get updates from the urgent care facility, and when they discharged their dog the day after surgery, he still seemed very unwell. He continued to deteriorate at home and the family veterinarian sent them to BluePearl where sepsis was diagnosed and he was euthanized. Both the complainant and their family veterinarian were none too pleased at the conduct or the outcome.
While Stinnett did the actual surgery, Gilson is the responsible veterinarian for the premises, and as much of the complaint pertained to the facility, he was up at bat on this one. Gilson, board-certified veterinary surgeon and Founding Fellow in surgical oncology, has quite the reply, and he wants you to know he had nothing to do with any of it. He provided no care to the dog at all as he was on vacation and only tried to read radiographs and give directions to Stinnett on his cell phone. In fact, it sounds like it was Gilson himself, based partially on what Stinnett sent and what she told him, who suggested waiting on surgery and doing the barium study instead. He also goes on to state that the complainant's concerns about getting in touch with the clinic were basically impossible, that the family was embellishing things, that they were wrong about how their own dog was doing at discharge, and that the family veterinarian needed to stop being an "armchair quarterback" after the fact.
The Investigative Committee said they had serious concerns about Stinnett's conduct in the case but not with Gilson either personally or in his role overseeing the entire hospital. They recommended maybe somebody should go after Stinnett instead.
| Source: | December 12, 2017 AM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Stephen Gilson | Respondent |
| Roll Call: | |
| Alex Casuccio | Aye |
| Christine Butkiewicz | Aye |
| Ed Hunter | Aye |
| Mary Williams | Recused |
| Ryan Ainsworth | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | February 2, 2018 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Stephen Gilson | Respondent |
| Proposed By: | Julie Young |
| Seconded By: | Darren Wright |
| Roll Call: | |
| Christina Bertch-Mumaw | Absent |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Absent |
| Jessica Creager | Absent |
| Jim Loughead | Aye |
| Julie Young | Aye |
| Nikki Frost | Absent |
| Robyn Jaynes | Aye |
| Sarah Heinrich | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
The primary source for the above summary was obtained as a public record from the Arizona State Veterinary Medical Examining Board. You are welcome to review the original records and board meeting minutes by clicking the relevant links. While we endeavor to provide an accurate summary of the complaint, response, investigative reports and board actions, we encourage you to review the primary sources and come to your own conclusions. In some cases we have also been able to reach out to individuals with knowledge of specific complaints, and where possible that information will be included here.