| Complaint: | Complaint 19-41 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Danielle Strohacker |
| Premises: | BluePearl Phoenix |
The complainant's sister's dog had been doing poorly for quite some time and was near the end of her life. They were planning to take the dog to their regular vet but the dog got worse quickly so they went to BluePearl Phoenix. They checked in and gave them an account of the dog's problems and stated they thought euthanasia was needed but wanted a vet's opinion. The dog was quickly examined and according to the complainant they said the dog's vitals were normal; according to the complainant the dog was actually breathing 60 times per minute and was staring straight forward, unaware and glassy-eyed. They were finally taken to a room next to a large barking dog which scared the dog even more. Their dog was put on the floor, sprawled out, and having difficulty breathing. An employee allegedly told them that the vet was in surgery and wouldn't be available for three to four hours. After three and a half hours the receptionist allegedly came in and told them that they hadn't started the surgery yet so it would be an additional three hours. During this wait the dog started to vomit. Eventually they decided to leave and the receptionist allegedly asked for help moving the dog out but got none. The dog was taken home and cried all night until the family veterinarian was able to euthanize the dog the next morning. The complainant says that she's had seven animals euthanized and had never been in a place that was less caring. She wonders if they were waiting to just let the dog die on her own.
Strohacker, the responsible veterinarian, writes a simple one-paragraph letter that says she wasn't present in the hospital or scheduled to work there at the time. Mayer, the vet who was there at the time, included a letter in the reponse but according to the vet board this isn't part of the public record.
The Investigative Committee discussion says that some members of the committee were concerned about the long delay. The veterinarians on the Committee apparently said if this were a primary care veterinarian then they would be concerned, but that in an emergency facility anything can happen. They state the dog was triaged appropriately.
| Source: | February 2, 2019 PM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Danielle Strohacker | Respondent |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Roll Call: | |
| Adam Almaraz | Aye |
| Amrit Rai | Aye |
| Christine Butkiewicz | Aye |
| Donald Noah | Absent |
| William Hamilton | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | March 3, 2019 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Proposed By: | Jessica Creager |
| Seconded By: | Sarah Heinrich |
| Roll Call: | |
| Christina Bertch-Mumaw | Recused |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Aye |
| Jane Soloman | Aye |
| Jessica Creager | Aye |
| Jim Loughead | Aye |
| Nikki Frost | Aye |
| 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.