Complaint: | Complaint 19-49 |
---|---|
Respondent: | Emily Clinton |
Premises: | Squaw Peak Animal Hospital |
The complainant took her pregnant dog in for a checkup and Clinton allegedly decided to do a Caesarian section. There were six puppies, five alive and one dead; the complainant relates that the puppies were small. She asked Clinton about a spay at the same time and was told not to as it could interfere with nursing. At home she says she was able to finally get the puppies to nurse, but after she gave her dog Deramaxx (as prescribed), two of the puppies were dead and her dog had droopy eyes. She says she gave her dog a charcoal tablet, took the puppies and started bottle-feeding them again, and "asked God for help." She says she also called a 24-hour vet for advice and received none. She concludes by stating that she went to the clinic as it was recommended by the breeder and had been quoted a firm $1250 for C-section but was charged $1550. She laments the loss of the two dead pups and states that she still has them if needed for examination.
Clinton states that she was called by the complainant over concerns the dog was going into labor. She states she told the complainant that the dog could be having an abnormal labor and that the puppies may not survive. She disputes ever quoting $1250 for the C-section as she would not give a firm quote, and the amount she suggested was approximately $1550. She then details the surgery to fetch out the five live puppies and the one dead one. She says that she warned the complainant that live puppies that are so small often die in the first few days. Follow-up calls with the complainant are detailed, including one call in which the complainant allegedly said all was going well, followed by another stating that the dog had tried to attack some of her puppies. Another call occurred after the complainant left a message indicating that two of the puppies had died. In this case she says the complainant was very concerned because of online results saying the Deramaxx was a terrible medication; the complainant allegedly told her both the dog and her puppies were very sedate, but Clinton told her that it couldn't be the Deramaxx. She also asked about the dog attacking her puppies but the complainant allegedly told her the dog was just being rough and that those puppies weren't the ones that died. She also notes the complainant's dispute over fees.
The Investigative Committee said that written estimates and instructions are always better but that verbal ones are acceptable. They said that there was missing documentation in the medical record for penicillin but that it didn't really matter. The Committee didn't believe the Deramaxx could be responsible for the loss of the puppies and suggested it was an underlying problem with the tiny pups.
Source: | April 4, 2019 AM Investigative Committee Meeting |
---|---|
People: | |
Emily Clinton | Respondent |
Roll Call: | |
Carolyn Ratajack | Aye |
Christina Tran | Aye |
Jarrod Butler | Aye |
Mary Williams | Aye |
Robert Kritsberg | Aye |
Result: | Passed |
Source: | May 5, 2019 Board Meeting |
---|---|
People: | |
David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
Proposed By: | Christina Bertch-Mumaw |
Seconded By: | Jessica Creager |
Roll Call: | |
Christina Bertch-Mumaw | Aye |
Darren Wright | Aye |
J Greg Byrne | Aye |
Jane Soloman | Aye |
Jessica Creager | Aye |
Jim Loughead | Aye |
Nikki Frost | Aye |
Robyn Jaynes | Aye |
Sarah Heinrich | Absent |
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.