The complainant says she'd taken her dog to Eye Care for Animals three other times and
been seen by Barrett two of those times. The dog had been muzzled all three times. On
the fourth visit the dog wasn't muzzled and bit Barrett while he was trying to put eye
drops in the dog's eyes. The complainant says that he shouted "son of a bitch!" and
left the room bleeding. He then came back with a small band-aid on his finger and told
the complainant that her dog had just bit the tip of his finger off. He allegedly then
grabbed the dog and forced him on the table, telling him that he "was not the Alpha"
and that "your parents should not let you be the Alpha!" The complainant says Barrett
grew even more agitated and grabbed the dog's neck by both hands and lifted the dog
up into the air and choked him. The complainant says she cannot recall whether Barrett
told the dog he was going to "meet Jesus" or "have a talk with Jesus" but that he said
something along those lines. The complainant says she was frozen in tears believing
Barrett was going to kill her dog, and finally a technician, JJ Bishop, managed to get
the dog away from Barrett. The complainant states that the way the office staff acted
she felt this was likely not the first time an event similar to this had occurred.
The complainant's husband suggested calling the police and then came down to the clinic
to meet with Barrett. They also received the contact information for the CEO and talked
with her, but she had not heard of the incident as a report had not been filed. The dog
is said to be so afraid of the complainant's husband and son that he hides under a chair
when they try to pet him.
Barrett's response contains some brief summaries as a buildup to the main event. He then
states that the dog bit the tip of his thumb "quite severely at this exam, which induced
a puncture wound on the inside of my thumb tip and immediate penetration blood blister
under my thumb nail." He then says that as the dog had not been disciplined before he
turned the dog on his side and said "no, no, no" while holding his hand at the dog's
throat. He says that the complainant was very upset but took the instructions and the
dog home only to come back an hour later and ask what had happened. He says that he was
unable to resolve the situation with the complainant's husband.
The Investigative Committee said that there can be a reflex reaction when you're bitten
by a dog. The investigators also "commented they were taught the behavior modification
Respondent used was not an appropriate technique" and said it was extra bad that he was
choking the dog as "brachycephalic breeds are more susceptible to trauma when grabbing
them around the neck." They found violations regarding Barrett's conduct and the Board
found him guilty as well. He was sentenced to four hours of continuing education and is
still out there practicing veterinary medicine at Eye Care for Animals as of this writing
(2022).
ARS 32-2232 (12) as it relates to AAC R3-11-501 (1) for failure to show respect to the pet owner through courteous verbal interchange; and failure to provide professionally acceptable procedures due to Respondent's conduct, the behavior modification technique, the amount of time that passed between the bite and the behavior modification, and the decision to not muzzle a known aggressive dog.
ARS ยง 32-2232 (12) as it relates to AAC R3-11-501 (1) for failure to show respect to the pet owner through courteous verbal interchange; and failure to provide professionally acceptable procedures due to Respondent's conduct, the behavior modification technique, the amount of time that passed between the bite and the behavior modification, and the decision to not muzzle a known aggressive dog.
Penalties:
Probation (1 year)
Continuing education (2 hours in communication)
Continuing education (2 hours in animal behavior)
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.