| Complaint: | Complaint 20-26 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Lorna Lanman |
| Premises: | PetsVet Animal Hospital |
The complainant recently rescued a stray dog and brought the dog to Lanman for a spay procedure and microchip. She explained to the veterinary technician that she did not know if the dog had previously been spayed as she rescued the dog from the local gas station. She also wanted some vaccines administered. The total came to $467. She says that later that day she received another call asking if the dog had been through her first heat. She again restated that she didn't know. She then received a call stating that her dog was doing well and that the dog had actually already been spayed. The complainant asked if she could come get the dog but was told no, that the dog was still recovering from surgery, and they had changed the spay to an exploratory surgery instead. She then says that when she got the dog home, she definitely was able to see the spay scar on the dog; she wasn't able to originally because it had been hidden by hair. It turns out that her bill was $800.21 even though the original estimate was only $467. When she asked about it, she was told that the bill was actually only $450 as a generous $350 discount had been applied. The complainant concludes by stating that Lanman's license should be taken away for malpractice and that PetsVet are thieves.
Lanman's response states that the usual surgical preparation and anesthesia were performed but that they found no evidence that the dog had been spayed in the past. (This is markedly different to the complainant who said the original spay scar was quite visible once the dog had been shaved.) Lanman says she opened up the dog, and when she wasn't able to find the uterus, she had a technician call to ask whether the dog had a heat cycle. When she said the complainant didn't know she made the hole bigger to see if she could find the missing uterus. Once she found no uterus or ovaries, she put the dog back together. She also says that the incision from her surgery (with the big hole to look around) was so big that the complainant would never have been able to see any scar from a previous spay surgery.
The Investigative Committee found no violations. They said that a photo the complainant showed them could have been a scar from any surgery as it was high on the abdomen, and they also said that a surgery scar could have been from a procedure such as a C-section. Some members on the Committee apparently had a concern that no alternatives were presented, such as just waiting to see if the dog later went into heat; however, that was not viewed as rising to the level of a violation.
Another "generous discount" tale involving Lanman and the PetsVet Foundation as mentioned previously in 20-07.
There's a similar tale where a different vet goes on a quest for a cat's missing uterus in 21-126.
| Source: | December 12, 2019 AM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Lorna Lanman | Respondent |
| Roll Call: | |
| Carolyn Ratajack | Aye |
| Christina Tran | Aye |
| Jarrod Butler | Aye |
| Robert Kritsberg | Aye |
| Steve Seiler | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | January 1, 2020 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Proposed By: | Robyn Jaynes |
| Seconded By: | Jessica Creager |
| Roll Call: | |
| Christina Bertch-Mumaw | Absent |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Absent |
| 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.