| Complaint: | Complaint 20-30 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | April Talkington |
| Premises: | Continental Ranch Pet Clinic |
The complainant took her cat to Talkington for euthanasia. She says that her cat was desperately crying while the staff tried to insert a catheter into his leg. She asked if the cat had been sedated as the cat was already painful and anxious and was allegedly told no. She says Talkington quickly came in, flushed the IV line, and then adminstered the sedative and the euthanasia drug one right after the other. Talkington allegedly told her that this was "smoother" than the way her colleague, Stratton, does euthanasias; the complainant states that rather than being able to comfort her cat in his final moments she was asked to hold the cat down while Talkington gave him the fatal drug. She was very concerned about how this euthanasia was so different from an earlier one Stratton did on another of her cats; she tried to follow up and eventually received a call from Talkington reiterating that "this way was smoother." She tells us that the cat had shown up over a decade ago at Handmaker Jewish Services for the Aging and spent 12 years of his life providing comfort and companionship to the dying; she says he deserved a better death than what Talkington did to him.
Talkington's response is rather unique in that her lawyer, rather than her, wrote the response. No doubt many of these veterinarians have attorneys assist in writing the response but in this case it appears to have been outsourced entirely; the response is written and signed by Robert Berk and Clarissa Reiman of Jones, Skelton, and Hochuli. In it we have the testimony of several staff members stating that the cat was comfortable and calm and that the complainant never said anything negative about the euthanasia at the time. The response also says that Talkington did not know the complainant had been attempting to contact her to discuss the euthanasia after it happened. Most importantly, the lawyers tell us that since the complainant didn't accuse Talkington of an ethical or statutory violation the entire thing should be thrown out.
The Investigative Committee said that it can be distressing "if it is perceived" the cat was having a bad time during the euthanasia. They say that the complainant "misunderstood" the cat's vocalizing as suffering during its euthanasia. They state that the cat vocalized when he showed up as well as during the visit, so he was stressed, but nothing inappropriate happened during the euthanasia procedure.
| Source: | December 12, 2019 PM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| April Talkington | Respondent |
| Clarissa Reiman | Respondent Attorney |
| Roll Call: | |
| Adam Almaraz | Aye |
| Amrit Rai | Aye |
| Brian Sidaway | Aye |
| Cameron Dow | Absent |
| William Hamilton | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | January 1, 2020 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| Proposed By: | Jessica Creager |
| Seconded By: | Jane Soloman |
| 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.