| Complaint: | Complaint 20-40 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Dimitri Brown |
| Premises: | Pima Pet Clinic |
The complainant begins by telling us that even though the complaint is about Dmitri Brown at Pima Pet Clinic, she talked about the events with Chance at Encanto Pet Clinic. As both Pima Pet Clinic and Encanto Pet Clinic are owned by the same company, she was told that Chance had to file an "Incident Report" about it. The complaint itself regards the euthanasia of her dog, who she says died as a result of lengthy suffocation rather than euthanasia; she ascribes the failure to a variety of problems with Pima Pet Clinic which she subsequently details (improper procedures, lack of knowledge, and a clinic in the middle of remodeling). Her dog had a diagnosis of congestive heart failure and had been doing well but seemed to be having difficulty after getting home from a nail trim. She took the dog to Pima Pet Clinic's emergency clinic where she was told the dog needed a shot of Lasix. The complainant agreed. Brown met with the complainant and allegedly told her the dog had fluid in her lungs but didn't have an oxygen reading as he didn't want to stress the dog. The dog was put in an oxygen compartment. Brown allegedly talked about the prognosis and costs of the dog, which the complainant said would not be an issue. She was more concerned about quality-of-life issues. She related that Brown didn't want to give his opinion about euthanasia but told her he prefers to put his pets down before they get very sick. She began to become uncomfortable around Brown, first with his body language and later during discussions about what to do with the dog's remains. She explicitly stated she wanted the dog sedated before being euthanized so she wouldn't know what was going on. She details a rather confused euthanasia, beginning with some delays while the dog was out of oxygen, a post-sedation urination, a live dog struggling to breathe under sedation, and a hair trimmer that stubbornly refused to work in multiple electrical outlets. It also appears that Brown had difficulty finding a vein, leading to yet more delay and struggling on the part of the dog. the dog's gums lost all color while he tried to insert a butterfly needle. The complainant says at this point she told him the dog needed more sedation as she was suffering, but he said she wasn't. The dog was rolling her eyes around and trying to lift her head up to see what Brown was doing. At this time another woman came in and began speaking with Brown about the hair clippers. This other woman also helped with the euthanasia, as it appears Brown was unable to inject the medication. She says her dog's eyeballs were open, dry, and bulging, and her dog's mouth was stuck wide open trying to breathe. The complainant was unsure if the dog was now dead or just sedated; Brown confirmed the death with his stethoscope for quite some time and then hovered around in the room rather than letting the complainant say goodbye. She says that she has euthanized dogs in the past as a Pima County Animal Control Officer and she's never seen a dog suffer like that; she wants Brown judged by his peers on the veterinary board. She also raises concerns that Brown advertised himself as an expert on end-of-life care and that he's medical director at this facility that also teaches students (something called JTED). She also learned that her cremation bill was so low because it was also a JTED facility and she's not sure she even has her dog's remains.
Brown's response beings with the check-in and initial workup of the dog, then goes to the discussion regarding possible euthanasia. He says that he told the complainant the dog would have to be in the hospital for another couple of days, perhaps longer, and he couldn't guarantee the outcome. On the other hand, he says that they could just decide the dog had been through enough and didn't want to suffer. He says in that case he would suggest euthanasia, but there was no right or wrong decision to be made. He says that when asked he said he would euthanize the dog in her current condition. He also tells us that he tried to prepare the complainant for the euthanasia, stating that it's not uncommon to see a dog try to take a last breath up to a minute after dying, but that it's okay because the dog's brain is already gone. He also said that as this dog had heart failure it might be normal to see bloody fluid come out the nose "as she relaxes, which can be alarming to see." He says that when the complainant chose euthanasia, he told her that the dog could severely decompensate as the result of the sedative. He tells us that another emergency came in the front door during the euthanasia and that while the dog was sedated in his opinion, the complainant was concerned her dog was suffering. He relates some of the same events, such as problems with the hair trimmer, as the complainant; we learn that there's construction in the clinic, but those outlets weren't marked because nobody knew they were not working. He also reassures us that despite the dog moving her head around during the euthanasia that she was only minimally aware. He says that his staff member will vouch that the euthanasia solution went in as required. Lastly, he states that he is not the director of the facility (contrary to the complainant) and is a volunteer and license holder for the PIMA JTED veterinary science program for high schoolers; however, that's not affiliated with Pima Pet Clinic at all.
The Investigative Committee said that there were two stories here about what happened; they agree with Brown's, not the complainant's, though they don't explicitly state that until later. They stated that euthanasias in dogs with congestive heart failure or circulatory issues can be "difficult to watch" and "not recommended for the pet parent to be present for" as "emotions would be high."
| Source: | January 1, 2020 PM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Dimitri Brown | Respondent |
| Roll Call: | |
| Adam Almaraz | Aye |
| Amrit Rai | Aye |
| Brian Sidaway | Aye |
| Cameron Dow | Aye |
| William Hamilton | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | February 2, 2020 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Proposed By: | Darren Wright |
| Seconded By: | Sarah Heinrich |
| Roll Call: | |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Absent |
| Jane Soloman | Aye |
| Jessica Creager | Aye |
| Jim Loughead | Aye |
| Nikki Frost | Absent |
| 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.