| Complaint: | Complaint 20-89 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Heather Leigh Reidy |
| Premises: | BluePearl Phoenix |
The complainant says that she took her dog to BluePearl Phoenix because her dog was bloated and normally not that big. She went there with her fiance who informed the staff regarding the situation. They later received an update that the dog's gums were purple and that the dog wasn't doing well. The dog needed to be kept in oxygen. She says that Riedy came in and said that they could either take the dog elsewhere (but the dog wouldn't survive it), could try medications but she wasn't sure it would work, or she could euthanize the dog. They elected to euthanize the dog. She says that a month later her fiance read an article about bloat and learned that bloat can be resolved with surgery. She says she talked to her mother's veterinarian and was referred to the veterinary board. She concludes by asking that the vet board get her dead dog replaced with one of the same breed and includes the breeder's information.
Reidy says that she examined the dog and the complainants had expressed "extreme cost concerns." She said that the complainants couldn't even afford basic lab tests. It appears that their CareCredit application was rejected so Reidy may have discussed taking the dog to a hospital that accepted payment plans. She says that both of the complainants were "extremely emotional" and spent two hours trying to find assistance in paying for care for their pet. She says that she acquired special approval from BluePearl management to allow the complainants to sign a promissory note for euthanasia, a pain injection, and cremation. The owners opted for euthanasia as she states it was her professional opinion the dog would suffer without treatment. She states that surgery was never an option because the complainants couldn't afford BluePearl's cost of $5000 to $7000 for the surgery; she also says we don't know it was bloat because the complainants never paid for any tests. Reidy thinks she went above and beyond helping these people.
The Investigative Committee found that there were no violations. It was all very unfortunate. The findings of fact are interesting as they say the medical records state the dog was brought to the hospital to be euthanized; some of this doesn't really add up at face value.
Think about the complainant's payment plan for euthanasia (and no help at all to work up the dog) the next time you see an ad for Frankie's Friends or some other affiliated charity at a BluePearl office.
| Source: | August 8, 2020 PM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Heather Leigh Reidy | Respondent |
| Roll Call: | |
| Adam Almaraz | Aye |
| Amrit Rai | Aye |
| Brian Sidaway | Aye |
| Cameron Dow | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | September 9, 2020 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Proposed By: | Jane Soloman |
| Seconded By: | Jessica Creager |
| Roll Call: | |
| 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.