| Complaint: | Complaint 21-135 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Terry Silkman |
| Premises: | Apollo North Animal Hospital |
The complainant says her husband took their dog to Apollo North Animal Hospital for an eye evaluation. She says that the dog was taken in without him (due to coronavirus precautions) and an eye fluorescin stain test run without their consent (and charged to them). (We apparently don't even know who this veterinarian was; even the Findings of Fact simply state "Respondent's associate (name unknown)" and the Investigative Division should have full access to the medical records.) The unknown veterinarian recommended eye drops but her husband declined as they usually order prescriptions online. They were not given a paper prescription and when the complainant went to order, she called the clinic to get a prescription sent; much to her surprise, she was told the vet the dog saw no longer worked at the clinic and the dog would have to come in for reevaluation (and additional charges). She didn't want her dog to have to repeat the tests twice and was told that they wouldn't give her a prescription because she didn't get it at the time of the original visit.
Silkman says that he never examined this dog but that he will provide an interpretation of the case. He believes that since it was 25 days since the dog had been seen the dog's health status could have changed; if the dog has scratched at her eyes because of eye problems the eye drops could actually make the problem worse rather than better. He says that as the Board is responsible for regulating veterinary medicine they know that even health certificates are only good for 10 days so they should obviously immediately throw out this case without looking into it; he laments that tax dollars are even being used to look at the complaint. He also says that he's okay with his name being released to the public under state law (it is, after all, state law, so it's not as if he can just opt out of it) as long as all other information is also released. So for those following at home, he's Terry Silkman.
There's no Investigative Committee discussion on this one; it appears Tracy or her proxy put the list of information together including information about none other than Terry Silkman. The complaint was subsequently dismissed.
| Source: | October 10, 2021 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| Proposed By: | Nikki Frost |
| Seconded By: | Jane Soloman |
| Roll Call: | |
| 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.