Complaint: | Complaint 21-141 |
---|---|
Respondent: | Elizabeth Wyatt |
Premises: | Arizona Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Center |
Related: | 21-142 |
The complainant tells us that her dog was recovering from wounds in a dog attack. The dog was taken to AVECCC to have the sutures removed; she was asked to sedate the dog and come back in a couple of hours because the dog didn't want to go in. The sutures were later removed and the dog went home, but the dog started having walking problems, whining, and finally laid outside all night with the complainant watching over her. The dog also became lethargic and was eating less. AVECCC said to bring the dog in and later claimed the presenting symptom was leg swelling rather than the other serious concerns she said she mentioned. The complainant explicitly states this was a false statement on AVECCC's part (and she later elaborates saying that someone in her financial condition would never pay the exorbitant cost of an emergency visit over some swelling). She asked why her dog was whining, lethargic, and "walking like Frankenstein" but the dog was sent home. The dog slept for almost two days straight and started developing a serious cough and wet noises in her lungs. She was again directed to take the dog to AVECCC and her family members slept in the car all night; AVECCC allegedly said the dog was seen for "not moving and wheezing" and had little to offer. During phone calls it appears AVECCC was focused only on the dog's leg and ignoring the systemic concerns the complainant mentions; she doesn't even know who was doing much of this other than Wyatt's name is on much of the paperwork. Wyatt appears to have run some tests and suggested the dog had low platelets but suspected her machine was out of whack. Wyatt suggested the dog was in pain but the complainant challenged that notion; the complainant wishes that Wyatt had admitted she didn't know what was going on and sent the dog somewhere better. The dog continued to deterioriate and had ear problems, a dy muzzle, a crused nose, and she started rubbing her face on anything she could find. Another veterinarian, Jaroski, called and asked some questions; the complainant thought it odd because it was the first time that someone from AVECCC had seemed to care. Jaroski apparently said the complainant could try Benadryl and also thought steroids might help; she also related to Jaroski that at one point staff at AVECCC had told her that her dog should no longer be brought to AVECCC. The complainant said that AVECCC had made plenty of money off her dog and now seemed to not want to see the dog. She finally got the dog in at a Banfield hospital that ran some tests; the dog was diagnosed with ear infections in both ears and low platelets but many of the results didn't come in until after the dog was dead. The dog subsequently fell over while trying to eat and the complainant called Banfield; they said it was an emergency so they tok the dog to AVECCC and were treated by Beckley (see related complaint 21-142). The complainant says that the entire veterinary system is broken; she says that the animals can't speak for themselves and that "ignorance, arrogance and negligence had a hand in the death of my little girl."
The complainant also wrote a letter, included in the complaint, explaining what happened to her dog and pleading for AVECCC to do a better job so they don't kill more dogs. It's worth reading yourself but to give you an idea: "I will blame myself till I die for not advocating harder and being able to save her. But I trusted you and your center and your licensed, medical personnel to fight for her and want to help and save my baby." Another quote: "Some of you give off the impression that you hate your jobs or don't care enough about our fur babies. I'm appalled at the things I saw on this horrible journey." She concludes with a photo of her now-dead little dog.
Wyatt's response is somewhat pointless to read, particularly in light of the complainant's statements. The overall events line up rather nicely; we're left with the impression Wyatt ran a bunch of tests and had no real idea what was wrong with the dog, not unlike the situation described by the complainant. She recommended follow-up with the primary care veterinarian. She also says she's saddened to learn the dog died and that the complainant thinks that they did a bad job.
The Investigative Committee merged much of the discussion regarding 21-142 (Beckley) here. The Committee said that it can be frustrating for the complainant to have taken the dog to so many veterinarians but it was difficult to see so many veterinarians (yes, that's actually what they said). They felt that Wyatt did a good job overall but suggests that perhaps she should have hospitalized the dog (though if she had no idea where to start with the problem, what good would that have done?).
Source: | November 11, 2021 AM Investigative Committee Meeting |
---|---|
People: | |
Elizabeth Wyatt | Respondent |
Roll Call: | |
Carolyn Ratajack | Aye |
Christina Tran | Absent |
Jarrod Butler | Aye |
Robert Kritsberg | Aye |
Steve Seiler | Aye |
Result: | Passed |
Source: | December 12, 2021 Board Meeting |
---|---|
Proposed By: | Robyn Jaynes |
Seconded By: | J Greg Byrne |
Roll Call: | |
Craig Nausley | Aye |
Darren Wright | Aye |
J Greg Byrne | Aye |
Jane Soloman | Aye |
Jessica Creager | Aye |
Jim Loughead | Aye |
Melissa Thompson | Aye |
Nikki Frost | Aye |
Robyn Jaynes | 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.