| Complaint: | Complaint 22-28 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Heather Sanchez-Skultety |
| Premises: | 1st Pet Veterinary Centers Phoenix |
| Related: | 21-87 |
This complaint is related to 21-87. That complaint was filed against Ryan Lunt, the responsible veterinarian for the premises; it lists a variety of issues leading up to the resuscitation and subsequent euthanasia of her cat, all of which were dismissed with no violation. This complaint focuses specifically on Sanchez-Skultety's care of the cat, stating concerns about Sanchez being rather elusive prior to the cat's deterioration, leading to an overall feeling that 1st Pet was not being honest about the pet's condition (the complainant's depiction of 1st Pet in the prior complaint might support her intuition, as she portrays a facility that was confused at best). She also claims that excessive IV fluids led to the cat's cardiac arrest, has concerns about the manner in which CPR ("DNR" is written but it appears "CPR" is meant), and also notes that the intake form she signed doesn't seem to be included in her medical records.
Sanchez-Skultety's response states that fluid was administered correctly and that the cat failed to respond, so an additional bolus was given; however, CPR was initiated and the cat was subsequently euthanized prior to the second bolus being delivered. She also states that she was being "factual and empathetic" to the complainant when updating her and that many questions she was asked did not have answers. Sanchez-Skultety's response is somewhat confusing in itself, with a confusing reference to the complainant as part of a statement regarding estimates and use of funds; there's a note that she could not use the complainant's funds without consulting "you" but no clarity as to who "you" would be in that case. She also states that CPR was initiated immediately but that some clients change their minds once they find out the underlying cause. The discussion of the intake form and its non-inclusion in the records is also somewhat confusing, but I suspect it's stating that the complainant only asked for the medical records; 1st Pet apparently didn't consider the intake form as part of the records.
The Investigative Committee said the cat was very ill and that while communication could have been handled better, the veterinarian didn't do anything wrong.
| Source: | February 2, 2022 AM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Heather Sanchez-Skultety | Respondent |
| Roll Call: | |
| Robert Kritsberg | Aye |
| Christina Tran | Aye |
| Carolyn Ratajack | Aye |
| Jarrod Butler | Aye |
| Steven Seiler | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | March 3, 2022 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Proposed By: | Melissa Thompson |
| Seconded By: | Jane Soloman |
| Roll Call: | |
| Craig Nausley | Aye |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Aye |
| Jane Soloman | Aye |
| Jessica Creager | Absent |
| 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.