A fancy establishment finally succeeds in killing a puppy with their anesthesia machines: Part I

Complaint: Complaint 22-36
Respondent: Rowena D'Monte
Premises: Scottsdale Veterinary Clinic
Related: 22-37

The complainants state that they arrived with their 10-month-old puppy to have a tooth removed. They mentioned to the staff that they would prefer something other than general anesthesia because of a prior problem with the clinic's breathing machine some months prior. They were reassured that there was no need to worry and that all would be well. They reiterated their concerns and were reassured that the vet said it would be best to proceed as planned. The next call from the clinic stated that the dog went into cardiac arrest two minutes after starting general anesthesia. They were informed that the clinic was performing CPR and headed out the door. One of them mentioned to the veterinarian, D'Monte, that she killed their dog; she allegedly stated that she did not. They also state that D'Monte only seemed interested in getting permission to stop CPR, which they did not give.

They were greeted by the hospital manager, Hillary Ponder, who told them that there had been a "mistake" and explained more. During the start of anesthesia the vet walked away to get an instrument and left the dog with two surgery techs; the dog went into cardiac arrest within two minutes, and when D'Monte returned, she discovered the pop-off valve was closed on the anesthesia system. The dog had not received oxygen for three minutes and suffocated to death. Ponder reassured them that the dog didn't suffer while she suffocated since she was knocked out.

The complainants also go into the aftercare provided in this case, including the fact that the dog's ashes came back with the wrong birthdate. Despite repeated promises, D'Monte never spoke with the family, and both D'Monte and the technicians Cassidy and Haddesah were still practicing at the facility. They also state concerns that the clinic has problems with their anesthesia machines, noting that during the previous visit their dog had stopped breathing as well; at that time, veterinarian Samantha Gans aborted the procedure and blamed it on the anesthesia machine, necessitating a second and fatal surgery. The complainants initially agreed to send the body to Midwestern for necropsy but later reconsidered; at this point they were told it was too late to have second thoughts. (I wonder if the clinic was looking for underlying health conditions to help spread the blame around, particularly since they fully admitted their failure killed the dog.)

D'Monte's response mentions the dog presented for a tooth removal. She notes several components of the dog's history, including a mention that the "previous anesthetic complication was caused by the patient having been hooked up to the wrong anesthetic circuit." However, this prior failure was no reason not to proceed with the procedure today. The remainder of the response builds up to the main event. Per D'Monte, she went to the next table to pick up a tool and came back to notice the anesthetic circuit was disconnected from the dog's tube. She then apparently walked back to get the tool (twice?) and noticed a problem based on a fully-inflated reservoir bag. This allegedly occurred at exact same time one of her technicians lost the dog's heartbeat. They all jumped in together as a team to save the dog they'd just killed, but the magic just didn't happen, and CPR was terminated at 1:43 per the owner's request.

The Investigative Committee pinned it all on D'Monte. They stated that there was a violation because she failed to check the equipment and supervise the staff, and they also found it poor taste that D'Monte couldn't bother to follow up with the complainants. It appears that the clinic has updated some of their protocols to avoid this happening again. D'Monte gets nailed for gross negligence and poor bedside manner; she's sentenced to 10 hours of continuing education and a $500 fine.

Her boss, Langhofer, gets off without a scratch in the next complaint despite the same hospital (and two different veterinarians) endangering the dog's life with anesthetic machine boo-boos. There is, sadly, a pattern where, if veterinarians get blamed at all, it's usually the lowest-hanging fruit in the operating room that takes the fall even if the larger issues were systemic. Compare with 21-63, also involving an anesthesia machine but at a different clinic; in that case, some of Arizona's top veterinarians suggested not holding anyone accountable.

Motions

Investigative Motion: Find violation

Source: March 3, 2022 AM Investigative Committee Meeting
People:
Rowena D'Monte Respondent
David Stoll Respondent Attorney
Roll Call:
Robert Kritsberg Aye
Christina Tran Aye
Carolyn Ratajack Aye
Jarrod Butler Aye
Steven Seiler Absent
Violations:
ARS § 32-2232 (11) Gross negligence: failure to ensure the anesthetic equipment was functioning properly (pop -off valve was closed) and staff was supervised, which ultimately led to the death of the dog.
ARS § 32-2232 (12) as it relates to AAC R3-11-501 (1) failure to show respect to the animal owner for not speaking with the pet owners after the dog's passing or any subsequent communication.
Result: Passed

Board Motion: Schedule informal interview

Source: April 4, 2022 Board Meeting
People:
Rowena D'Monte Respondent
David Stoll Respondent Attorney
Proposed By: Melissa Thompson
Seconded By: J Greg Byrne
Roll Call:
Craig Nausley Aye
Darren Wright Recused
J Greg Byrne Aye
Jane Soloman Aye
Jessica Creager Aye
Jim Loughead Aye
Melissa Thompson Aye
Nikki Frost Aye
Robyn Jaynes Absent
Result: Passed

Board Motion: Find violation

Source: May 5, 2022 Board Meeting
People:
Rowena D'Monte Respondent
David Stoll Respondent Attorney
Proposed By: Melissa Thompson
Seconded By: J Greg Byrne
Roll Call:
Craig Nausley Aye
Darren Wright Absent
J Greg Byrne Aye
Jane Soloman Aye
Jessica Creager Aye
Jim Loughead Aye
Melissa Thompson Aye
Nikki Frost Aye
Robyn Jaynes Aye
Violations:
A.R.S. § 32-2232 (11) Gross negligence: failure to ensure the anesthetic equipment was functioning properly (pop-off valve was closed) and staff was supervised, which ultimately led to the death of the dog;
A.R.S. § 32-2232 (12) as it relates to A.A.C. R3-11-501 (1) failure to show respect to the animal owner for not speaking with the pet owners after the dog's passing or any subsequent communication.
Result: Passed

Board Motion: Issue board order

Source: June 6, 2022 Board Meeting
Proposed By: Melissa Thompson
Seconded By: Jane Soloman
Roll Call:
Craig Nausley Aye
Darren Wright Recused
J Greg Byrne Absent
Jane Soloman Aye
Jessica Creager Aye
Jim Loughead Absent
Melissa Thompson Aye
Nikki Frost Aye
Robyn Jaynes Aye
Result: Passed

Board Order: Order 22036 ROWENA D'MONTE, DVM

Source: Order 22036 (June 6, 2022)
Violations:
A.R.S. § 32-2232 (11) Gross negligence: failure to ensure the anesthetic equipment was functioning properly (pop-off valve was closed} and staff was supervised, which ultimately led to the death of the Patient.
A.R.S. § 32-2232 (12) as if relates fo A.A.C. R3-11-501 A.R.S. § 32-2232 (12) as if relates fo A.A.C. R3-11-501.
Penalties:
Probation (1 year)
Continuing education (6 hours in anesthesia)
Continuing education (4 hours in client communication)
Civil penalty ($500)

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.