Wednesday, September 8, 2010

To State Senator Ellen Corbett on behalf of Wally

I wrote the letter below to my local State Senator Ellen Corbett (D-Hayward) with similar letters sent to my federal representatives to pursue a law requiring veterinarians to adhere to the same standard as medical doctors in disclosing all of the risks associated with the treatment they recommend as well as alternative treatments rather than what is most profitable. Currently, there is no law that requires veterinarians to do this. Had there been, it is likely that Wally would still be here today as well as many other members of other families who trusted only what they were being told.

I have been contacted by staff in Senator Corbett's office about my proposal. I am confident that we are moving forward with "Wally's Law".

Please feel free to cut and paste the pertinent parts of the letter below and share it with your own legislators on behalf of all the family member pets in your lives and the lives of you own families.

My letter follows below:


August 26, 2010

Senator Ellen Corbett
1057 MacArthur Boulevard
San Leandro, CA 94577

Dear Senator Corbett:

Please find attached a letter written by me to Drs. Wendi Rankin and Charles Walls at Veterinary Surgical Associates in Dublin, CA. We brought our dog, Wally, there for treatment of a mast cell tumor.

The attached letter describes in detail our interaction with these two doctors from our first visit on August 9, 2010 until Wally died needlessly on August 19, 2010. The letter appends a formal complaint filed with the California State Veterinary Medical Board sent yesterday. I urge you to read the letter along with the tribute I wrote for Wally so you can gain a pretext for what I am asking you to do.

The veterinary industry is a billion dollar business that is largely unregulated. The fees charged for services such as x-rays and ultrasounds often exceed what is charged in a hospital setting for human beings. I am not writing to you to argue the merits of this unregulated fee structure. Rather, I am urging you to help me along with all of the families who will surely follow me. There is currently nothing in law that requires veterinarians to disclose any of the risks and the possibly less aggressive, less expensive alternatives associated with the treatment they are recommending. In Wally’s case, a very aggressive treatment of chemotherapy and prednisone was the only option recommended. As you will read in my letter, I was never told that this treatment is fatal in 5% of the animals that receive it. I was never notified verbally nor does it appear on the diagnoses forms and treatment plans attached. Further, I learned after Wally died that a less aggressive, less expensive alternative of giving him prednisone only could have shrank the tumor to a manageable size for surgical removal. I have consulted with my family vet who said that this treatment is commonly used; it does not have a great a success rate in killing all of the cancer cells but does allow for tumor removal and for a pet to live a longer, healthier life. This alternative was never disclosed. I trusted in what these vets recommended and Wally suffered and died as a result of their hubris, arrogance and possibly even their greed. Wally did not have to die. He should be here at home with my partner and I and his brother Niko.

Legally, pets are considered property and have no voice in our legal system. That is unfortunate given the fact that pets are members of our family. Wally and his brother Niko are part of our family in every way. There is absolutely nothing we would not do for them. They trust us implicitly to do what is best for them. In return, they give us their companionship, unconditional trust and love and make our houses into a home. When a member of our family is ill, we bring them to a doctor. We put our faith and trust in them that they are doing what is best for our family and that they are giving us all of the information available so that we, acting as their voice and on their behalf, can make the right decision. That did not happen here and tragically, Wally died as a result of their negligence. Perhaps I would have made the same decision for treatment had I all the facts, perhaps not. I will never know that now because they decided for me. They took that opportunity to decide away from me and my family. And, there is nothing that I can do about it…or is there?

I am appealing to you as my Senator to help me make Wally’s needless death mean something more than the tragic loss of a family member. I want his death to help others who will undoubtedly face what we just faced. I want veterinarians to be held to a standard befitting the loving souls of those family members we entrust to their care. The veterinary industry is certainly not a “fly by night” industry. Wally’s costs exceed $5,000.00 just while in their care. One would wish that those reaping such financial benefits would be held accountable somehow.

I am not looking for money. I have not hired a lawyer. I am looking for justice for the loving soul we lost to willful negligence. Please help me to find that justice by sponsoring a law, “Wally’s Law” that will legally hold veterinarians to the same standard that medical doctors are held to in treating our human family members. I will do whatever it takes to help in this effort in the name and memory of the soul we lost. We will never forget him. He was a cherished member of our family.

Please read the attached letter. Please read the tribute so you can learn about all that this remarkable soul suffered before he was rescued and all that he overcame. Two and a half years of happiness is all he had before he was taken away from us. It just isn’t fair.

I appreciate your help and your support in this effort on behalf of Wally.

Very truly yours,

Thomas John Bauer

Friday, September 3, 2010

Formal Acknowledgement of Complaint filed against Drs. Rankin and Walls from the California Veterinary Medical Board

I received a letter from the Veterinary Review Board yesterday formally acknowledging the complaint against the two vets whose joint negligence resulted in Wally's death. The text of that letter is below. It appears that this can be a long process. At least it will be thorough. We have decided to pursue Wally's case with an attorney as well. It is my intention to make this as public and as painful for the two vets as it was for Wally and us. I will keep you posted via this blog and Facebook.


Veterinary Medical Board/Registered Veterinary Technician Committee

2005 Evergreen Street, Suite 2250, Sacramento, CA 95815-3831
P 916-263-2610 F 916-263-2621 I www.vmb.ca.gov

August 31, 2010

Thomas John Bauer
688 Woodland Avenue
Hayward, CA 94544

RE: Case Number - NV 2011 109

Respondent: Wendi Rankin, DVM & Charles Walls, DVM



Dear Mr. Bauer:

The Veterinary Medical Board acknowledges receipt of the complaint you filed. The enforcement team will review your complaint and any supportive documentation.

The allegations in your complaint along with documents and statements collected from the veterinarian and other parties involved must be investigated to determine whether there has been a violation of the laws governing veterinary medicine in California. The Board's authority to investigate complaints is limited to determining administrative violations of the California Practice Act. The Board's investigations are conducted within the parameters of the California Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Under the APA the Board must meet a very high burden of proof to establish a violation of the laws and/or regulations ("clear and convincing evidence to a reasonable certainty").
Before initiating a disciplinary action, the VMB has an obligation to ensure that admissible and competent evidence exists to sustain a decision, judgment or fine.

If it is established that there is sufficient evidence to indicate a possible violation, further formal or informal investigations may be initiated. Alleged violations are then reviewed by legal counsel to determine if the evidence is adequate to support disciplinary action. During formal legal review, or at any point in the review process, it may be determined that there is either no violation of the California Veterinary Practice Act or insufficient evidence to support a disciplinary action and the complaint is closed.

The entire complaint review is important and the determination of appropriate action may take an extended period of time. Please note that the initial time frame involved in the complaint review process can range from four to nine months. The overall disciplinary process including investigation and formal discipline through the Attorney General's office can take up to two years.

Thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention. You will be notified of the results of the complaint review and any action taken by the Board. Please retain this letter and refer to the above referenced complaint number when making inquiries regarding your complaint.

Sincerely,

Veterinary Medical Board