TEXAS BOARD OF VETERINARY MEDICAL EXAMINERS

discharging the patient, I discussed follow up care with the owner, who asked for pain
medicine for the next few days. I pointed to her dog, who now was "bright eyed and
bushy tailed", obviously greatly improved from the depressed patient I had seen on
arrival and I told her that in my opinion her dog did not require any medicines.
On her continuing insistence however, I donated (no charge) to her some tablets for pain
control, even though I did not think: it was necessary and advised her of this. A few days
later my bank advised me that the check that was given to our clinic for the costs of the
exam, lab work and surgery had bounced. When I saw the owner a short time later to
remove the sutures, she was quite happy in her dog's continued improvement, lDleventful
healing and admitted that the donated to her pain medicines had not even been used.
When she was asked to correct the bad check she had presented to us, she made proruises
to pay us. However repeat inquiries by phone and finally by letter were met with silence.
I contacted the Arizona District Attorney's Office regarding the bad check and followed
their procedures to document the collection process and eventually filled a formal
complaint to the District Attorney office regarding the bad check.
Next I received a letter stating that a complaint had been filled to the Better Business
Bureau by this family and again soon later I received a notice that they had filled a
complaint to the Arizona State Veterinary Board. Apparently, even if it is a financial
complaint, the State Board must pursue any and every complaint, no matter how
frivolous it may be. I had found out later on, through my representation, having to
"defend" myself to the Board, that this husband and wife couple was in fact habitual
complainers to the Vet Board, who apparently hopped from vet to vet, looking for yet
another "victim". I imagine that they hedged their bets, after receiving medical services;
would not pay the doctor and would threaten to complain so they could get away with yet
another non-payment, because most doctors just do not want the nightmare and the time
and effort to have to defend themselves.
The "only" fault the Board could come up with in this "complainf' was the fact that I sent
home an outdated product. I had supporters in the Board from some of the lay members
and from another veterinarian, but not from some others, who took the letter of the law
literarily to chastise me for "dispensing" an out of date medicine. Even though I had not
sold the pain pills, giving it away at no charge, even though I had direct information from
the manufacturer that this particular pain control drug was still effective and safe beyond
the official expiration date (it had expired just a week of so previous to my dispensing the
medicine), even though it had not even been used by the client; this is what they made as
a matter of "record" for Disciplinary Action.
On of the lay women on the vet board, openly stated to me in sympathy that "no good
deed goes unpunished". The State of Illinois, even though I never practiced for a second
in that state, made it part of their own public record simply due to the fact that Arizona
and lllinois have a "sister" relationship with each other, and the fact that I had held an
Illinois license years previously.