Forensic Vet Report

A question about : Forensic Vet Report

I am writing this new thread following my previous my dog bled to death 2 hours after leaving surgery practice that has been locked. I now have got the expert report that has confirmed all my fears as to the terribly inadequate treatment that my dog had received including confirmation that Max was sent home with active bleeding. The reason for starting this new thread is that many people have been very kind and helpful in my search for the truth and maybe interested how it is progressing. Also if some of you were or might find yourself in similar situation this may give you more encouragement to pursue matters if you think wrongdoing has occurred.

Here are some quotes from the report:

It is my view that a breach of this duty occurred. Ms...was unable to read and interpret the pre-op blood test result and her competence; skill and judgment fell below that which would be expected for an average reasonably competent veterinary surgeon.
With regard to Mrs ...she failed in her duty of care by providing a report that did is not consistent with pathologist findings and this is exacerbated by both vets providing similar description of their findings in both reports that the bleeding occurred prior to surgery. This is an unsatisfactory coincidence that would not be supported by a reasonable vet..... It would seem unusual that the patient was discharged with pressure bandage, knowing that active bleeding was occurring and the platelet count was so low.

5.15 To address the issue of was the loss foreseeable? Then the
question must be asked as to:
a. Why pre-operative blood tests were performed and
subsequently misinterpreted?
b. Why was the intra operative bleeding considered to be a preoperative
event when pathologist reports it to be iatrogenic?
c. Why the pressure bandages post operatively?
d. Why no blood or plasma transfusion?
e. Why no request for specialist advice or guidance?
f. Why was the bleeding animal discharged?
5.16 At each stage of 5.15 (the above) the loss was foreseeable and was met with optimism bias-an expectation that it will work out for the best....
5.17 I am satisfied that the 4 criteria for demonstration of negligence viz;
A.Presence of duty of care
B.Breech of that duty
C.other considerations
D.Occurrence of foreseeable loss.
Have been demonstrated in this case against Ms.... and Mrs....
Summary of conclusion;
Max did bleed to death following the operation.
the operation did cause the bleeding to occur.
Max did have an existing anomaly with his blood that prevented his blood from being able to clot.
The pathology report has suggested the vet may have caused the bleeding during operation.
Indicators of an existing coagulopathy in Max were present but not correctly interpreted in a pre-operative blood test.
a Veterinary surgeon of normal skill and judgment and reasonably competent would not have proceeded with the surgery.

I wonder what the RCVS will have to say when I present this to them ? I think giving a bleeding dog back to its unsuspecting owner is unforgivable.

Best answers:

• So the next step is to get a full refund of all vet fees and costs incurred. Give them a copy of the report.
• I was just wondering what happened in terms of updates and found your old thread which had been locked.
  I'm glad you've started a new one and hope it doesn't descend into the same ilk as the last one.
  Some people think support your efforts and have the opportunity to continue supporting you.
  Some don't, and I'd say to them, even if they think your wasting your time, you being able to talk about your dogs death is your choice, and if you think it's helpful to you then who is anyone else to try and stop you.
  Just don't go off getting sidetracked with dogs trust accusations etc again or I fear the thread will end up like the last one, which would be a shame.
• Were dogs trust involved in killing the op's dog then? That is awful, I thought that they never put a healthy dog down. Don't think I will contribute to them again, if that is what they do.
  What do they use all the money donated for then if they aren't looking after the dogs?
  @OP sorry for your loss.
• Seems a lot of "advisers" from consumer rights forum have" egg on their faces". It all has gone quiet. No more abuse.
• You have left a name visible in post 7, in point 4.16.
• They believed her health was suffering, yet there were some who were bullying her..
• Thank you all, there was so much more care on this forum