Veterinary boards are obliged by the rules of court, legislation and/or common law to provide reasons for their conviction of a veterinarian. Most veterinary boards are resistant to doing so. The VDA recently had sight of a board’s reasons for the conviction of a veterinarian. It was immediately obvious from these reasons that the members of the board had little idea of due process and had failed to apply their minds properly to the facts that had been presented to them. It was clear that there was no justification whatosoever for the conviction of the veterinarian. This is a commom occurrence, given that veterinary board members have no legal qualifications or training and mostly merely follow the mistakes handed down by previous board members. Should veterinary boards be obliged, on request, to provide written reasons for their judgments?
Posted on: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 13:37:29 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015