Mar 22/17 - 4:30pm
Chapter 2
1. A case study highlighting problems with CVO's Advertising Rules
2. See below to have YOUR say.
3. You may contact us - see below.

In our recent email about the problems with the CVO advertising rules we highlighted the absurdity of the CVO advertising regulations. 
Below is a case study of a complaint against Dr. McCleary that came just days before he and Mr. Quinn (VPOA lawyer) were scheduled to question the Registrar on their procedures on November 15, 2016 with regards to concerns with the Veterinarian's Act (This Report is Coming Soon). This case demonstrates how an anonymous veterinarian highlighted a referral program on Dr. McCleary's website.  The College and the Registrar deemed that this referral program may demean the integrity or dignity of the profession and bring the profession into disrepute.  
These following letters spotlight the hodgepodge of subjective rules laid out by the College and how these advertising rules pit veterinarians against each other.  In this circumstance we see that the concern or inquiry was not handled by Susan Sabatini, CVO Practice Advisor, nor was it an official complaint written to the executive committee.  According to these letters the executive committee directed staff to follow up on concerns a veterinarian had with other veterinarians in the area. The staff member ended up being the Registrar. This was not an investigation, but an inquiry.  Was this an inquiry intended to intimidate and distract Dr. McCleary before his meeting with the Registrar or a simple coincidence? Who knows? Dr. McCleary was never allowed to face his accuser nor was he allowed to know the identity of the person that made this unofficial complaint or inquiry. For all we know the Registrar could have initiated this inquiry by trolling Dr. McCleary's hospital website? 
Since the punishment for this advertising violation was unknown and arbitrary and because of the perceived violation in the advertising regulations Dr. McCleary complied and subsequently stopped this "demeaning" referral program. This is the due process veterinarians get, anonymous snitching from our colleagues, based on a hodgepodge of subjective rules, and as result we are forced to comply to avoid an arbitrary and unknown penalty.  The other outcome would involve a lengthy legal battle to fight for our constitutional rights for our freedom of speech. 
Please see the following links: LETTER 1, LETTER 2, LETTER 3, LETTER 4, LETTER 5, LETTER 6, LETTER 7

We would love to hear about how the CVO forced you to comply to their hodgepodge of absurd advertising rules.  Please send us your stories so we can all commiserate together. 
What needs to change?
We need to get rid of these arbitrary hodgepodge of subjective rules.
We need to be allowed to know our accusers to ensure that these complainants are not fabricated.
We need to know what advertising violations result in what type of penalty.
At the very least stop snitching on your colleagues for advertising mistakes and make a complaint about something substantial like animal abuse.
2.  If you agree, email the CVO president and let him know!  If you don't want to email Dr. Marin directly, please send us your thoughts.
If you disagree, email us and tell us why.
3. Please feel free to contact the VPOA with any questions, concerns, or comments you may have.  You can:

1) E-Mail us directly
2) Fill out this form on our website.  If you wish to remain anonymous, just use "Anonymous" as your first and last name and as your email address.  If you wish to share any documents with us anonymously, click the "Choose File" button on the form.
3) Mail an anonymous typed letter to the address below.
Copyright © 2017 Veterinary Practice Owners Association, All rights reserved.

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list

Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp