Veterinarian guilty of "disgraceful conduct" for not euthanising a cat on request

NEWS AND COMMENT: This is a rather disturbing and at the same time interesting story. I think, my sympathies lie with the veterinarian and not with the adjudicating panel who found her guilty of 'disgraceful conduct'.

The vet's name is Dr. Janine Parody. She was employed as a veterinary clinic and was described as an excellent veterinarian. She had 10 years experience at the time.

Dr. Janine Parody. Image: Facebook.

A woman involved in cat rescue it seems came to the veterinary clinic where she worked and asked Dr. Parody to euthanise a youngish male cat (8-months old) named Shadow who had an MRSA infection, was thin and had facial injuries. It appears that the cat was a street cat and had been injured and contracted the infection while leading a very difficult life.

The cat rescuer arranged for Dr. Parody to euthanise shallow on December 20, 2021.

At the time Dr. Parody was stressed and had euthanised a few cats that day already. She made the point, as other veterinarians have made, that euthanising pets is stressful and it leaves its mark. She said that you tend to take euthanasia home with you.

It was during the Covid-19 pandemic and these factors put together drove her to disregard her client's instructions to euthanise Shallow and she sedated him instead I guess to give the impression that she had euthanised him. The client went home and Dr. Paoli took Shadow home with the intention of treating him at home.

She sterilised him and removed his microchip and put a new one in. We don't know whether the one she put in contained her details or not. But she did say that she had no intention of adopting Shadow. It should be said that at the time Shadow had no owner because he was a rescue cat and had simply been rescued and brought to the clinic.

And therefore if she did intend to keep the cat she can't be accused of stealing or attempting to steal.

Anyway, after two months, Shallow's condition had not improved and Dr. Parody decided to put him to sleep at that time and owned up to what she had done to her client. Her client was shocked and elated and agreed to pay the £480 cost of treatment that Dr. Parody had administered.

The matter was investigated and Dr. Parody resigned her position at the clinic. The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons tribunal found Dr. Parody guilty of disgraceful conduct and issued her with a reprimand.

At the hearing she said the following:

"I understand that my decision not to euthanise Shadow and instead to treat him without the consent of Ms SM was wrong.

"It was a decision I made on a very, very busy and stressful day and when I thought the cat had no owner but I fully appreciate that was no excuse.

"Once I had made that one decision, I did not revisit my decision but simply continued to treat the cat as best I could at an extremely stressful time.

"I accept that as a result of my decision and actions that the lady who had brought the cat in and who I now know was SM, was misled into thinking that it had been put to sleep and this is something I very much regret.

"My actions with regard to this cat all snowballed from my decision to treat the cat on 20 December and not put him to sleep.

"I know I should not have done this but because the cat was young and the condition curable, I felt that I was acting with the welfare of the cat at the centre of my decisions."

Comment: it's hard to know exactly what was in the mind of Dr. Parody at the time that she took this course of action. My gut feeling is that she in fact did want to adopt the cat because she did, after all, change the microchip. It doesn't really change the outcome although her motivations are important.

As you can see, she found Shadow to be a happy cat in her consulting room. I should think that he was probably an attractive cat to but I don't know. This vet has a heart. This is what makes her a good veterinarian. Euthanasia is always difficult both for the client and for the veterinarian. It should only happen after a good consultation with a good veterinarian and the timing of euthanasia is critical. It should not be delayed because the cat's owner doesn't want to relinquish their cat and say goodbye to them and likewise it should not be conducted to soon for obvious reasons.

---------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

Rescuers and animal advocates protest against Riverside County's $2.45 million boondoggle

This is a story concerning America from that great animal advocate, Nathan Winograd. It's about animal rescue in Riverside County, California, USA which is located in the southern portion of this US state. What is a boondoggle? I looked it up! It means spending money or time on unnecessary, wasteful or fraudulent projects.

Cancel the contract protest by animal advocates. Photo: Nathan Winograd.

Animal advocates are protesting in Riverside County about a boondoggle which in this instance means spending $2.45 million of taxpayers money to pay a woman, Kristen Hassen, who according to Nathan Winograd has a dodgy record to be a consultant on animal rescue at Riverside County's pound after the removal of Erin Gettis, Riverside County's former pound director after a lawsuit charged her with ethical and legal misconduct.

According to Nathan Winograd, Hassen was one of the chief architects and promoters of Human Animal Support Services (HASS). This method urged shelters to make Covid-era closures permanent by turning away stray animals. And according to him, she also sat on the National Animal Control Association board which encouraged shelters to re-abandon animals people had found on the streets.

The policy manipulated the intake and placement rates by abandoning the whole idea of an animal shelter. The policy put the animals back on the street to be cared for by the community. They were no longer sheltered. According to Nathan Winograd, under HASS, "Intakes of healthy strays and owner surrenders don't exist any more". The conventional shelter model appears to have been disbanded under this policy and instead the community is expected to pick up the slack.

This, according Nathan can lead to animals dying on the streets. He refers to a dog called Nesa was turned away from a shelter under a program hatched up by Hassen and her colleagues. The dog was subsequently found dead in an alley. He argues that her policies can sometimes prove fatal to unwanted companion animals.

HASS results in the fate of unwanted animals to be left to chance. People who find them are told to take them into their own homes until their families are located. Or they should leave them on the street where they found them. According to HASS, the idea is that the animals will find their way home. That's what is hoped for but Winograd says that "Such hope is misplaced. Indeed, for many animals, it proves fatal."

And while Hassen was at Austin Pets Alive, it's alleged that she promoted or defended abusive pound directors and help formed a committee to shield directors from public accountability. It is also alleged that she defended the killing of healthy and treatable dogs and cats and promoted authors and their books that disparage rescuers and shelter volunteers.

Hassen praised Gettis despite the fact that it is alleged that she killed at her facility more animals than any other reporting shelter in United States.

I think that I have had enough. The animal advocates and citizens who are concerned about animal welfare in Riverside County are up in arms about this large consultancy fee payable to a person who is alleged has a very poor track record on shelter animal welfare. They appear to know this whereas the administrators of the county don't or are not bothered about it.

--------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

Andrew Lloyd Webber adopted a therapy dog because of trauma from the movie "Cats"

OPINION: This is an interesting story with, in my view, some undertones. You may remember the movie version of Cats the Musical directed by Tim Hooper. It was made in 2019 and was a disaster with a lot of people criticising it. Personally, I don't think it was as disastrous as people say it was but people started talking about it as a disaster and therefore it was one. It was a self-fulfilling prophecy at the end of the day.

Cats the film. Image: Wikipedia and small in size making it acceptable under fair use.

Glenn Close is a friend of Lord Andrew Lloyd Webber and she recommended that he adopted a therapy dog. The idea was to give him a boost after the upset over the film.

From the perspective of Andrew Lloyd Webber, it was more than that. He wanted to take a dog into the cabin when travelling with airlines in America. And you can do that with a therapy dog, no questions asked. He found that he didn't even have to produce a medical certificate. He just said that he had a dog to get over the trauma of Cats the Film and they let him in!

Personally, I don't think he was that traumatised. I think he used the argument that he was traumatised to get a therapy dog so he could take that dog into the cabin of aircraft. It kind of works backwards.

The Mirror newspaper claims that Lloyd Webber said that the film was terrible and that the stars of the film were very unhappy about it too. But I don't think that is accurate reporting because in the same article the Mirror journalist says that Sir Ian McKellen, who was in the film, alongside Dame Judi Dench, said that he enjoyed working in the film with Judi Dench. He said in fact that he had a "lovely time" making the movie although he has never watched it.

He does say that he is a dog person but the movie changed his mind about cats. He said that people who watched the film would be enchanted by it.

So I'm confused by this story. I think it's been hyped up. The film wasn't successful because of bad publicity. I think Tim Hooper the director, was unfairly criticised. I think he is a good director but this went wrong.

And I also don't think that Lord Andrew Lloyd Webber was traumatised by it! He must have been unhappy because the musical version of Cats was highly successful (it ran for 21 years and 8,949 performances before closing in London). One of the world's most successful musicals ever. So no doubt wanted the same result with the film which was quite an ambitious project.

--------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

North Haven, Connecticut, community in uproar over trapping and euthanizing feral cats

NEWS AND COMMENT: The video tells the story nicely. I can't guarantee that this video will stay on this page forever. If it disappears I'm sorry. North Haven is approx. 100+ miles northeast of New York City.

The nub of the story is that the authorities in North Haven, Connecticut, USA were receiving complaints about feral and stray cats in their community and there was a decision, it appears, to trap and euthanise i.e. kill these cats but then this story rattled around social media, particularly Facebook as I understand it, and the community reacted to the news by rejecting the concept of euthanising these cats. There are better solutions. They are correct. 

This information was fed back to the authorities and they responded wisely and sensibly by changing their policy and the animal shelters in the area, the non-profits, have also stepped up to help remedy this situation. That's what I get from the video. I will add some detail from the written word on Yahoo News!.

A New Haven councillor has confirmed that they will not be euthanising feral cats after animal control declared that they would euthanise feral cats after trapping them.

Animal control in New Haven post on Facebook on Friday that they would start trapping euthanising the cats at the beginning of October. The post was then deleted apparently after a community backlash in comments.

I like that! The community often rallies around when there is an injustice about to be perpetrated towards animals. Essentially, the American citizen is sensitive towards animal welfare. There are many millions of Americans who are very tender towards stray and feral cats. Often they become volunteers in TNR programs and help them directly. These are great people. They deserve all the praise in the world.

The police stated that the trapping of the cats was "prompted by complaints of feral cats in the area, causing unsanitary conditions, as well as danger to domestic animals."

Apparently a dog had their eye scratched by a cat that attacked it. Comment: that wouldn't surprise me because the cat was in a defensive mode and attacked the dog because they felt threatened. And when a cat attacks a dog they slap the dog around the face with their claws which clearly in this instance caused an eye injury. This is unsurprising. I don't think it is a reason to trap and euthanise cats! And clearly the community agrees with me.

Police in general are often a bit negative towards feral cats. And in this instance they said that feral cats are carrying diseases like rabies in toxoplasmosis and damaging gardens, lawns and flower beds and cars et cetera. Comment: one can paint a negative picture about feral cats. It's quite easy. But you have to go back to the original root cause which is careless human cat ownership. The problem is a human problem and therefore the problem needs to be fixed humanely. Often the police are unaware of this.

Anyway, the end result as I understand it is a good one. The cats will be trapped but taken to shelters where if possible they will be rehomed. Some of these cats will be stray domestic cats and therefore can be rehomed. The true adult feral cat will probably be euthanised although even adult feral cats can be socialised but it takes time, sometimes as long as 12 months or more which is going to be beyond the means and abilities or capacity of the animal shelters but perhaps individual volunteers might step up.

--------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

Best cat deterrent. Infographic.

Millions of words have been written and many videos made on the topic of deterring stray and neighbours' cats from coming into your backyard. The methods proposed are often stated as being genuinely successful but in reality there are often not. I don't think it is such a big deal if a cat comes into your backyard. And cat urine isn't as bad as some people think for plants. In fact human urine is a fertiliser!

Anyway if you really must deter those pesky cats - and I understand why and am sympathetic - the infographic I have prepared tells you about what I believe to be the best method.

------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.