RSPCA bashing

QR...

A charity with a political fund the the fat cats at the top....

Sorry to be cynical, but some times their officers are do gooders without a flipping clue
 
[ QUOTE ]

They should be referred to the vet in question, who should tell them to beggar off and do something useful.


[/ QUOTE ]
Whatever you do you should never give permission for your vet to talk to the RSPCA.

There is case law that says once your right to confidentiality between you and your vet is breached it is breached permanently.

That is why the RSPCA will ask people if they can talk to their vet without explaining what the precedent means.

That your vet may well end up as a prosecution witness and not a witness for you.

The RSPCA and ILPH are not interested. Going back to the Griffin case, take a look at the comments by the District Judge about Mr. de Brauwere, the Redwings chief vet:

"The RSPCA’s ‘expert’ in this case was Nic de Brauwere. Rather worryingly for the RSPCA, in the light of the court’s findings against it, Mr de Brauwere is the vet in the RSPCA’s recent high-profile seizures in Amersham. Mr de Brauwere is in charge of welfare at ‘Redwings’, the rescue centre which the RSPCA pays to stable many of its ‘rescued’ horses. The Griffins vainly tried to tell de Brauwere that they knew the horse was thin and that they had to keep its weight down to avoid an acute recurrence of the long-standing laminitis. This is not only good equine practice – it followed the excellent advice obtained from their horse’s vet, Charlotte Mayers, who knew all about the horse, but with whom it seems that de Brauwere disagreed."

[ . . . ]

"“Mr de Brauwere was not minded to discuss alternative causes of the thinness with Mrs Griffin and agreed that Mrs Griffin was offering other causes - he did, to use his words, not want to enter a long debate and did walk away at one point.”"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top