In a message dated 9/18/01 9:14:05 PM, Dbeverly4@aol.com writes:
<< Hi John! Thanks for soliciting questions from the members. I am curious
to
know what AERC's position is regarding unlicensed vets "vetting" rides? If
it is allowable, possibly AERC would want to re-think that position and
require that vets be licensed or retired in good standing in order to judge
rides? I'm just wondering because of the litigious nature of our society.
And well, basically, I want a VET there if my horse gets in trouble.
>>
Sylvia,
This is an issue I have been communicating with other board members and other
people about lately. I have wanted to get a better factual background about
how unlicensed vets are used at rides. I know this is an issue members of
the board have grappled with. I would like to see closure on this and have
concerns about potential liability problems for ride managers and even the
AERC.
I think it is important that we do not see this as a personality issue. I
don't want to have anything to do with a rule on this topic which is intended
to punish one person. On the other hand, I don't want to avoid doing
something rational just because I might want to avoid affecting one
particular person.
Although I am generally not a sky is falling person, I am a little uneasy
with the idea of having vets working a ride who are not allowed to practice
in a state under any licensing system or exemption. Each state generally
requires a vet to be licensed somewhere to work in association with a vet
licensed in the state where the ride is held. Different states also have
other exemptions for teaching vets from vet schools.
The problem is with vets who are not licensed anywhere and fall within no
exemptions under state law.
Some people make the distinction between "control" vets and "treating" vets.
Although I understand how this works in practice, I would not bet on a court
buying the argument. I think it would be very hard to isolate a vet as
strictly a control vet who made no diagnoses, dispensed no veterinary advice
and most importantly, didn't help out in an emergency situation. I think
many riders view a vet as a vet and would not understand the distinction
between a control vet and a treatment vet. I also doubt if ride managers
typically explain the supposed difference to riders in their ride packets or
at ride meetings.
Frankly, I am concerned that a rider whose horse suffers a mishap will blame
the vet who happens to be unlicensed anywhere and then blame the ride manager
for hiring the vet with knowledge the vet was unlicensed or didn't fall
within some exemption to state law. I am worried the rider in that situation
would blame the AERC for sanctioning the ride knowing the vet could not
practice at the ride under state law.
I am probably going to draft some sort of a proposed rule on this point for
consideration at the mid year board meeting. It would require rides to use
vets who are allowed to practice under the circumstances under the law of the
state where the ride is held, including any exemptions such as,for esample,
teaching vets or vets licensed elsewhere but acting under the supervision of
a vet licensed in the state where the ride is held. It would just be
something for the board to talk about to focus the discussion. I would want
to hear from the vets on the board who have far more experience in the
practical aspects of this than I do. The issue is made more difficult
because each state may have different law or have vet boards or courts which
interpret the law differently.
I also don't want to do something which seriously undermines the availabilty
of vets for our sport when we already have a shortage of them. It might be
we need to go to some endurance judging certification system where veterinary
education but not licensure is one factor for qualification and we tell all
riders ahead of time the judge may be not be eligible to practice veterinary
medicine at the ride. I want to see this whole issue fully explored but I
haven't made up my mind yet and won't until I feel better informed. I just
don't want to see us ducking resolution of issues just because they are
difficult.
Sorry for the long answer, but it was a good question.
John Parke
Solvang Ca