‘Veterinary Disciplinary Law Can and Must Be Improved’
PhD Defense Iaira Boissevain:
On 12 February, Iaira Boissevain will defend her PhD at Utrecht University with a study on veterinary disciplinary law. According to her, the system can be far more effective. This would benefit animals, animal owners, and veterinarians alike.
Iaira Boissevain is a lawyer and lectures on veterinary law at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine. For her doctoral research, she analyzed hundreds of disciplinary cases. In addition, more than 900 veterinarians (20% of the total number of practitioners) completed a questionnaire. The results show that nearly 70% of disciplinary cases are declared unfounded. Moreover, many complaints appear not to primarily concern veterinary medical conduct, but rather communication issues. “Yet all these cases go through a lengthy and intensive procedure, with a major impact on everyone involved,” Boissevain notes.
Quality of professional practice
Veterinary disciplinary law has existed in the Netherlands for over thirty years. During this period, the Veterinary Disciplinary Tribunal and the Veterinary Appeals Tribunal have issued thousands of rulings concerning veterinary professionals who treat companion animals or livestock. The aim is to safeguard and improve the quality of professional practice. “That is very important,” says Boissevain. “Most animal owners are satisfied with their veterinarians, but of course things do not always go perfectly. The most important thing is to learn from this.”
Learning-oriented
In theory, the system therefore has a learning-oriented character. In practice, however, it is often experienced differently. A disciplinary case—or even the threat of one—frequently leads to severe stress among veterinarians, resulting in sick leave or even burnout. Thirteen percent of respondents indicated that the current disciplinary system mainly leads to more defensive practice in order to avoid complaints. Boissevain explains: “On the one hand, the stress of a looming procedure is so great that it hampers veterinarians in learning and functioning; on the other hand, the low threshold for filing a complaint means that its impact is devalued among some veterinarians. Both undermine the purpose and effectiveness of disciplinary law.”
Because our animals and veterinarians are worth it.
Improvements
Boissevain also analyzed the situation in Belgium and the United Kingdom, as well as in other liberal professions. She advocates for a different structure of veterinary disciplinary law. “Sanctions should be the end point, not the starting point.” Concrete improvements include:
clearer professional standards;
substantive pre-screening of complaints by an independent chair;
the introduction of court fees to limit frivolous complaints;
shorter procedural timelines;
and more room for mediation, allowing complaints to be handled more quickly and constructively.
Current debates
Boissevain’s research closely aligns with current societal debates. Recently, the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) published a draft rapport on veterinary care, which, among other things, recommends establishing a disputes committee for minor complaints in companion animal healthcare. Boissevain’s research underscores the importance of reforming the Dutch disciplinary system so that it does justice to both animals and veterinarians. Or, as she herself summarizes: “Because our animals and veterinarians are worth it.”