Boston-based vet reprimanded for using unnecessary force and failing to handle Shih Tzu with sufficient care

The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) Disciplinary Committee has reprimanded a Boston-based veterinary surgeon for using unnecessary force towards a Shih Tzu named Bella, and for failing to handle her with sufficient care.

Dr Michael Kettle MRCVS appeared before the Disciplinary Committee between Monday 12 and Wednesday 14 February 2024 at the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, London, with a number of allegations of serious professional misconduct being made against him.

The allegations were that, on Friday 23 October 2020 Dr Kettle used unnecessary force on the dog and/or failed to handle her with sufficient care. The charge alleged that he grabbed Bella when she was in a kennel, and/or failed to take sufficient care to ensure that Bella did not fall from her kennel, hit Bella with his hand and/or muzzle, and carried Bella only by her collar and/or scruff.

At the outset of the hearing, Dr Kettle admitted that he had committed the acts as alleged and that his conduct represented serious professional misconduct. The Committee accepted the admissions made by Dr Kettle and accordingly found the facts proved and that it considered that Dr Kettle’s conduct and failures fell far below the standards expected of a veterinary surgeon and represented serious professional misconduct.

The Committee identified a number of aggravating factors and, after having taken evidence from the College and the respondent into account, the Committee considered that Dr Kettle’s actions had not only placed Bella at risk of injury but had also caused her actual injury including her tongue turning blue for a few seconds, an exacerbation of her pain by each of his actions and her soiling herself and her stillness in the treatment room.

The Committee considered whether or not the aggravating factor was sustained or had been repeated over a period of time and concluded that the incident was a single episode in respect of a single animal that had occurred over a period of 30 seconds. The Committee concluded that while Dr Kettle’s actions were serious both individually and cumulatively, the Committee did not find that his actions were aggravated by being sustained or repeated over a period of time.

In terms of mitigating factors, the Committee considered that the circumstances at the time of the incident were relevant. It found Dr Kettle to be a credible witness and accepted that, during the time that the incident occurred, Dr Kettle had been going through a very difficult time personally with the loss of locum staff, the increased work pressure during the pandemic and adverse comments on social media further to unrelated matters. The Committee considered that whilst these factors in no way excused his behaviour, the Committee did consider that his circumstances had affected how he had reacted angrily towards Bella on the day.

The Committee also considered that this was a single isolated incident, having occurred on one day and relating to a single animal. The Committee also noted from clinical records that Dr Kettle had been Bella’s veterinary surgeon for over seven years, on nine occasions prior to the incident and on seven occasions subsequently. There has been no such evidence of any other incidents happening within this time. Dr Kettle received highly positive testimonials attesting to his usual high standards of practice, both before and since the incident, and the Committee was satisfied that this incident could properly be characterised as isolated. The Committee was satisfied that Dr Kettle’s conduct had been out of character.

Kathryn Peaty, Chair of the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “It was clear that Dr Kettle was deeply remorseful and ashamed of his actions, immediately recognising the seriousness of what he had done. Indeed, it was apparent to the Committee from Dr Kettle’s evidence that this remorse and regret continue to weigh heavily on him.

“In all the circumstances, although the Committee did not consider that Dr Kettle’s misconduct was at the lower end of the spectrum of seriousness, given the absence of future risk to animals or the public, and the evidence of exemplary insight, the Committee concluded that a reprimand was the appropriate and proportionate sanction in this case.

“The Committee was satisfied that a reprimand would mark Dr Kettle’s misconduct and reassure the public that veterinary surgeons who act as Dr Kettle had done, would face regulatory consequences and sanction.”

Please note, this news story is intended to be a summary of the hearing to help understand the case and the Committee's decision. The full documentation can be read on our Disciplinary page.