Handling a veterinary board complaint starts before one is filed

CURRENT FULL VERSION: A new dvm360 Vet Blast episode is tackling one of practice's most anxiety-producing topics: how to handle a board complaint. In the episode, host Adam Christman, DVM, MBA, speaks with Beth Venit, VMD, MPH, DACVPM, chief veterinary officer of the American Association of Veterinary State Boards, who frames complaints as serious but often misunderstood events in a veterinarian's career. She stresses that receiving a complaint doesn't, by itself, define a clinician's quality or character. (dvm360.com)

The discussion lands in a profession that has been talking more openly not only about complaint risk, but also about burnout, leadership, workflow, and the systems that shape daily practice. In other recent Vet Blast episodes, guests discussed mental health, purpose-driven leadership, AI, and engineering better care—conversations that reinforce the idea that many high-stress practice problems are influenced by team design and process reliability, not just individual performance. AAHA reported that complaints rose during the pandemic in at least some jurisdictions, citing California data showing roughly 1,300 complaints a year and a 25% year-over-year increase at the end of fiscal 2020-2021; the same article noted that about 90% of complaints did not result in disciplinary action or citation. That context matters because the emotional impact on veterinarians can be severe even when cases don't lead to sanctions. (aaha.org)

Venit also used the episode to demystify what boards tend to see. In a separate Andy Roark podcast appearance on veterinary board complaints, she said the biggest category is failures in communication and medical recordkeeping, while other violations can include negligence, substandard care, unprofessional conduct, illegal activity, controlled-drug errors, CE deficiencies, and, in some jurisdictions, impairment. She described a pathway in which some lower-level matters may be resolved through a consent order, while more serious allegations can move to a hearing. (drandyroark.com)

That emphasis on documentation is consistent with broader regulatory and risk-management guidance. In a recent AAVSB-promoted JAVMA article, Venit wrote that informed consent should include discussion of diagnostic and treatment options, risks, prognosis, and costs, and that the conversation should be documented in the medical record. The article adds that signed estimates and clear documentation can provide supporting evidence if a board complaint follows, while also improving continuity of care. AVMA PLIT has similarly advised veterinarians to document verbal, email, and text communication with clients and to notify their carrier promptly if a client threatens a board complaint. (aavsb.org)

The wider dvm360 podcast slate adds some useful context for why these basics matter. In one recent episode, Peter Weinstein, DVM, argued that veterinary medicine is fundamentally a people-driven, service business that depends on leadership, team delivery, and consistent processes—summed up as people, passion, and processes driving outcomes. In another, Texas veterinarian and entrepreneur Mark Bezanson, DVM, discussed innovation, product development, and practical solutions for veterinary teams. Taken together, those conversations point to the same operational reality behind many complaints: communication failures, unclear workflows, and inconsistent systems can create risk long before a board ever gets involved.

Industry commentary points in the same direction. AAHA quoted sources saying clear, complete, legible records are often the strongest defense in a board matter, and that inadequate records can themselves become grounds for discipline. The article also highlighted the need for proactive team support and self-care, underscoring that a board complaint is not only a legal or regulatory event, but also a workplace and mental health challenge. (aaha.org)

Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, this is a reminder that complaint prevention is built into everyday systems: consent conversations, discharge instructions, callback documentation, CE tracking, controlled-substance compliance, and familiarity with state-specific rules. Because veterinary boards are state-based, the exact process and standards vary by jurisdiction, but the pattern is consistent across sources: practices that communicate clearly and document thoroughly are better positioned when a complaint arrives. The surrounding discussion in veterinary media—about leadership, mental health, AI, and better-engineered workflows—suggests practices may increasingly treat complaint prevention as part of broader operational design rather than a stand-alone legal concern. Public-facing board materials in states such as Indiana, Maryland, Texas, California, and Minnesota also show how formal and records-driven these investigations can become. (drandyroark.com)

What to watch: The next phase of this conversation will likely center on informed consent standards, medical record quality, and whether more practices adopt license-defense coverage and formal complaint-response protocols before a case occurs. It may also expand into the adjacent issues dvm360 has been highlighting across Vet Blast: clinician mental health, leadership accountability, and the use of practical tools—including AI and workflow innovation—to reduce preventable errors and communication breakdowns. (aavsb.org)