Domestic cat bit veterinary technician at clinic and was immediately “euthanized”

This cat should not have been killed by this veterinarian. It was shoddy, lazy veterinary work at best. The story unfolds slowly and in a sinister way. In America rabies is a rare but active and very dangerous disease and therefore strict precautions must take place to prevent people contracting it.

“I can’t stop crying…..I feel like I let Oliver down..”

A veterinary technician, Kaitlin Neal, took a cat, Oliver (who I believe was owned by someone else), to what I believe was the Odenton Veterinary Hospital. This is in Maryland, USA. I don’t know why Oliver was taken to the vets but Kaitlin agreed to bloodwork and to the de-matting of his coat. In the consultation room Oliver purred. In fact he purred so much that they had to stop him by putting a cotton ball with alcohol on it in front of him. They did this because they wanted to check his heart beat and his purring masked the sound. Clearly, Oliver was friendly but no doubt anxious. He was a socialised, domesticated indoor/outdoor cat. He was elderly and perhaps a little neglected by his owner(s) judging by the photo (this fact may have encouraged the vet to adopt a less caring attitude). The video below shows him in a cat carrier.

Update: 4th August 2017 — A couple of visitors to this page have commented and provided the hospital’s response for which I am grateful (see below). Soon, I will write another article and publish the hospital’s statement. I will also comment on their statement. I am keen to present balanced, fair reporting (Admin).

Here it is:

Odenton Veterinary Hospital justifies the “euthanasia” of Oliver the cat

August 6th: there is a further update to complete the story. It’s a prequel, the time when Oliver was trapped. It tells us for sure that Oliver was completely domesticated but neglected. Click this to read it.

Dr Corcoran
Dr Corcoran

Oliver was examined by Dr Kellie Corcoran. Oliver was taken out of the consultation room. It appears he was carried out because his carrier was left behind. Kaitlin waited patiently. The veterinarian returned after a few minutes and told her that Oliver had jumped off the table after they had drawn blood. Because of this they said they wouldn’t be able to groom him. I’m not sure why they made this rather bizarre decision but read on.

The veterinarian took the cat carrier out of the room where Kaitlin was waiting. The veterinarian then comes back into the room and told Kaitlin that as they were putting Oliver back into the cat carrier he had bitten the veterinary technician. Comment: this is predictable for a cat under these circumstances. It does not mean anything other than that the cat is anxious and has become defensively aggressive. Anybody with experience of cat behaviour would realise this.

The fact that Oliver had bitten the veterinary technician created a problem. The problem was the question whether he had rabies or not, bizarre as that might sound to international visitors from countries other than America to this website.

The veterinarian made it quite plain to Kaitlin that she had no option but to euthanize Oliver. Kaitlin asked whether they could contact animal control to see whether Oliver could be placed into quarantine to check whether he had rabies or not.

CDC write: If you were bitten by a cat, dog, or ferret that appeared healthy at the time you were bitten, it can be confined by its owner for 10 days and observed. No anti-rabies prophylaxis is needed. No person in the United States has ever contracted rabies from a dog, cat or ferret held in quarantine for 10 days.

The veterinarian responded by saying “that would mean we would have to get postexposure shots”. This means that the veterinary staff would have to be treated as if they been bitten by a cat who had rabies (as I understand it).

Kaitlin requested that the veterinarian call animal control – she was desperately trying to save Oliver. She made it clear that the cat had had no issues in the past and was a house cat. Oliver deserved a chance she said. Veterinarians should know that cats in veterinary clinics can behave like this.

The veterinarian then walked out of the room and returns five minutes later claiming that she had talked to animal control. She did not provide the name of the officer with whom she had spoken. She said that she had to euthanise Oliver and that there was no quarantine option.

Kaitlin did not have the opportunity to speak to animal control. Oliver was immediately euthanized (killed is the better description). Kaitlin was not given the opportunity to say her goodbyes. Kaitlin says that when a veterinary technician or veterinarian handles an outdoor/indoor cat then they know they have to handle them properly to prevent being scratched or bitten. It could be argued that the veterinary staff mishandled the situation and are the authors of this catastrophe.

Kaitlin had to pay her bill even though her cat was taken from her and euthanised without her permission. She is very upset. She is angry. Kaitlin writes:

“This cat was let down. Let down by his owners, by the community, and quite honestly by this vet. This has to stop.”

Kaitlin did not want to leave the matter without resolving some outstanding issues. She called the veterinary clinic again requesting the name of the animal control officer that the veterinarian had telephoned. She was told that they spoke to Officer Herbert. Kaitlin spoke to Officer Herbert who told her that Dr Corcoran had never spoken to her. Officer Herbert said that she had received a call that the veterinary clinic and a “pick up”. The protocol would have been a ten-day quarantine in Kaitlin’s home and then to vaccinate for rabies afterwards. The animal control officer said that the veterinarian was in the wrong.

It is quite clear that animal control did not tell Dr Corcoran to euthanize the cat. Animal control also said that they were told by the veterinarian that Oliver was feral and had no family and was fractious. Because of this misleading information from the veterinarian animal control informed the veterinarian that a ten-day quarantine could be done but if he was fractious and could not be touched then it would be impossible to quarantine him.

It would appear that the veterinarian misled animal control and received back information which supported what she wanted to do in the first place which was to kill Oliver to avoid the inconvenience of being given postexposure shots.

As mentioned, Kaitlin never signed a release form allowing euthanasia and was never given the option of putting Oliver into quarantine for 10 days even though animal control had said that they were the options. Kaitlin made it clear that she wanted the quarantine option for Oliver.

To me it is clear that Oliver was unnecessarily killed by the veterinarian because it was more convenient to do so than to put him into a ten-day quarantine. A bad veterinarian and extremely upsetting. May Oliver rest in peace bless him.

Update: A subsequent test on Oliver (I believe this is obligatory) showed that he did not have rabies. This does not surprise me as there were no signs of it. Oliver’s behavior was normal.

Source: Facebook post by Kaitlin Neal.

Please search using the search box at the top of the site. You are bound to find what you are looking for.

Useful tag. Click to see the articles: Cat behavior

81 thoughts on “Domestic cat bit veterinary technician at clinic and was immediately “euthanized””

  1. BTW the final decision to euthanize is usually based on the information provided by the veterinarian in this case I believe for convenience they recommended euthanasia with the added pressure of knowing AC was now involved in what started out as an act of kindness. It’s very important to put yourself in the clients place here where everything went south very quickly and she may have hastily agreed to the euthanasia.
    The normal process for grieving pet owners includes the guilt felt by deciding to end a pets life with the almost instant afterthought of I could have done more even though you later realize you couldn’t. This whole situation was compounded by the clinic twisting an obvious domestic cat into a feral via animal control.
    The debate if this was the kindest thing for Oliver in the end without a real guardian and his medical condition becomes moot. I see this as a case about a clinic knowing presenting false information to get the desired outcome to woman who brought him in and to Animal Control.

  2. It’s funny reading all these posts and the story which I stumbled upon accidentally. I have formed an opinion which may or may not be right, but I am guessing that Kathy Wright who ‘owned’ Oliver the cat in question, is an older ‘cat lady’ who probably ‘owns’ lots of cats/kittens.

    I am also guessing that Kaitlin is involved in animal care from the pics of rescued doggies on her You Caring page, and that she is doing what she thinks is a good thing, by ‘rescuing’ these kitties from what is arguably a less than ideal situation. This is especially so if the cats are unspayed/neutered and are breeding uncontrollably (which reading between the lines it appears they are).

    Add to this the vet clinic response which clearly tags Oliver as ‘feral’, although in Miss Dee’s response, Oliver is definitely Kathy Wright’s cat! Who is telling the truth, or could it be that the vet clinic jumped to that conclusion given Oliver’s badly kept appearance?

    In my experience of vet practices, yes most of them are nice and went into it because they cared for the welfare of animals. I have however come across bad vets on occasion. There is also a definite willingness to euthanise animals, especially if they are wild/non-domestic animals. This is understandable since they see injured and ill animals on a daily basis. Frankly in some cases, it is the kindest thing. We have all seen the pictures of Olvier, and he looks badly looked after, so it is really no surprise that the vet took the view that he was better off euthanised whether he really had rabies or not.

    This case really revolves around whether the vet did indeed get an order to euthanise from animal control. I note that nowhere in this blog is definitive evidence from animal control saying that they did indeed give such permission. We only have the vet’s statement ‘claiming’ that they did, and that vet statement is the same one that says that Oliver was ‘feral’.

    It is truly a shame that your country has laws which permit animals being sold for testing – this is really muddying the situation. However, if Kaitlin has been trapping cats to sell them, why take Oliver to the vet?

    1. Thanks Michelle. Thanks for commenting but I think the veterinarian should do all he can to keep the cat alive and should not be too eager to euthanise him just because his appearance indicates that he has not been looked after properly. A veterinarian’s role is to preserve life and enhance the welfare of animals. They should not be too eager to end their lives.

  3. Please note that the vet has unleashed her acolyte clients against this blog and the owner (yes, owner) of the poor cat. It just makes the victim of this abuse look like a young David being attacked by an unfeeling Goliath.

    1. Yes Carol I am aware that but thanks. I don’t mind. The article has been proved to be correct and I have provided a follow-up article. I’m convinced that this veterinarian did the wrong thing for the reasons stated.

  4. Here’s an update on the Oliver the cat situation. On Aug. 6 Kaitlin Neal was seen back in the Beechfield neighborhood where she got Oliver from to set up more cat traps. She was seen again in the morning on August 8 collecting the cats caught in the traps. Kathy Wright, who owned Oliver, was outside her house when she saw Kaitlin come to get a trap with a kitten in it. A woman who lives across the street told me that she was getting ready to leave for work when she saw Kathy scream at Kaitlin to get the kitten out of the trap because it belonged to her and told her to take the traps and not come back. Then she asked Kaitlin when she was bringing Oliver back, and Kaitlin said in a few days. I couldn’t believe it not only because Kathy didn’t know yet but because Kaitlin lied to her. Oliver has been dead since she took him about 7 or 8 days before then. Then Kaitlin said something to Kathy about calling animal control to come get the rest of the cats in the neighborhood.

    Now none of the neighbors on the block or around the corner that I talk to say they have seen Kaitlin come back.And they said she never brought back any of the adult cats she trapped and said she was going to have spayed and then bring them back. They don’t think she called animal control either because they would have already come out here since this all happened almost a week ago. Makes people wonder why Kaitlin just didn’t call animal control to handle the problem in the first place if she works at the dog shelter in Severn like she told people. I tried to find her facebook account to see if she posted anything more, but it looks like she may have deleted it. She might have took it down to cover her trail so people can’t find her and report her for what she did.

    Now some people think she was totally doing wrong by those cats, not only because of the lies she told the neighbors about Oliver and what she was doing with the kittens and adult cats she caught. They told me they found out she set up an account on a crowdfunding site about her activities and bragging about the “hauls” of cats she was trapping in the neighborhood: The cat in the big picture is one of the ones that used to be in the alley I described in my other post. Now why if she’s working with the dog shelter in Severn is she fundraising under her own name where all the money pledged goes directly into her pocket? A bunch of suckers already given her $2,300.

    She writes on this crowdfunding page that it “all started with a call about some kittens near Spring Grove Hospital in Catonsville.” That’s another lie. This alley in this neighborhood where those kittens were is in southwest Baltimore city, not Catonsville in Baltimore county. Spring Grove hospital is about 3 miles away. She also said there are 70+ cats in this area. That’s not true. Wasn’t even 20 or 25 before she started trapping them. Why would she tell these lies on the internet? To make money for herself, and she didn’t want to identify the exact place because she knows that other people who go around trapping cats will come here and do the same, then sell them to labs to get money. If she advertises that she’s doing these good works catching cats in Catonsville, maybe she figures people there will give her more money because 21228 is a much richer area than 21229. That’s another reason why she is a con artist and she doesn’t have the best interest of the cats at heart. Maybe you can tame feral kittens while they still small, but it’s not the case with the adult feral cats she was catching. The only thing you can do with them is put them down or sell them to labs for experiments. There’s plenty of people who go around this city catching cats and doing just that to make money, and she’s likely one of them.

    Second thing why people think she’s a con artist. She’s trying to raise money on the same crowdfunding site saying she’s a single mother and needs to start over with her baby Jaycee: I had to laugh when I read that she’s “not one to ask for help” and “it really hurts her to ask her for help.” She got more than $1,000 from people off this request. Now why if you a single mother you not out working full time or looking for a job to support yourself and your child, and instead running 20 miles from Severn up to Baltimore to trap cats? With your baby in the car in a car seat while you are doing it in the morning, in the late afternoon, and sometimes in the evening. Because you are making your living from catching cats and selling them to labs. That’s what her full-time job is, and I guess its not providing her with enough cash. Who knows if she’s a single mother because the neighbors I talked to said sometimes when she came here she had the baby and a man in the car with her.

    Somebody else told me they looked her up online and found out she’s been in some trouble with the police in Anne Arundel county for refusing to show a car registration document after getting pulled over. They gave me the site, and I looked it up.

    The whole thing is shameful–the lies, the cat trapping, and making money off all of it. Especially when shes telling people she works at a shelter And it’s shameful that she using her child to lie and make money.

    1. Thanks a lot Miss Dee for taking the time to write a full update and provide very useful information. I will make your comment into an article today.

  5. The people who live in the neighborhood where Oliver was taken from learned about what happened to him from this website. I have lived in this Beechfield neighborhood in southwest Baltimore for 13 years and know most of the people from walking my dog, so let me set the record straight. Oliver’s owners are Leroy and Kathy Wright who live at…..

    Note from Admin: This extensive comment has been converted into an article and therefore its content has been removed here to avoid duplicating the words which is not good search engine optimisation. You can click on the link below to read the entire comment and an introduction to it. It is very useful and very helpful. It provides a prequel if you like to the story about Oliver who was unnecessarily euthanised at the Odenton Veterinary Hospital.

    My thanks to Miss Dee. I believe this is a pseudonym to enable the person to remain anonymous to avoid any possible abuse from trolls et cetera.

  6. Sir….you endangered lives bigtime, you think this is a “what not game”? The cat was ill, Miss Kaitlin lied to you, super sorry your a nitwit who believes a pretty girl would tell you the entire truth. I hope where-ever you are policy and people are more honest. BTW, get a new VPN. 😀

  7. My question is for the Author of this blog/post…Did you Sir even VERIFY sources? The Vet or Animal Control? No, Sir, you did not. If I were to say right now that President Trump mooned me, would you also just mindlessly post with zero fact, proof and or integrity as well? Not even verifying anything? Sincerely, you incited (per YOUR BLOG/POST) threats and violence to innocent people by NOT fact checking. You Sir put lives in line to be harmed, I hope you are happy. Sir, you put innocent people in danger because you DID NOT FACT CHECK your source/s. I hope you are happy. I have contacted all but one party, this is your notice, take this article down or retract it. Quote “retract* meaning, I call the Police again because you are inciting violent rhetoric based on a FACEBOOK post! This isn’t a threat, its the right thing to do. Sir, do the right thing. Also, why is Kaitlin Neal’s facebook unavailable? Has she lied? Or couldnt handle being called out as a liar?

    Thanks and warm fuzzies,

    1. Frankly, Robin, you are highly exaggerating what’s happened. You say that I have put lives at risk! That is ridiculous. I’m simply writing about a single veterinary experience in which a cat, in my opinion, should not have been euthanised (killed in fact).

      That’s all I’m doing. If other people, against my wishes and against good sense, wish to make senseless threats against people working at a veterinary hospital then that is their business. I am not inciting violence in any way. I’m simply reporting something.

      I have published the hospital statement in response. This provides a balanced argument. I have commented upon that statement because in my opinion it does not stack up. I think you are being utterly ridiculous and I think you should calm down a bit and put things in perspective.

      I hope that you have criticised Facebook and the administrators at Facebook. Because their website is packed full of articles which are critical of veterinarians and other people. Facebook publishes very many posts and articles which are questionable and critical of others. They do so to support freedom of speech. The same goes for Google.

      I think to you should consider the cat, Oliver. What about his life? He lost his life because of a poor veterinary decision. The worst thing that has happened to a human is that he has been criticised. Wake up and calm down.

  8. You should be ashamed of yourself for publishing this “article,” that is based on one Facebook post that has since been removed. Did you call Odenton Veterinary Hospital for their story, or visit their Facebook page where a conflicting account of events was given? You have no business posting inflammatory and un-confirmed accounts and sending your followers to destroy a business based on one person’s since-deleted account of events.

    I have been using OVH for years, worked there as a vet tech myself many years ago and know each and every person who works there loves animals and cares for them deeply. You are working to destroy the reputation of good people based on one side of an event. Again, shame on you.

    1. Natalie, I do not feel ashamed at all. Not one bit. I’m not destroying anybody’s career. I’m simply reporting on something. If I were to be ashamed then the entire Facebook management should also be ashamed because the story comes from Facebook. Have you criticised Facebook? Have you criticised the management of Facebook? They publish this sort of story a million times every day. They never take things down. You had better go to them and start criticising them. The post I referred to is still on Facebook by the way.

      1. That’s unfortunate that you cannot seem to grasp how you are at fault here. I’m criticizing you because you are using this platform to repackage a Facebook post without doing any research into its validity. You show no interest in gathering the other side of the story, saying you don’t have the resources to do so, when a simple Facebook search produces the response from the hospital. Rather, you choose to use this platform to elucidate emotional responses from your readers based on a unvalidated account of events that are then used to personally attack an otherwise well-regarded veterinarian. The hospital has received threats as a result of your “article,” for which you are partly responsible as you are using this platform to legitimize a Facebook post that you do not know to be true, and have shown no effort in investigating. I feel shame for you.

  9. The veterinarian involved has been getting death threats over this story. For her safety you should probably removed her picture from the article. Especially if you are truly against cyber bullying.

    1. I object strongly to cyber bullying. I object to threats as have been made. It is completely wrong obviously. The photograph is on the hospital website. It is available for anyone to see. It is in the public domain. Removing it here will make little difference.

  10. Stop cyber bullying

    Here is the clinics side. Please research both sides before launching an attack.

    To our clients, community, and those concerned…

    Note from Admin: Thanks a lot for this. As another person has commented and presented the hospital’s arguments there is no need to replicate their statement here and in any case it is bad in terms of search engine optimisation to repeat the same words and therefore I have removed it in this comment. However, I’m going to write a fresh article in which the entire statement from the hospital is stated.

    I am very keen on presenting balanced arguments.

  11. You are being fed a pack of lies. This sick, elderly, neglected and STRAY cat was euthanized for multiple reasons that were explained to and agreed on by the person who brought it in. You are listening to one side told by a person who is lying to you. It’s obvious from the pictures even this is not a cat who has any care in a long time. Please stop bullying someone when you really don’t know what is going on. Put down the pitchforks. This idiotic social media behavior of listening to one side of a story and launching a hate campaign against someone is causing SO much harm to our society. Cyber bullying has gotten out of control. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. So many wonderful ppl are taking their lives because of these hate and smear campaigns mounted on innocent people. It has to stop! I am starting to think we need to be able to prosecute people like so many who have posted on here spouting hatred, threats and abuse.

    1. Thank you for commenting. I agree that cyber bullying is a problem. It happens to me but I ignore it. In this instance I don’t think this is cyber bullying. Yes, the cat was elderly but that does not mean he should have been killed. The person who took the cat to the veterinarian sounds credible. What she says sounds truthful. The question is whether Oliver should have been euthanised or not under the circumstances. And I don’t think he should have. Many other people agree with me. That’s the question. I think you are discussing cyber bullying and using this as an example but this is not an example.

    2. This is a postscript to my previous response. You say that the cat was a stray cat. Stray cats are essentially domestic cats who have strayed from their home or even may return to their home but spend a lot of their time outside. They are not feral cats as stated by the hospital. This is the crux of the matter. This cat was not feral. If he was it would have been impossible to have carried him out of the carrier to another room from the consulting room.

  12. You wrote an article based off a Facebook post…that was full of false statements… you are a terrible journalist sir. It’s laughable how you are defending your terrible article with reiterating that you read the facts on her Facebook post. I thought everyone learns in journalism that investigation is the key, moron. I hope this Doctor and practice sue this woman for extortion.

    1. Thank you for commenting, Sally. Yes, I wrote an article based upon a Facebook post. I believe what the person said in that Facebook post. It sounded truthful to me. I am simply reporting that. If you have evidence to the contrary, evidence which proves that what was said in the Facebook post is untrue then I would be happy to publish it in a fresh article. However, all you are doing is saying that it is untrue without providing any evidence. That is no better than what I have done and perhaps worse.

      1. The statement from the clinic may not have been available but you very easily could’ve done some research rather than basing an entire article on a Facebook post. A post that is completely false. Furthermore what you state about in home quarantine is also completely wrong. The animal was not eligible for 10 day in home quarantine but because you read it on Facebook you considered it a fact. This girl is likely facing a serious lawsuit and because of this article you may be too. The original post called for destroying a career, a hospital and even contained death threats against the vet and her children.

        1. Miranda, you need to explain yourself far more fully. You say that the Facebook post is completely false. In what way is it false? You say that the information about quarantine is wrong. In what way is it wrong? Why was the animal ineligible for quarantine? Is it because they describe the cat as feral? I would dispute that very strongly. In fact the whole issue turns upon whether you describe the cat in question as feral or domestic. I will address that issue in a second post. I have provided the best possible balance on this topic. I visited the hospital website and could not find any statement. When did they make the statement? Was it available to me at the time? I could not find it.

  13. Perhaps before putting all belief in one side of the story people should hear both sides. Also note that the first thing on the OP on Facebook was asking for donations. Below is the response from the vet.

    To our clients, community, and those concerned:

    We do this job because we love animals, and we understand the concerns surrounding a story that’s gone viral which claims we mishandled a cat that was brought to our clinic for evaluation. Although we respect everyone’s right to free speech, in this case it has crossed the line to a cyberbullying attack- including serious threats against our clinic and staff. We would like to share our side of the story to those who are willing to listen.
    On July 31st, a new client brought in a feral cat they were considering rescuing that had been abandoned outdoors several years ago. This cat no owner, no veterinary history, and we were told by the client that it hadn’t had any vaccinations for years. The client asked us to examine the cat and let her know whether he could be saved, or if it would be more humane to euthanize him.

    We were able to perform an examination. The poor cat was so matted, we were unable to perform a proper skin examination. His right eye was bulging outward, had lesions all over the cornea, and likely would need to be removed. He also had severe dental disease, a possible tooth abscess, and a heart murmur.

    We discussed with the client that this cat’s prognosis was very guarded to poor, and this cat was in very bad shape. We discussed options with the client, and she eventually decided to do bloodwork, stating that if the bloodwork looked too abnormal, she would likely elect to euthanize.

    At this point, out of concern for the client’s toddler whom she had in the exam room with her, we took what we knew to be a feral, unvaccinated cat, to a more secure room in the back of our clinic in order to draw the blood.
    Though we were able to get his blood drawn, the cat quickly became aggressive, scratching and biting a few staff members. We informed the client of this fact, and explained to her that often the protocol in the case of a feral, unvaccinated cat is likely euthanasia and rabies testing.

    Before moving any further, we contacted our animal control office. We explained the situation in detail and asked whether this cat had to be euthanized and tested, or whether the client could quarantine him for 10 days and then vaccinate. The animal control officer told us that because this cat was feral, unvaccinated, had bitten someone, and was not healthy, their recommended protocol was euthanasia and rabies testing. After speaking with animal control, we spoke again with the client, explaining their recommendation to her. Rabies is fatal in humans, so we have to weight that fact against what we know about this cat and the protocol that was recommended by animal control. The client said, “This sucks”, and we agreed, sharing words about what a tough situation this was to be in. We asked the client if all of this made sense to her and if she understood why animal control had recommended euthanasia. She told us that it did, and then went to the front desk to check out.

    Hours later, we began to receive angry messages and threats from people who have never even been to our clinic. We discovered that this client had posted a story online stating that we had euthanized this cat without her consent and we needed to be brought to justice. The story went viral and our clinic and staff began to be bombarded with emails, Facebook messages, and calls. Comments ranged from accusing us of being animal murderers to outright death threats.
    The fact is this was a difficult decision for everyone involved, especially our staff, who are in this business because we love animals. This was not a decision that was reached lightly. We care deeply about every animal that comes through our doors, and euthanasia is never an easy choice. No one at this hospital would ever euthanize an animal without full permission from the owner, period. It has never happened and will never happen at our hospital. And while we share the grief that comes with losing any life, this client was made fully aware of what was happening at all times. Thus, we don’t understand why she has chosen to spark an attack on our hospital and staff for doing what was recommended by animal control and what she agreed to in the exam room.

    Thank you for your time. We appreciate those of you who understand that there are two sides to every story. Thank you for keeping an open mind.


    The Odenton Veterinary Hospital staff

    1. Thank you very much for commenting. I appreciate you presenting the other side of the story. I will publish that today, immediately with some comments. At the time I published the story I did not know of this response from the hospital. I do not have the resources of a large newspaper which will enable me to discover responses like this. In fact, I’m not sure that the response was available to me when I wrote the article. It quite possibly wasn’t. This article has elicited a response.

      Also, I do not condone cyber bullying. I do not support people who insult other people. I simply present what I see as best I can and comment upon it. I am happy to present the counter argument.

      I have read this statement carefully and to me the whole matter turns on whether this cat was feral or not. The doctors say that the cat was feral and because of that he had to be put down under the circumstances (fear of rabies). I’m going to say here in this comment and in the subsequent article that all the indications are that he was not feral. He was an outdoor cat. If he was truly feral I don’t believe that he could have been brought into the hospital in a cat carrier and it would have been impossible to have drawn blood has stated without anaesthetising the cat. This is the contentious point in this story in my opinion. I will refer to that in my article.

    2. Your statement, which you make several times, that they cat in question was feral is obviously challenged by the person who brought the cat into the hospital.

  14. There are a lot of passionate comments on here regarding Oliver and its wonderful to see people care so much about the life of an animal, however, shouldn’t both sides of the story be considered? I see the source is from the “owner” of the cats Facebook post. Whose to say she is being honest herself? Don’t get me wrong, if this is what really happened then its an awful thing, but I feel like the story is quick to take sides in what is a “he said/she said” scenario at best. All the information is from one person who could easily being manipulating the facts or perspective, I mean let’s face it there are some crazy people in this world. It would be a shame for what could be an actual caring doctors career to be damaged because of it. Jumping on the bandwagon is all too easy to do. As we werent there, who knows what actually went on within the clinic? There is too much missing information to accurately tell. Maybe we shouldn’t be so quick to judge.

    1. Kalli, very soon I am going to publish the statement from the hospital presenting their point of view on this matter. I will comment on that statement. The statement has only come to light now. I don’t have the resources to find such statements even if it was available on the Internet before I wrote the article.

      I fully agree that a balanced approach needs to be taken. I disagree with cyber bullying.

      1. You don’t have the resources to find such statements? What exactly does that mean? You are writing comments and posting “articles” based on Facebook posts, so certainly you have access to Facebook.

        Interesting how you “disagree with cyber bullying,” when you, yourself are a cyber bully.

        1. I am not cyber bullying. Cyber bullying is swearing and insulting people irresponsibly normally through comments. I am writing and reporting about something that was posted on Facebook. There is no inappropriate language in the article. There are no insults. It is cold reporting and opinion. I am entitled to do that.

          As for resources, it can take a very long time to find stuff on the Internet. I spend hours searching for stuff on the Internet. So when I refer to resources I mean the resource of time. I work alone pretty well.

          I hope that this clarifies the matter.

          1. Cyber bullying is also inciting people to negatively review, attack and threaten another entity based off an unverified account of an event. This is exactly what you did.

            Simply repackaging a Facebook article is not journalism. If you’re going to post something as an article, it is your responsibility to do your due diligence and determine if the information is factual. Using your platform to incite threats and attacks against an organization as you have is cyber bullying.

            Spare me the pathetic excuse you made about being unable to find resources. The phone number and Facebook account of Odenton Vet Hospital is easily available, and you know that.

            1. Well Natalie, you can spare me your pathetic dialogue as well. You’re lucky that I’m publishing your comment. I totally disagree with you. I’m about to publish their statement in response.

              What I’m doing is called freedom of speech. It is protected under the constitution of the USA in case you have forgotten.

  15. I would SUE the vet & start a campaign to get her out of practise. POST ALL in the local papers, and the tv channels that do the “on your side” reporting. This is HORRIBLE!

  16. “CDC write: If you were bitten by a cat, dog, or ferret that appeared healthy at the time you were bitten, it can be confined by its owner for 10 days and observed. No anti-rabies prophylaxis is needed. No person in the United States has ever contracted rabies from a dog, cat or ferret held in quarantine for 10 days.”

    This does not mean that the cat does not have rabies, only that the cat hadn’t incubated rabies long enough to make it transmissible during the last 10 days before it eventually dies from rabies. The incubation period for rabies is anywhere from 21 to 240 days (hence the legally required 6-month government-supervised quarantine of any animal with an unknown rabies vaccination history), in some cases 11 months. One rare case incubating rabies didn’t develop into the transmissible form for for SIX YEARS.

    Please stop spreading your deadly half-truth lies. It only means more cats will be killed because of your deceptions and half-truths.

    1. Woody, I am not trying to tell half-truths. I am simply reporting on what has happened. I was not trying to portray the fact that Oliver did not have rabies. In fact he was tested (obligatory) and he did not have rabies. This is to be expected because his behaviour did not in any way provide an indication that he had rabies. He was simply a cat who was a anxious and who bit a vet technician at the clinic. This must happen all the bloody time you idiot. You are a thoroughgoing idiot. If you want to comment please make it sensible and please put aside the huge amount of emotional baggage that you carry around with you. And lay off the booze at the same time.

      1. You'reBeingLiedTo

        This person is blaming the vet, when in fact it is her own fault. She would have to pay about $1,000 per month for a mandatory quarantine for 6 months. You’re all being manipulated and lied to and swallowing it hook, line, & sinker.

        She’s trying to make others look like the guilty-party when in fact she was just too cheap to keep the cat alive. If a person doesn’t choose to pay $6,000 for a mandatory quarantine on an animal with an unknown vaccination history after it has bit someone, then the only other option is euthanizing and testing it for rabies. That was her second option, and she took it because she’s just that pathetic.

        Quit blaming the vets. They have to follow the law. And good laws they are.

        1. You are writing absolute codswallop I am afraid. This is not about a six-month quarantine. It is about a 10 day quarantine as stated in the article. Secondly, the person who took Oliver to the vet is not the owner of the cat. I think she was doing the owner of favour perhaps because the owner is elderly. And therefore she has no financial liability in respect of this cat.

          At 10 day quarantine would have established that the cat did not have rabies. I am not sure where you are getting the six-month quarantine from. Perhaps you are referring to cats being imported into the country from a country where rabies is present in which case there may be a six-month quarantine.

          The article makes it clear that the veterinary clinic is at fault in this instance. There is clear evidence of that. So please do not try and defend the indefensible. Yes, the laws protecting people from rabies are good but this veterinarian did not follow those laws.

          1. Unless there are extenuating circumstances at home quarantine is almost always allowed for dogs and cats.
            Without a doubt regardless of how you feel about vaccines refusing to comply with the law can had consequences. However even in cases where the dog or cat bites someone in their own home with no proof of rabies vaccine the dog or cat will be home quarantined unless AC feels there is reason to think the owners will not comply.
            In this case it appears the vet was judge, jury and executioner. It might also be worth pointing out that in a court case the owners would have to sue and they would likely be held at least 50% responsible for not complying for the law.

            1. It gets a bit complicated. Only 5 US states (AL,DC,MD,NC,& VA) still have the “Contributory Negligence Rule”, which means that if you were even a little bit at fault you collect nothing. All the rest have “Comparative Negligence” standards, where damages are apportioned according to the degree of fault. MD is a contributory negligence state, but I don’t think that matters because I can’t envision a way in which anybody but the vet is responsible for what happened. One might say the owners are partly responsible for not having his vaccination current, but I don’t think that would work. What happened in that office was the vet’s own doing. But –in thinking more about all of this I saw a problem. Kaitlin wasn’t the owner, she was the owner’s agent, so she can’t be chief plaintiff in a lawsuit. The owners would have to be plaintiffs & that may not happen — it looks as if she cared more about him than they did. But she can still make a complaint to the vet board on her own & that may be the best avenue. It will subject the vet to scrutiny by her peers & those findings have teeth.

              1. I agree and it’s so great to have an attorney here commenting. Of course we’ve all seen the insane twisting and turning in the Kristen Lindsey case.
                We didn’t have a lawyer willing to step in until 3 days before our court date. She was the FIRST one to look at the entire packet of evidence. We were frayed and wanted it over and it was sadly one more debt to be owed on top of all the veterinary bill incurred by our vets negligence. So we hauled ourselves in and faced the beast. We lost but won and she won but lost. Her clinic is now closed.
                SVBs are varied but in NM complaints hide the names unless it goes before a full board hearing. Most vets take the deal offered pay their fine and go back to doing the same shit. Mine snagged it like a life line. Her attorney shook my hand and congratulated me for putting making a good case while his client stormed out of the courtroom.
                Every pet owner who goes through this crap needs to go to the SVB , the AG and small claims. It’s not just winning it’s fighting back in numbers. If it’s about the money you’re probably going to be disappointed. Justice comes in many packages. It was nice saying this to an attorney.

              2. I do believe i saw on kaitlyns facebook that the owners gave oliver to her…he was outside all the time and they didn’t want him back…so she wasn’t the agent at that point I would think

                1. Thank you very much for this extra information, Melissa. If that is true then it does change the situation slightly. It means that she can take legal action herself if she wants to. The way that she wrote about the story on Facebook indicated to me that she was not the owner but it is difficult to tell with certainty.

            1. Thank you, Hayley for the link. Unfortunately, the page that it links to has been removed and therefore I can’t read it. I would love to read it. I would love to present the other side of the story. That would please me no end. But unfortunately I cannot. Do you have another link?

                1. Thanks Haley, another perso has commmented and provided the statement as well. I’ll be writing about that soon in another article.

                1. At no time before the alleged bite was Oliver treated like a feral cat. Oliver despite the long list of ailments was in no worse than many elderly indoor cats that have not had adequate veterinary care.
                  When the clinic called AC they presented false information in regards to Oliver. If instead they had said there is a person here who brought in a neighbors most likely they would have ended up recommending home quarantine. I’m going to add that they have many concerning reviews that have popped up along with the many gushing ones over this case. In the end perhaps Oliver should have been euthanized if he had many health issues and no one was going to be able to afford to or willing to address them. The deeper issue here is the dishonesty by the clinic and staff and it leads you to look at all of the bad reviews many descriptive that are popping up.
                  Remember up until it went south they treated Oliver as a pet cat not a feral. This is an ethics situation or rather lack of ethics in the end. They molded the story to fit the situation and justify their actions. This should serve as a dire warning to anyone taking a pet there.

        2. I know for a fact here it is 10 quarantine for a domestic animal bite usually at home with the pittance of a fee in the form of a ticket given to the owner. The number of dogs and cats here in the county in no way matches the lower than 100 tags sold and required.

  17. I agree that the quarantine option should have been given to Kaitlin, and this would have saved Oliver’s life. I myself, have a wonderful orange kitty who was a stray and was brought in to a clinic for treatment for a URI. As a stray, he had no vaccine history. He bit a technician, but instead of immediately euthanizing him, there was the option of quarantine. I quarantined him as my foster, but now he is my forever cat.

    HOWEVER, if this cat had been ‘owned’ by someone, they need to take RESPONSIBILITY for some of what happened to Oliver. First and foremost, it was THEIR responsibility to keep him up to date on his vaccinations. Secondly, they should not have let his coat get that matted–it is painful for the cat.

    1. Your comment sums up the issues in this story perfectly. Thanks. So pleased that your similar experience turned out so much better. The owners are more important to the outcome than the story suggests. They take at least half of the blame and poor Kaitlin was stuck between what appears to be a poor cat owner and a poor veterinarian.

  18. As an attorney who has handled many veterinary malpractice cases I can say that this should be pursued. First step is to find an atty. who does animal law — easy to find one in MD through internet directories. Need to file a complaint with the state veterinary board immediately. Disagree that civil court is worthless in such cases — you’ve got both negligence & intentional misconduct which is outrageous (basis for punitive damages). Some cases are winning substantial judgments these days. Even if the case settles & never goes to court, the lawsuit will trigger major investigation by the insurer, which will impact the vet’s pocketbook — maybe the best way to make an impact.

    1. Thank you for legal clarity. Sad to say that when you go to civil court it is out of reach for some people. My bad vet retained a criminal trail attorney. We were unable to match that kind of representation. I would like to say that it’s not worthless to pursue justice it just might not net you very much dollar wise. I would have loved to pursue my crap vet to district court on my de novo from magistrate court but I believe she is insolvent at best. However hanging her ass and it’s dirty laundry out , priceless.

  19. I haven’t even read this story yet but I know it will make me cry. So many of the stories I read here hit me close to home if not right through the heart. I’ll come back to comment on this and compare it to what happened to my cat.

    1. Sorry that most cat stories are unhappy. It is the nature of ‘news’. It is a sad story. The outcome was wholly preventable.

  20. Their yelp review site is down and a notice up that the reviews are in the process of being cleaned up. Also their FB page is down. Google isn’t pretty either. Good work peeps.

      1. Thanks. The page has been removed for some reason. I do have the hospital’s statement in someone’s comment fortunately. I will discuss that in another post.

  21. What happened to Oliver is completely heartbreaking. The veterinarian sounds like a jaded person who maybe should not be practicing veterinary medicine any longer. Every animal is a living, breathing, feeling soul that deserves to be treated with respect and dignity. Oliver was treated like a disposable piece of trash. I think a lawsuit is warranted against this veterinarian. How many animals are treated this way at Odenton Veterinary Hospital on a daily basis, simply because the veterinarian cannot be “bothered” to follow protocol that restricts her time or resources?

    1. I agrees.It seems the vet just did not want to bother to the right thing but pursued the easy, instant path. The quick fix.

    If the cat had bitten someone at a home it would have , if anything, been quarantined for 10 days. Routine dangers for a veterinarian are being bit, scratched ,stomped or kicked. They should put a sign on the door that if your dog/cat bites we will kill it. I suspect this has something to do with no viable rabies certificate. It seems in connection to your story and something I brought up to Dr. Robb that tittering could probably save a lot of grief in these situation’s.

  23. My experience says that anyone bitten by an animal who may be positive for rabies MUST have the post exposure shots to prevent the disease. No Ifs, ands, or buts about it. To kill Oliver would NOT prevent the need for the shots. That vet tech and clinic needs to be taken to court.

    1. I sincerely doubt AC would stick it’s neck out on the phone and give her permission to euthanize a cat that was not hers.
      At this point the person who has custody by permission of the owner had the right to contest that the cat even bit her.
      BTW AC does not investigate over the phone. Court won’t get them much but filing a complaint with the SVB and the Attorney General who will indeed purse it if she broke the law. Civil court is worthless in this case. On and review on every site on the internet.

      1. I’d file a formal complaint and pursue it. You could sue in the small claims court for breach of contract and in the tort of negligence (probably harder to prove). The damages would be very small (if successful) but the point would be made. It would cause disruption to the veterinarian and be embarassing.

        The trouble is that it appears Kaitlin was acting for the owners and that Oliver’s owners are elderly themselves (a big guess) so they won’t bother to pursue this. And it would be a troublesome process; off-putting.

    2. Cat’s meow exactly! So perhaps the Vet recommended euthanasia because the cat was very sick and the OP wanted some attention and some donations for her supposed home run cat rescue.

Leave a Reply to Natalie Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

follow it link and logo

Note: sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified.

I welcome and value comments. Please share your thoughts. All comments are currently unmoderated.

This blog is seen in 199 of the world's country's according to Google Analytics which is pretty much the entire world.

Scroll to Top