She snapped -- and so did her dog's leg
But should stressed mom have to be labelled a criminal?
Joey Thompson, The Province
Published: Friday, May 02, 2008

Amid the frustrating frenzy of readying fidgety toddlers for Halloween, Tammy Larson flung the family's yappy black Yorkshire terrier on to his cushion from the three-step landing above.

It was a mindless, impulsive move by an overwrought mom who had just come off a long nursing shift. It was one she immediately regretted, but only later would she realize just how much.

The airborne pooch slammed into her stocky boxer that, spooked by the commotion, had jumped up. The collision set loose a container of household stuff, which tumbled down and crash-landed on Tupper's front leg as he was touching down.

Larson's 15 years as a critical-care hospital worker clicked into gear. Pulling herself together, she rushed the little dog, his leg flip-flopping like a rag doll, to the nearest vet.

Freaked by the extent of the leg fractures, the dog's long and painful path to recovery, as well as an even longer medical bill she couldn't afford, the nurse told them exactly what happened and suggested perhaps Tupper should be put down.

But X-rays confirmed the leg had a chance if housed in a splint.

Turns out the $600 vet bill for the emergency fee, consultation, X-rays, pain meds, splinting and follow-up exam were the least of her worries.

During the wait for her dog to be patched up, an SPCA special constable paid a visit, read Larson her Charter rights and asked for a statement. Nonplussed by the questions, she forthrightly admitted it was a dumb, careless thing to do but it was an accident; she never intended to hurt or harm the dog.

She said the officer took notes and told her she'd hear in a few weeks if anything was to come of it.

But it wasn't until last month that she received notice from the attorney-general's office. Surrey Crown counsel had approved a criminal charge against her for causing or permitting an animal to be or to continue to be in distress.

Turns out the animal emergency clinic deliberately delayed returning Tupper to her to give the SPCA's cruelty officer time to get there.

The investigator's recommendation? A $250 fine upon conviction and mandatory anger-management and coping-with-stress counselling.

Purpose of proceeding? "Deterrence," the special constable wrote.

"I admit what I did was foolish," the 40-year-old mom told me.

"But Tupper's discomfort, the vet bill and the fact my kids missed out on trick-or-treating that night, isn't that deterrent enough? Do they have to make a criminal out of me?"

No. While doctors have a legal obligation to report suspected cases of child abuse, there is no such parallel onus on vets to report suspected animal abuse, although they are within their right to do so, said Val Osborne, registrar of the B.C. Veterinary Medical Association.

"But there is no statutory imperative that requires them to do it."

Vets are also legally barred from euthanizing an animal in critical distress without consulting with the SPCA and completing a critical-distress assessment form. The SPCA special constable has the final say.

Nor are vets permitted to withhold or take ownership of an animal due to nonpayment of a bill.

As for five-year-old Tupper, he's recovered nicely.

Larson, who must attend her first criminal-court appearance next week, is a different story.

© The Vancouver Province 2008