A vet who became ‘obsessed’ with the death of a Doberman dog named Holly has has lost her £150,000 bullying compensation claim against employers.
Animal internal medicine specialist Dr Theresa McCann, 45, from Harlington, Bedfordshire, claimed she suffered a ‘severe incident of bullying’ over the death of Holly the Doberman after failing to save its life at her surgery in 2013.
She claimed the dog’s death and the ‘aggressively rude’ reaction of one of her fellow vets, who told her that her actions had ‘killed the dog’, led to a ‘downhill spiral’ of her health.
The vet told Judge Heather Baucher at Central London County Court: ‘One colleague criticised my professional skill by telling me that I had killed the dog with my approach to the case…in the public space of the car park…I was humiliated.’
Dr McCann claimed that following criticism about the ‘dog event’ she felt insecure and unsupported and was subjected to an ‘aggressive and threatening management style’ so that she feared for her job.
Dr Theresa McCann, 45, (pictured at Central London County Court) claimed she suffered a ‘severe incident of bullying’ over the death of Holly the doberman in 2013
The hostile atmosphere at the surgery, where she continues to work part time, led to her suffering depression, she said, and she sued employers Davies Veterinary Specialists Ltd, based near Hitchin, Hertfordshire, claiming up to £150,000 compensation.
But the judge has now rejected her claim, saying she was not bullied, but that the death of the dog had left a ‘professional scar’ on her which developed into an ‘obsession.’
Dr McCann’s lawyers told the court she had been working excessive hours, including nights on call, when she looked after the seriously ill Holly as an overnight emergency case in October 2013.
The judge rejected Mrs McCann’s claim, stating that she had developed an ‘obsession’ over a ‘professional scar’
The dog, which had a neurological condition, could not be saved and was later put to sleep, leading to Dr McCann being ‘subject of a bullying/harassment incident, in the course of which her clinical ability was called into question,’ said her barrister Joel Kendall.
The barrister told the judge that a ‘confrontation’ took place during which a colleague ‘shouted at her in the public space of the car park on the morning of 11 October 2013, accusing her of killing a dog with the approach she had taken to the case.’
‘This was oppressive and unacceptable conduct, likely to cause her distress,’ the barrister said.
‘Following the incident, and the criticism…there was a lack of assessment of Ms McCann’s management of the case. She needed positive reassurance in relation to her clinical skills, and, it is submitted…made it clear how important the reassurance was,’ he added.
The vet unsuccessfully sued Davies Veterinary Specialists Ltd., based near Hitchin, Hertfordshire, for £150,000 compensation
In the witness box, Dr McCann, told the judge that after the ‘dog event’ she was greeted when she arrived at work by three colleagues ‘shouting at me about my management of the case.’
‘I couldn’t even get out of the car,’ she said, explaining that she was ‘yelled at openly’ by two fellow vets, then had a third ‘criticising my case management’ when she entered the practice.
‘I lost my confidence because they wouldn’t reassure me that I hadn’t killed that dog,’ she said.
‘They were not supportive over the whole incident.’
‘I felt that I was threatened,’ she added.
In a letter to bosses, she told them: ‘Many times your choice of management style has been detrimental to my health. I felt that your management style was aggressive and threatening.’
She told the judge her treatment at work caused her a ‘depressive condition,’ characterised by ‘fluctuations in her mood’.
The judge rejected Mrs McCann’s claim that a colleague had ‘shouted at Mrs McCann and sought to belittle her in public’
She felt there was a ‘lack of support generally’ at work and that she suffered ‘anxiety that a disciplinary might be just around the corner.’
Mr Kendall said Dr McCann had previously worked full-time for the practice, but in 2013 she went to three-day weeks after being diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome.
Between September and December 2013, she had been put under pressure to return full-time, with ‘constant highlighting of the burden’ she was creating for colleagues by not working full weeks, he said.
Judge Baucher, dismissing her claim that she was bullied over the dog’s death, said: ‘I have no doubt that she is a high achieving individual and this incident has left a professional scar.
‘Mrs McCann accepts that, when attending to ‘Holly’ the Doberman, her clinical notes were suboptimal. That is chastening for any professional, particularly I find, one so driven as Mrs McCann.
‘She takes a lot of care and pride in managing her cases. She clearly loves her job and being a specialist vet is clearly very important to her.
‘I consider that this ‘mistake’ has coloured her recollection of the incident and informs her attitude to any discussion in respect of it.
‘Her obsession with the incident is also demonstrated by her request for the case file in respect of Holly for the purpose of these proceedings. The clinical records have no bearing on the claim.
‘I find that Mrs McCann has, faced with her own error, then over analysed and scrutinised every aspect of the Holly incident so that what occurred has been magnified out of all proportion.
‘Indeed, the contemporaneous record refers to the case ‘playing on her mind’. This has resulted in her expressing, and indeed displaying, as was evident in the witness box, a somewhat distorted view of anything related to it.’
The colleague who spoke to her in the car park had ‘made his opinion very clear and in so doing was no doubt brusque and direct,’ the judge said.
‘However, I reject the assertion that he in any way shouted at Mrs McCann and sought to belittle her in public. I do not consider he would have acted in such an unprofessional manner,’ she added.
‘I find that the exchange was no more than is common in any professional workplace and that Mrs McCann, for the reasons I have given, has simply reconstructed events in her own mind because she was emotionally fragile on the day and has thereafter questioned her own clinical competence.’
She went on to dismiss Dr McCann’s bullying claim and the other aspects of her compensation bid relating to management style and changes to her working pattern, finding that Davies Veterinary Specialists Ltd is ‘a considerate employer.’
‘I consider that the defendant has acted throughout in an entirely appropriate, supportive and sympathetic way towards Mrs McCann. I find no failings on its part,’ she concluded.
The court heard Dr McCann still works for the practice part-time and says she is now ‘happy with the job.’