Originally Posted by SamIam
It is not unusual to use a muzzle to help calm the dog, prevent the vet/groomer being bitten, and allow the head to be held still for picking/plucking, cleaning, and visual inspection. Taking the dog out of his owner's presence often improves the dog's behaviour as well. On those points, I do not believe the legal action you are considering will hold any water in court, though still valid points to bring up with the veterinary association.
I would have to whole-heartedly disagree with that. Neither one of mine are put in a better state of mind by being taken out of our presence. In fact, they both get highly stressed which is why we will not leave them. If the vet is not comfortable doing what he/she is going to do in front of us, we will find another vet. As for the muzzle, one of ours has seizures due to the stress of being muzzled. The vet should have spoken with the owners prior to doing something like that. Are there legal grounds? I have no idea. But one thing I do know is that vet made an extremely poor decision. And as for muzzling as not to get bit, it's a 4 month old puppy, small breed. He could have had an assistant hold the puppy's head. There was no need for a muzzle.
"Obey my dog!" - Mugatu
"Who can believe that there is no soul behind those luminous eyes!" ~ Theophile Gautier
"Dogs are not our whole life, but they make our lives whole" - Ok... whoever said this has never had a sick or special needs baby. They ARE our whole life!
R.I.P. my sweet, handsome Thorin. You are missed dearly Dec. 25, 1999 - Mar. 4, 2012