Microchips

Veterinary Science Graduate Programs from U. of I.
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
B

Buckeye1206

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Members don't see this ad.
Does anyone know the law on microchips? If you find one in a dog what is the course of action the vet much take? I've tried looking on the avma website but haven't been able to find any info.

Info or links to a site would be great
 
Buckeye1206 said:
Does anyone know the law on microchips? If you find one in a dog what is the course of action the vet much take? I've tried looking on the avma website but haven't been able to find any info.

Info or links to a site would be great
Click to expand...

I don't really understand what you're asking....do you mean what is a veterinarian legally required to do if they are presented with a dog who is microchipped but does not belong to the person presenting them??
 
well since many people do not liscence, tag, calor or microchip their pets it would probably be handled on a case by case basis.

when I adopted my cats Gin and Tonic they were from a rescue group, they have to transfer ownership to me so I can let the microchip company I am their forever owner.

when I purchased indigo from a pet store. I thought it was the right thing to do to get him neutered and microchip when he was in surgery, but many other pet owners might not believe or follow the same rules.

some cities and states have by laws on pet ownership many people do not follow them that is why there are soo many tv shows like animal rescue, animals cops, animal hoarding confessions and etc. I think I watch too many animal planet.

so if you get a human bringing in your patient who is not verified where his owner is I say treat the patient then discuss the ownership if you can find a way to bring it up. some people find strays all the time, bring them to be checked out and then some keep them or find their rightful owner.
 
Yes, I was just wondering what the vet was required to do if a client brought in a dog who is found to have a microchip but isn't willing to find its rightful owner. I am not well versed in ownership laws and I can't seem to find anything on AVMA.
 
I'd imagine it varies by state.

In my opinion, if the client KNOWS that the animal belongs to someone else (which they seem to in your case, if you've made them aware of the fact that the animal is microchipped and that you have the owners information, or at least can get in touch with the owner) and refuses to return it, that's animal theft.

I'd look up pet/animal theft laws in your state and see what it says.

From my quick google search, it says that pet theft is a felony or misdemeanor in all states.
 
Actually, this is one of those areas where the law hasn't yet caught up. We covered this last semester in a selective.

So, the laws that do exist are conflicting. IE you can't prove theft by the individual in possession of the animal via use of microchip, and if you contact a microchip service w/out permission of the client, you may be in violation of privacy laws. And once you have contacted them, releasing info becomes a massive issue, etc.

I have already decided that when I own a clinic, part of our intake will include microchip screening of all animals, and if an unknown microchip is found, we will contact the microchip company and inform the person on record. This will be included in the initial visit information for a new patient; clients that refuse this service will be sent to another vet. I have my pets all microchipped, and believe in microchipping as a form of ID, so I feel ethically that I need to match my actions across the board (ie if we sell microchips, track by microchips, etc, I need to honor their use.)

Our contract lawyer (husband's friend) said this should be legal in every state, because it includes an upfront warning and release, and because there is no benefit to me (which could become an issue with microchips; it doesn't benefit the vet to upset the client....could that at some point be considered if a complaint is filed?)
 
Yeah these issues are very complicated. Our class is trying to figure out what ethical considerations we need to have if this case was presented to us. It seems to me that we would have to consider personal, social, and of coarse- professional ethics when talking to the client not willing to contact the previous owner. But I wasn't sure how the VCPR would be affected since we dont have a relationship with the previous owner but rather the one who isn't willing to part with the new pet.
 
The other issue you face is that the non-owner presenting with the animal cannot consent to anything being done since they aren't the legal owner of the animal. As such you could be liable if they wanted you to neuter the animal that the true owner planned to use for breeding.
 
VIN has a few great threads about found pets with microchips.

I think if a client brings in an animal they tell you they found it is your obligation to call the microchip company. To me this is the same as if another client of yours had a lost pet you were familiar with, then someone else comes in with said pet and says they found it but don't want you to contact the owner. How is that right? No one knows why the pet was lost in the first place. I know people that have lost their pets when someone broke into their house. They were not neglectful and sure do not deserve someone else to claim that animal as their own. When an animal is microchipped it is done so that the animal and owner can be reunited should the pet become lost. Since the person that found the animal is not legally the owner there should be no issue with a vet contacting the chip company.
 
The challenge there is ethical vs legal. Since the laws haven't caught up, if you have already established a patient-doctor relationship with the client that found the dog (and that dog) before you establish that your policy is X, you can be violating confidentiality (which there are laws and regulations about.)

Remember that ownership isn't always defined by original owner. I have had this go to court in the opposite way. We had legally adopted an animal from a county shelter. It had been held for two weeks without anyone trying to find it (purebred english bulldog.) It was checked for a microchip at the county shelter. We took it to our vet for routine physical. Two weeks later we get a call from the previous owners, who apparently called all the vet clinics in the area (only 3) and our vet clinic told them we had rescued an English Bulldog and gave our info out. We refused to turn over the dog (he was emaciated, had been left out in 110 degree weather, had sores, and was HW+.) Their excuse for not looking for the dog? They were convinced their neighbor stole it (though they never reported theft either.) The dog also, according to them, routinely broke its chain and wandered the neighborhood. They took us to court, we won. I had already poured money into the animal, started him in obedience training, etc. The judge ruled in our favor, and specifically noted that the release of our information directly to the owners was completly inappropriate, and advised us to write a letter to the state board and the BBB. I opted not to (this was a vet I also worked with every day in a different capacity.)

The vet should have referred the owners to the shelter, who would have contacted us, but would not have released the info. His client/patient relationship with us included not releasing personal information. He not only released our names and numbers, but I was in a public position, and these folks did show up at my work and threatened me with violence. I think that is where vets run into problems, particularly if they don't address this on the initial visit before client/patient privelage attaches.
 
There are some states that have laws stating that all found dogs must be either turned in to animal control, or at least listed with animal control. It is illegal for someone to keep a found animal.
 
So I definitely think that the vet in Sunstorm's example was out of line giving the previous owners her information. That seems like a legal issue regarding confidentiality. I don't understand how a vet scanning a patient for a microchip would be a legal issue provided neither owner gets the contact information of the other. Can't a vet scan for a chip, tell the current owner that the animal is chipped to someone else, and then turn the matter over to a legal authority? I don't know if that places to much responsibility on the vet...
 
We had an issue recently with a stray cat brought in by a client who wanted us to help find its home. She had a chip so we contacted the microchip company and were told the cat's name, but they would not give us any information on the owner, they simply told us that they would provide the owner with our information. Of course after multiple tries, we were never contacted and the original client ended up adopted the cat.
I definitely understand the confidentiality issues that can come up and don't endorse giving owner information directly to the clients, but I think that vets should be allowed to contact the listed owner directly. It sounds like maybe this is permitted in other cases but for some reason not in the situation I experienced..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top