A vet who was struck off the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) register for serious professional misconduct has been restored.
Mr Cronin, who was based at the time in the West Midlands, was also found guilty of failing to adequately explain the treatment of an animal to a client, threatening and abusive behaviour towards complainants and employees, and inappropriate handling and transportation of animals.
His original application for restoration to the register commenced in June 2014, but was adjourned due to the committee’s concerns about the future welfare of animals, his efforts to keep up to date in terms of skills and developments in practice since his removal and the need to ensure public protection.
The committee detailed a range of evidence that Mr Cronin should compile to support a properly planned return to practice programme and adjourned the hearing for three months to allow him the time to do so.
However, at the hearing on November 14 the committee heard how Mr Cronin was currently practising as a veterinary surgeon at a practice in Omeath, contrary to the evidence he gave in June 2014. It concluded there was no compelling evidence to support this allegation and accepted his denial of it.
The committee found he had undertaken more than 100 hours of continuing professional development, had developed an understanding of the limitations of his practice and accepted he should concentrate principally on his specific practice interest (racing greyhounds and pigeons).
Mr Cronin then stated his intention not to undertake surgery and to avoid working in isolation by joining a general practice and he had spent much time observing the practice of other veterinary surgeons.
Noting Mr Cronin’s clinical skills were not among the principal concerns when he appeared before the committee in 2005, it concluded the future welfare of animals would not be at risk, should he be restored to the register.
Judith Webb, chairing the disciplinary committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The committee takes the view that the applicant who appears before it today is likely to be a wholly different person to the person before the committee in 2005. He recognises his limitations, interests and priorities (which include caring for his elderly mother and aunt).
“The committee allows [Mr Cronin’s] application and directs the registrar to restore him to the register. In so doing it acknowledges there will be no restrictions on his practice, save those that he will impose on himself.”
The committee’s full findings are available on the RCVS website www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary