In 2022, the State of Vermont filed formal professional disciplinary charges against veterinarian Dr. Raymond E. Knutsen.
The charges did not arise from a single complaint. According to the Vermont Office of Professional Regulation’s Specification of Charges, the case involved four separate complaints concerning veterinary care provided between 2016 and 2020.
The State alleged repeated failures to document examinations, diagnoses, clinical findings, treatment plans, follow-up recommendations, and communications with animal owners. The State also alleged that a rabies vaccination was administered without the examination, authorization, and direct supervision required by Vermont law.
Four Complaints Involving Four Veterinary Patients
2016 Complaint: Fourteen-Year-Old Cat
The first complaint concerned veterinary treatment provided to a fourteen-year-old cat in September 2016.
According to the State, Dr. Knutsen diagnosed the cat with renal disease but did not document that diagnosis in the veterinary record. The records referenced symptoms including not eating, vomiting, weight loss, bad breath, and stomatitis.
A dental procedure was scheduled for September 2, 2016. The State alleged that the record did not adequately document the cat’s condition, what dental work was performed, or the animal’s condition when released.
The complaint alleged that the cat appeared lifeless and could barely open its eyes when picked up. Two days later, another veterinary clinic reportedly diagnosed the cat with dehydration, an upper respiratory infection, corneal ulcers, and eye ulcers. The cat was euthanized on September 15, 2016.
2017 Complaint: Vaccinations Administered by a Technician
The second complaint involved a three-year-old cat that received rabies and feline distemper vaccinations in 2017.
The State alleged that a veterinary technician administered the vaccines without an examination by Dr. Knutsen and without his direct supervision. The cat later developed a lump at the injection site.
According to the State, the medical record did not adequately document an examination, diagnosis, treatment, client communication, or the care provided after the lump developed.
2018 Complaint: Cat Later Diagnosed With Renal Failure
The third complaint concerned a six-year-old cat brought to Dr. Knutsen’s office with blood in her urine, lethargy, reduced appetite, and reduced water intake.
The State alleged that the records contained test results and medication instructions but did not include a diagnosis, physical examination findings, interpretation of clinical data, a follow-up plan, or documentation of what was communicated to the owner.
The cat returned approximately two weeks later because her condition had not improved. According to the State, the second record was also insufficient and did not clearly establish whether blood work had been recommended, declined, or discussed with the owner.
Three days later, another veterinarian reportedly diagnosed the cat with renal failure.
2020 Complaint: One-Year-Old Dog
The fourth complaint involved a one-year-old dog treated in November 2020.
The State described portions of the veterinary records as illegible and inadequate. It alleged that the records did not establish whether Dr. Knutsen examined the dog, what treatment was provided, what clinical conclusions were reached, or what risks and potential medication side effects were explained to the owner.
The dog returned for an X-ray two days later. The following day, another veterinary office reportedly used an ultrasound to identify an intestinal blockage. The dog was ultimately euthanized.
The Four Professional Violations Alleged by the State
Based on the four complaints, the State filed four categories of professional misconduct charges against Dr. Knutsen.
1. Unsafe or Unacceptable Patient Care
The State alleged that Dr. Knutsen failed to practice competently by providing unsafe or unacceptable patient care.
The charge focused largely on his alleged failure to document examinations, diagnoses, treatment plans, clinical interpretation, and other information necessary to establish what care had been provided.
2. Failure to Follow Accepted Professional Standards
The State alleged that acceptable and prevailing veterinary practice required documentation of examinations, findings, treatment plans, follow-up plans, and interpretation of clinical data.
It claimed that Dr. Knutsen’s records did not meet those standards.
3. Violation of Vermont Rabies Vaccination Rules
Vermont rules required rabies vaccinations to be performed by a licensed veterinarian or under the direct supervision of one.
The State alleged that a staff member administered a rabies vaccine without Dr. Knutsen first examining the animal, authorizing the vaccination, and directly supervising the procedure as required.
4. Failure to Exercise Independent Professional Judgment
The State also alleged that Dr. Knutsen failed to exercise the independent professional judgment required of a licensed veterinarian because he did not create sufficient records for the animals under his care.
Dr. Knutsen’s Response
Dr. Knutsen denied that the allegations established professional misconduct and asked the Board to dismiss the charges.
His attorney argued that the veterinary recordkeeping rules in effect when the alleged conduct occurred described recordkeeping practices as recommendations rather than mandatory requirements.
The defense claimed that Vermont could not retroactively apply stricter recordkeeping rules adopted in July 2022 to conduct that occurred years earlier.
Regarding the vaccination complaint, Dr. Knutsen’s attorney argued that the veterinary technician acted without his approval and that he should not be professionally disciplined for the technician’s unilateral conduct.
The motion to dismiss characterized the State’s theory as an attempt to impose a professional standard that had not been clearly established in the rules at the time of the alleged conduct.
What the State Requested
The Vermont Office of Professional Regulation asked the Board of Veterinary Medicine to warn, reprimand, suspend, revoke, condition, or otherwise discipline Dr. Knutsen’s veterinary license.
The document reviewed for this article contains the State’s allegations, procedural filings, and Dr. Knutsen’s motion to dismiss. It does not, by itself, establish the final disposition of the disciplinary case.
Why These Records Matter
Professional licensing records allow the public to see how state regulators evaluate complaints against licensed practitioners.
These documents show both sides of the dispute. The State alleged a recurring pattern of deficient documentation and unacceptable care across four cases. Dr. Knutsen argued that the State was attempting to discipline him under recordkeeping requirements that were not mandatory when the alleged conduct occurred.
This article summarizes public records. The allegations described above should not be treated as proven facts unless and to the extent that they were established through a final decision, settlement, or disciplinary order.
Source: State of Vermont, Secretary of State, Office of Professional Regulation, Board of Veterinary Medicine, In re Raymond Knutsen, Docket Nos. 2022-13, 2022-14, 2022-15, and 2022-16.
