A Toronto veterinarian has been suspended for three months and ordered to undergo remedial training after a disciplinary panel found he committed professional misconduct in his treatment of a 13-year-old Golden Retriever named Chelsea, who was euthanized a day after being in his care. In a case cited as College of Veterinarians of Ontario v. Singh, 2025 ONCVO (CanLII), Dr. Harjinder Singh of the Birch-Dan Animal Hospital admitted to a series of failures, including discharging the seriously ill dog when she could no longer walk, not providing any pain medication despite his own diagnosis of a painful condition, and failing to offer options for emergency care as her health rapidly declined.
The events leading to the discipline began on March 3, 2021, when Chelsea’s owner, identified in the decision only as JV, brought her to Dr. Singh’s clinic. The senior dog had been vomiting, had stopped eating, and was lethargic. During the examination, Dr. Singh had difficulty hearing Chelsea’s heart rate because of her excessive panting but recorded a pulse of 140. According to the facts agreed upon at the hearing, a veterinarian should have known this heart rate was elevated for a lethargic, large-breed dog and was an indicator of serious illness. After conducting blood tests, Dr. Singh informed JV that Chelsea was suffering from pancreatitis, an inflammation of the pancreas.
Dr. Singh recommended hospitalizing Chelsea for the day to receive IV fluids, anti-inflammatories, an antibiotic, and pain medication. JV agreed and left Chelsea at the clinic, with instructions to pick her up at the end of the day. He was told to bring her back the next morning if she was still unwell. However, the investigation later revealed significant shortcomings in the care provided. Dr. Singh admitted that he failed to perform the necessary tests to properly diagnose pancreatitis and did not consider other potential health issues. He also failed to adequately explain the seriousness of Chelsea’s condition, her prognosis, or the possibility that the proposed treatment might not work.
When JV returned to the hospital to retrieve Chelsea, her condition had severely deteriorated. He was told she could no longer walk and would have to be carried to his vehicle. Despite this alarming decline and his diagnosis of pancreatitis, a condition known to be painful, Dr. Singh had not administered or prescribed any pain medication for Chelsea. He assured JV that her condition would improve by the next morning. Critically, he did not advise JV on what to do if Chelsea’s condition worsened overnight, such as contacting an emergency clinic, nor did he recommend transferring her to a 24-hour facility for continuous monitoring. The panel found he knew or should have known that a few hours of daytime hospitalization was insufficient for her condition.
Overnight, Chelsea’s health continued to spiral. By the morning of March 4, she could not lift her head, was having trouble breathing, and refused to move, eat, or drink. A distressed JV called Dr. Singh, who advised him to try and see if Chelsea would eat anything and to call back if she refused. When Chelsea still would not eat, JV called the clinic again shortly after, only to be told by a staff member that Dr. Singh was unavailable and could not see Chelsea that day. No referral to an emergency clinic or another veterinarian was offered.
Growing increasingly desperate and not wanting Chelsea to suffer any longer, JV called the hospital a third time to arrange for euthanasia. A receptionist informed him that the earliest this could be done was the next day, more than 24 hours away. Again, no options for immediate or urgent care were provided. Left with no other choice, JV contacted a different veterinary clinic. After the new clinic requested Chelsea’s medical records from the Birch-Dan Animal Hospital, Dr. Singh called JV and offered to see Chelsea. By then, it was too late, and JV declined the offer. The second veterinarian, Dr. NB, performed further tests and told JV that the initial tests done by Dr. Singh were not sufficient to have concluded she had pancreatitis. Tragically, Chelsea was euthanized later that day to end her suffering.
In a hearing before the Discipline Committee of the College of Veterinarians of Ontario on June 10, 2025, Dr. Singh pleaded guilty to professional misconduct. He admitted to failing to maintain the standards of the profession, failing to continue to provide professional services until the owner could find alternative care, failing to keep proper records, and engaging in conduct that his peers would regard as unprofessional.
The discipline panel accepted a joint submission on penalty from the College’s and Dr. Singh’s lawyers. The penalty included a formal, public reprimand and a three-month suspension of his veterinary license, which began on June 11, 2025. Dr. Singh was also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the College. Furthermore, he must complete a series of remedial courses as a condition of his license. This includes a one-day mentorship focused on the medical issues from this case, with a specific focus on pain management, as well as a course or mentorship on proper client communication, supervision of staff, and informed consent.
In its decision, the panel noted that its penalty was designed to protect the public and rehabilitate the veterinarian. The panel expressed its hope that Dr. Singh would “consider seriously what he could have done differently for Chelsea, particularly in the area of pain management.” It was also noted that while Dr. Singh had a prior disciplinary record, it was from many years ago, and he had been cooperative in the current proceedings.
During the oral reprimand delivered at the hearing, the panel chair told Dr. Singh, “The fact that you engaged in unprofessional conduct is truly regrettable. Public confidence in this profession is essential. You have put that confidence at risk.” He was also warned that any future finding of professional misconduct would likely result in a more severe penalty.
Read more cases about proceedings in regulated professions here.
