Skip to main content

Veterinary nurse removed from Register for prescription medicine misuse

A veterinary nurse has been removed from the Register of Veterinary Nurses by the Disciplinary Committee after being found guilty of charges relating to dishonestly taking prescription only medicine, and on one of these occasions, injecting himself with a prescription only medicine. 

Date Published:
Disciplinary

Mr Robert Drummond was in attendance at the hearing which took place between the 27 and 29 October 2025. He was charged with the dishonest taking and injecting himself with Lidocaine on 4 August 2023, and the dishonest taking and injecting himself with Alfaxan on 6 September 2023. Mr Drummond admitted the charges save for the allegation regarding injecting himself with Lidocaine on 4 August 2023.

On 4 August 2023, Mr Drummond was found by a member of the public to be slumped with his eyes closed, sitting in the driver’s seat of a car. It was alleged that the member of the public witnessed Mr Drummond using a syringe and needle to inject himself in his hand. Mr Drummond admitted to wrongly removing the Lidocaine from the practice, stating that he took it to use in case he cut a blood vessel while trimming the claws of a patient. Mr Drummond was adamant that he had not injected himself with anything on 4 August 2023; rather, he was just sleeping on his break. 

Then on 6 September 2023, Mr Drummond, appeared to be unconscious in the bathroom area at work. When he eventually got up, a syringe was found underneath him. Drummond would later admit that he injected himself with Alfaxan.

In relation to the allegation that Mr Drummond injected himself with Lidocaine on the 4 August 2023, the Disciplinary Committee could not be sure that it was Lidocaine in the syringe and therefore could not find this charge proved. All other charges were found proved on the basis of the admissions made by Mr Drummond and the Disciplinary Committee found proved that Mr Drummond was guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect. 

The Disciplinary Committee decided to postpone its judgment for a period of 18 months, subject to undertakings. The decision was supported by complementary testimonials from veterinary professionals and 21 members of the public, as well as Mr Drummond’s own written statements demonstrating significant insight into his behaviour. The Disciplinary Committee was satisfied that Mr Drummond did not represent a risk to animals going forward.

However, the Committee resumed the hearing on 30 June 2026, due to:

  • Non-compliance with the undertakings following Mr Drummond gaining access to a controlled drugs cabinet on 21 March 2026
  • Mr Drummond attempting to remove himself from the Register through the online process on 23 March 2026
  • A lack of communication and engagement from Mr Drummond

At the hearing, the Disciplinary Committee were satisfied that Mr Drummond had breached his undertakings. It reconsidered its findings that Mr Drummond was guilty of serious professional misconduct, and the submissions made during the last hearings and in relation to this hearing.

Furthermore, the Disciplinary Committee noted that as a result of Mr Drummond’s lack of engagement, it was unable to determine whether there were any additional matters of mitigation or further developed insight.

The Disciplinary Committee therefore upheld its original conclusion that there had been two instances of serious dishonesty. It did not consider it appropriate to postpone judgement further due to Mr Drummond’s wish to leave the Register.

Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, noted: “Mr Drummond’s irresponsible approach to prescription-only medication constituted an abuse of the trust placed in him as a registered veterinary nurse and was in breach of legal provisions designed to safeguard human health.”

The Committee concluded that removing Mr Drummond from the Register was the most appropriate sanction. Morris added: “Since the Committee could not now assess the Respondent’s future risk or his insight in his absence, it therefore decided that removal was the only proportionate sanction because any other sanction would not protect animals or the public in the future without those matters having been adequately assessed.”

The full facts and findings regarding the hearing can be found on our Disciplinary Committee hearings webpage.