The SSPCA is being accused of a cover-up after it emerged staff were exposed to legal risk for over a year.
The Herald revealed that a ban on staff euthanising animals was brought in more than a year after legal advice warning such procedures could only be performed by a vet.
Here's everything you need to know.
What is the issue?
Until recently, SSPCA staff who were called to attend injured animals were permitted to euthanise the animal if required.
To do so they used a compound called phenytoin/pentobarbital which causes rapid, painless, brain death.
Earlier this month though staff were called to a meeting and told they would no longer be permitted to use the drug.
The SSPCA advised the public that they should transport small animals to a qualified veterinarian themselves if safe to do so.
Read More:
For larger animals, for example a deer, a vet would have to be called to the scene to administer a lethal injection or staff would have to seek assistance from a colleague trained in the use of a bolt gun.
Few members of staff have such training and there is no guarantee vets would attend, possibly leading to a situation where SSPCA staff could do nothing to ease the suffering of an animal.
How did the SSPCA explain the change?
Staff were initially given no explanation for the changes, and when The Herald contacted the charity we were told they had made "operational changes... in order to manage our operations better".
After staff raised further queries in an open letter, with the chief executive and chair of the board saying they were "not in a position" to give further information.
On July 9 the SSPCA admitted there was a "compliance issue" but did not elaborate further, saying it had "withdrawn the drug from use by non-veterinary staff" as a precautionary measure.
In a later letter sent to staff the charity said "changes in regulatory interpretation and governance requirements meant that continued use was no longer possible under our existing arrangements".
It said the lack of communication in advance was down to the need to "act quickly and decisively to meet our legal obligations".
What was the 'compliance issue'?
At its April 2024 meeting, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) was asked to consider whether lay people working in rescue centres could administer pentobarbital, which is a class B listed drug.
It's understood this question was raised due to growing concerns over its use by non-veterinary people.
The RCVS concluded that there was "no legal basis that allows" lay people to carry out euthanasia with controlled drugs.
Despite that, the SSPCA did not prevent most staff from using pentobarbital until July of 2025.
Were all staff still using it?
No. Following the RCVS guidance, the charity immediately stopped its use by non-vet staff at its National Wildlife Rescue Centre in Alloa, replacing it with an alternative system of remote prescription by an in-house vet.
The RCVS had advised that veterinary surgeons could prescribe controlled drugs remotely under existing legislation where there are exceptional circumstances.
However, for over a year after the RCVS clarification, Animal Rescue Officers (AROs) and inspectors continued to carry and administer pentobarbital in the field without veterinary prescription or any lawful authority to possess or use it.
What would that mean?
Staff were, unbeknownst to them, at risk of committing offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act (1971) and the Veterinary Medicines Regulations (2013).
Were they to be charged and convicted for possessing and administering pentobarbital they could, at least in theory, have faced an unlimited fine or a custodial sentence.
Their belief that they were doing so legally on behalf of their employer would not be a legal defence, though courts would almost certainly take it into account as mitigation.
What has the SSPCA said?
In a statement the charity said: "The Scottish SPCA has identified a legal compliance issue relating to the use of pentobarbital, a controlled drug used to humanely euthanise sick and injured wildlife in the field. The charity moved quickly to withdraw the drug from use.
"We are now working closely and proactively with the relevant authorities to address this matter. In the meantime, we have made operational changes to how we provide end of life care to wild animals who need it. Those changes involve us working in collaboration with our partners and local vets. We have adapted to new practices which continue to ensure no animals go without care.
"Our designated operational taskforce continues to monitor these interim ways of working closely and provide support to staff. All wildlife callouts are still being responded to by our highly experienced frontline services.
"Our board has commissioned an independent external review to understand how this situation arose and to put in place a sustainable and compliant future model."
Anna Hart, interim chief executive of the Scottish SPCA said: “Our mission is to care for all animals, always and this has not changed. We are minimising the impact any changes have on animals, colleagues and our partners. We are incredibly proud of the resilience and continued dedication everyone has shown throughout as we work towards a long-term solution.”
Share