A Hopkinton veterinarian is awaiting a judgment about her suspended license from the state Supreme Judicial Court following a hearing Feb. 7.

Former Attorney General of Massachusetts Martha Coakley represented Dr. Margo Roman, longtime veterinarian and owner of Main Street Animal Services of Hopkinton (MASH), at the proceeding.

“We are here today because of a finding in error by the disciplinary board in veterinary medicine and the single justice that Dr. Roman was practicing beyond the scope of her license,” Coakley argued in her opening remarks.

Roman received a two-year suspension in 2023 after a multiyear battle with the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Veterinary Medicine. The suspension stemmed from a complaint regarding emails she sent to her veterinary clients in March 2020, at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In those emails, Roman promoted the use of ozone therapy for humans as a method of combating coronavirus. The emails also directed clients to resources on MASH’s website for purchasing ozone therapy machines.

Part of the emails encouraged patients to let the ozone generator vendors know Roman had referred them because “they understand how we have tried to educate our clients to be protective,” according to the veterinary board’s appellee brief to the SJC.

In its findings, the veterinary board concluded that Roman’s advice to her human clients exceeded the scope of her veterinary license. The board believed that Roman used “the color of authority of her veterinary license” to provide advice about human health.

In her appearance in front of the SJC, Coakley argued that Roman’s email did not constitute veterinary practice but rather general health advice. She cited past actions by the veterinary board and noted that in those cases, discipline was administered in the context of patient-client relationships.

“Educating herself and the public … and giving general health advice is all [Roman] did in that email,” Coakley said.

Assistant attorney general Grace Gohlke, who represented the veterinary board, disagreed with Coakley’s assertion of “general health advice.”

“This is a targeted communication people are receiving because they are her clients,” Gohlke said. 

She went on to explain that the board’s primary concern revolved around the trust clients place in Roman for her expertise as a veterinarian. “They don’t necessarily know exactly what the limits of [Roman’s] license are,” she said.

The court justices probed the limits of the veterinary board’s decision in their questions to both attorneys.

Justice Scott Kafer brought up the context of the email and the role of medical professionals in passing along information from government officials at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“If she wrote something that just tracked what the governor was telling people to do, wouldn’t that be OK?” he asked.

“Did [the board] take into account the state of knowledge about the pandemic at this point?” added Justice Frank Gaziano.

Gohlke argued that the state of knowledge “cuts both ways,” and that it is imperative for professionals to remain within the scope of their own licenses during times of uncertainty.

The SJC has taken the case under advisement. A date for a decision has not been determined yet.

Roman: Veterinary board ‘vindictive’

For Roman, the SJC hearing is another step in a series of continued struggles with the Board of Registration in Veterinary Medicine.

“It’s an accumulation of vindictive behavior on the part of the board,” she said in an interview with the Independent.

Roman has been a practitioner of homeopathic medicine for decades. Her inclusion of ozone therapy has been ongoing since 2004, when she used it as a treatment for cancer on a horse she owned. She claims that adding medical ozone to the care of her animal patients has led to significant outcomes.

Ozone therapy remains a controversial treatment. The Food and Drug Administration classifies ozone as “a toxic gas with no known useful medical application in specific, adjunctive or preventative therapy.” Some research indicates ozone treatments are effective in the treatment of conditions such as herniated discs in humans, though more research is needed.

It was Roman’s background and knowledge of ozone therapy that led to the content of her March 2020 email.

“I was using my scientific skills and knowledge for the protection of animals, humans and public health,” she said.

Added Roman: “Is that fair for me to shut my mouth in the middle of a pandemic? That would have been, to me, corrupt.”

During the SJC hearing, the judges appeared to speak to Roman’s concerns.

“It seems that this is content-based, in that had she said, ‘Wear a mask and socially distance,’ the government would be a-OK with that,” said Graziano to Gohlke. “But because she said this alternative type of treatment, then she’s in violation.”

Kafer concurred, wondering if the state had to find ozone therapy a “kooky” treatment for the court to justify upholding the suspension.

The state noted that the evidence in Roman’s case suggested no mal intent on her part, nor that clients had taken the advice. Evidence entered about the toxicity of ozone therapy also had been removed from earlier filings.

“This is not about whether ozone is good or effective therapy,” argued Gohlke. “The problem here is she failed to maintain the boundary between her veterinary practice and other knowledge she might have.”

Although the board has said in its court filings that Roman’s case is not a referendum on ozone or other alternative medicines, Roman says the opposite is true.

“It’s been a vindictive, capricious attack on progress in veterinary medicine,” Roman said, claiming major veterinary schools and even the veterinary board are “paid by pharma.”

“To have this kind of thing be so attacked because I’m trying to do alternative stuff, it’s not right,” she added.