Delaware first codified a veterinarian-client-patient relationship in 2023, and the statute it wrote is silent on modality.
The relationship rests on sufficient knowledge of the patient — built through a timely examination or medically-appropriate and timely visits to the operation where the patient is managed — but the text never says whether either can happen remotely.
Maintenance by telemedicine goes unaddressed too, while the board's unprofessional-conduct rule bars prescribing without an examination within one year.
The federal VCPR applies regardless.
Verify before you rely on this
At a glance
The veterinarian must be personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the patient by virtue of a timely examination of the patient or medically-appropriate and timely visits to the operation where the patient is managed — one of five conditions the statute requires conjunctively.
Not addressed. The definition was newly written in 2023 in FDA-style wording, and it carries no telemedicine language in either direction — no remote path, and no express bar.
Not addressed in the statute. The board's general unprofessional-conduct rule separately bars prescribing medication without examining the animal within a period of one year.
Not stated in the sources read.
The operative line is a general unprofessional-conduct rule, not a telemedicine rule: prescribing medication without examining the animal within a period of one year.
Governed by the same general one-year examination rule — the sources read name no telemedicine-specific controlled-substance carve-out.
84 Del. Laws, c. 232, § 2 (2023) — the enactment that added Delaware's first codified VCPR definition; no later amendment appears in the sources read.
The text is silent on modality — State statute.
24 Del. C. § 3303A, added by 84 Del. Laws, c. 232, § 2 (2023)
The relationship is conjunctive — subsection (a) requires all five listed conditions: responsibility for medical judgments with a client who has agreed to follow instructions, sufficient knowledge of the patient, availability for follow-up or arranged emergency coverage and continuing care, oversight of treatment and outcome, and maintained patient records.
The knowledge condition in (2) is the one with a physical root: the veterinarian is personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the patient by virtue of a timely examination or medically-appropriate and timely visits to the operation where the patient is managed.
The statute attaches no number to the word timely; the one-year interval that does govern practice lives in the board's prescribing rule, covered below.
Subsection (b) lets multi-animal operations — shelters, farms, laboratories, zoos — establish and maintain the relationship through examination of health, laboratory, or production records, consultation with supervisory staff, or maintenance of local disease-epidemiology information.
A manager building intake files should be able to point to which route each relationship rests on.
“The veterinarian has sufficient knowledge of the patient to initiate at least a general or preliminary diagnosis of the medical condition of the patient. This means that the veterinarian is personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the patient by virtue of a timely examination of the patient, or medically-appropriate and timely visits to the operation where the patient is managed.”
The definition in force was written fresh in 2023, after the remote-establishment question was already live nationally, and it still contains no telemedicine, telehealth, or electronic-means language — no clause permitting a veterinarian to form the relationship remotely, and no clause barring it in terms.
Subsection (a) frames its conditions as a closed list ('Except as provided under subsection (b) of this section'), and modality appears nowhere in it.
On the text, the question is unresolved: reading a video-exam path into 'a timely examination' is an inference, and so is reading an outright ban into the silence.
A practice deciding whether it can launch a remote-first service on this language is deciding on silence — and the federal VCPR described below will not treat a remotely formed relationship as valid for extralabel use no matter how the silence is read.
“Except as provided under subsection (b) of this section, a veterinarian-client-patient relationship is established and maintained if all of the following are met:”
The statute's own verb reaches maintenance — the relationship must be 'established and maintained' — and the five subsection (a) conditions apply to both, but the text never addresses whether the ongoing relationship can be carried by telemedicine between examinations.
Nothing in the sources read imposes a synchronous-video floor on follow-up of an established patient, and nothing permits or forbids remote-only continuity in terms.
What is fixed is the prescribing floor covered next: the board's rule bars prescribing without examining the animal within one year, and it does not say whether that examination can be remote.
“For a veterinarian to practice veterinary medicine, a veterinarian-client-patient relationship must be established and maintained.”
The one dated, auditable line a Delaware practice manager can write policy against sits in the board's unprofessional-conduct rule rather than the VCPR statute: prescribing medication without examining the animal within a period of one year is unprofessional conduct.
It is a general rule about prescribing, not a telemedicine rule — it names no modality, and it does not say whether the examination it requires can happen remotely.
Its twelve-month clock is the only numeric interval in the sources read, which makes it the practical maintenance floor for any prescription-supported relationship.
Controlled substances receive no separate treatment: the sources read name no telemedicine-specific controlled-substance carve-out, so the same examination rule governs them.
“prescribing medication without examining the animal(s) within a period of one year”
Delaware's VCPR definition arrived with 84 Del.
Laws, c. 232, § 2 in 2023, and it was the state's first codified definition — the chapter previously had none.
The youth of the text matters in both directions: any summary, vendor page, or intake policy written before 2023 describes a chapter with no VCPR definition to rely on, and a definition this young — enacted after the remote-establishment question was contested nationally, and silent anyway — is precisely the kind of text a board can clarify through guidance or an amendment can settle.
No later amendment appears in the sources read, which is why this page dates the rule to 2023.
Check the board for anything newer before relying on it.
There are two VCPRs, and the federal one does not move
This page describes Delaware’s own text — 24 Del. C. § 3303A, added by 84 Del. Laws, c. 232, § 2 (2023) as read for this series, current as of September 2026, with the provision itself last changed 84 Del. Laws, c. 232, § 2 (2023) — the enactment that added Delaware's first codified VCPR definition; no later amendment appears in the sources read. It does not cover licensure, scope of practice, or the terms of a specific prescription, and it is not a compliance sign-off for a telemedicine service.
VCPR and telemedicine rules are the fastest-moving area this site covers — nine states changed theirs between 2024 and 2026, and bills are live in others. Confirm the current text with the board before you build an intake policy, a prescribing workflow or a remote-care service on it, and read the federal note above alongside it rather than instead of it.
The Delaware statute does not answer that.
Section 3303A(2) requires personal acquaintance with the keeping and care of the patient through a timely examination or medically-appropriate and timely visits to the operation where the patient is managed, and it never addresses modality — no clause permits a video establishment and none bars one.
On the text the question is unresolved, and the separate federal VCPR cannot be established by telemedicine regardless.
Ask the Delaware Board of Veterinary Medicine how it reads the silence before launching anything remote.
The statute is silent here too: it says the relationship must be established and maintained but never addresses the modality of ongoing care, so there is no express allowance or restriction to point to.
The practical floor is the board's unprofessional-conduct rule — prescribing medication without examining the animal within a period of one year is unprofessional conduct — so prescription-supported care has to come back to an examination of the animal at least annually, though the rule does not say whether that examination can be remote.
Confirm the board's current reading before building a telehealth follow-up program on the silence.
No, and this is the trap.
The federal VCPR at 21 CFR 530.3(i) is a separate relationship governing extralabel drug use under AMDUCA and Veterinary Feed Directives, it requires that the veterinarian has recently seen the animal or visited the premises, and the FDA has said it cannot be met solely through telemedicine.
It applies regardless of what Delaware permits, and extralabel use is routine rather than an edge case.
Check both, and confirm with the Delaware Board of Veterinary Medicine.
The definition in force today was added by 84 Del.
Laws, c. 232, § 2 in 2023, and it was Delaware's first codified VCPR definition — the chapter previously had none.
No later amendment appears in the sources read, which is why this page dates the rule to 2023.
Because the text is silent on telemedicine, a board guidance document or an amendment could resolve the open question at any time.
Verify the current text with the Delaware Board of Veterinary Medicine.
Sourced from Delaware’s own statute or board rule (see the citations above). Verified September 2026. This page is general information, not legal advice — confirm current rules with the Delaware board before relying on them.