PDA

View Full Version : Declawing Cats


deoxys121
July 27th, 2011, 05:49 PM
This thread is basically for debating whether or not it is humane to declaw cats. According to this page (http://www.catsinfo.com/declaw.html), when a cat is declawed, they actually remove part or all of their last toe bones. It is also very risky, with risk of infection and possible temporary or permanent paralysis in their front leg(s).

Personally, I would never have a cat declawed. They go through too much pain and suffering for me to find it acceptable. I love animals, so I never want to have them harmed in any way.

What are your opinions on this?

Mr. X
July 27th, 2011, 07:44 PM
The only people who declaw a cat are those who are to lazy to properly trim the cat's nails.

As for the last toe part, I can't remember what animal it is (Either dogs or cats) but its actully recommended to remove one of the toes for some reason.

G.U.Y.
July 27th, 2011, 07:48 PM
I would never get my cat declawed!

People always ask me why in real life. My cat likes to play, it plays like a dog. I play with it all the time and I get scratched sometimes (although it happens less and less often as my cat is realizing that I get scratched easier than other cats) .

I think it's cruel. I don't even trim my cat's nails, he scratches his post-thing a lot so they're dull most the time anyways.

And we try to limit vet visits as my cat is so scared of cars that he fills the carrier with diarrhea, so if we weren't against it that would be a major factor in not doing it. And yes..we've tried bigger carriers and no carriers. :[ Poor kitty

moments.
July 27th, 2011, 07:52 PM
If they are justifying removing their claws because of damage they do to humans, or other animals or whatever, it is a ridiculously flimsy reason... Animals are great at adapting, and if you take away one method of defence, they will simply use their others. Cats have sharp teeth and teeth are going to do more damage than claws in most cases.

Not only is it cruel and unnecessary, but surely it won't even be effective, unless there is some other reason for doing so?

G-Virus
July 27th, 2011, 07:53 PM
Personally, I think people who declaw their cats are stupid in that sense. No offense to anyone who does though, but really, you're basically taking away one of their defensive weapons and climbing tools, that's not going to survive when they go out/if :/.

2Cool4Mewtwo
July 27th, 2011, 08:03 PM
This is just plain dumb and ridiculous. I'd rather not have a cat if it's going to be scratching stuff all over the house. It's called common sense.

Sydian
July 27th, 2011, 08:07 PM
Well here I am, I'll be the "stupid inhumane" person of the group. Now, I wouldn't declaw a cat unless the claws were becoming a major problem. I don't let my cats go outside and I've always had scratching posts for my cats, or they knew better than to scratch furniture. And I never had issues with them scratching me or anything. But yeah, if the claws were becoming a major problem because of furniture damage, or say if I had small children and the cat was aggressive for whatever reason and couldn't be in an environment with kids, then yes, I will get the cat declawed. "Survival" shouldn't have to be a big issue because like I said, I don't let my cats outside, and it's not too terribly difficult to keep them in. But under certain circumstances, I would get a cat declawed. Just note, that is not my first option. There's always the spray bottle or something for when a cat is scratching what it doesn't need to scratch, teaching it to use scratching posts, clipping them (which I have never really had luck with!), and hell, there are even those little rubber things you can put on their claws now. Declawing would be my last resort. /prepared to have my butt flamed :)

Deerling
July 27th, 2011, 08:09 PM
As far as I'm concerned, declawing a cat is like cutting the tail or ears of a dog just to make a humans life more pleasant whilst the animal itself is mutilated. I would never declaw my cats since I know the proper way of looking after them so I have no excuse (or desire). However, ignorance is no excuse either! People should know how to look after an animal before even getting it so they KNOW what to expect and the consequences to some of their actions as owners. One of my two cats is an outdoor cat. She needs her claws to climb trees, over fences and defend herself if another animal or human tries to harm her whilst outside. To take that away from her would leave her to many dangerous in this world and as her owner, I'd rather she was safe and able to fight back/escape if needed. Simple.

Don't let her outside? Don't be so cruel! If an animal wants to be outside then you should let it. It's like keeping a horse inside a stable rather than letting it feel some sort of freedom. Just no. My cat has done nothing wrong for that sort of punishment. And even if she had plenty of room to play, as children, did we not get bored of being in the house all the time? Yes? Point proven.

As for indoor cats, that's even worse. You'd have all the time in the world to trim their claws without even having to go out and look for them.

Gold warehouse
July 27th, 2011, 08:18 PM
@ Sydian: if you've ever got a cat that's aggressive to kids I think you need to send it to a new home. xD

No I would never declaw a cat. It's not natural and almost unheard of in this country. I think I remember reading somewhere that I'd have a hard time finding a vet that's willing to do so anyway. I wouldn't get an aggressive cat to begin with, and I don't love furniture so much that I'm going to declaw my cat. My cats go outside a lot and they definitely need their claws. They do scratch on the chairs, but every chair in this house is old and broken anyway lmao.

Oryx
July 27th, 2011, 08:19 PM
I can't stand declawing. Of course all the point above, plus the matter of no matter how hard you try to have indoor cats, cats can get out. My cat is 12 and has gotten out a few times. When I was younger we had many, many more cats and of those a few did get out as well. We always caught them, but if they had been caught by another cat first with no claws to defend themselves with...we saw how that worked out when we brought our cat into the home of a declawed cat and his cattery stud instincts kicked in, causing him to attack the other cat. The other cat had literally no means of defense, it was terrible.

Taking care of a cat's nails isn't that big a deal. If you can't do that, then take it to a groomer. It's not like a dogs nails where they generally wear down because they're always out and tapping on the ground; if you don't take care of a cat's nails, the nails will curl around and grow into their pawpad. Declawing is an excuse for lazy owners who don't want to bother taking care of their cats, so they cause the cat unnecessary pain and possible complications in the future to ease their own laziness. If you can't afford a groomer and can't figure out how to trim a cat's claws, then you don't deserve a cat.

Sydian
July 27th, 2011, 08:41 PM
Don't let her outside? Don't be so cruel! If an animal wants to be outside then you should let it. It's like keeping a horse inside a stable rather than letting it feel some sort of freedom. Just no. My cat has done nothing wrong for that sort of punishment. And even if she had plenty of room to play, as children, did we not get bored of being in the house all the time? Yes? Point proven.

I don't want it running away like every other outdoor cat I've had. I'm fine with the cat coming outside with me if I'm watching it. But I'm not letting my cat go out unattended, by any means. It's like a kid. Just don't want it getting into things it doesn't need to get into. I've taken my cat outside with me on the back deck for a nice cuddle. So I'm not being cruel and keeping him inside forever.

@ Sydian: if you've ever got a cat that's aggressive to kids I think you need to send it to a new home. xD

lmao, I don't even have kids, so that's not a problem for me.

Just wanna point out again, I did say it's my last resort, not that'd I'd really want to. There are SO many other options out there that declawing wouldn't even have to be a thought. It's literally last on the list. Chillax.

Gymnotide
July 27th, 2011, 08:47 PM
I'm all-in on declawing cats. My friend has three cats in his old apartment and whenever I used to go over there, they would all mountain on top of me and their claws would always dig into my skin / clothes and stuff. It wasn't too big of a deal for me, but it would save them the trouble of getting stuck in cloth-based surfaces as well. And, er, it doesn't hurt if you don't hit the nerve.

Oh, I thought you meant clipping the claws.
Then, the opposite side. XD

donavannj
July 27th, 2011, 08:59 PM
One reason cat owners may opt to de-claw their cats is due to the extensive furniture damage they do when marking their territory, since they have scent glands in their front paws, if my memory serves me, and they paw at things with their claws extended like they're stretching out, and anything taller than the cat, especially if it's soft, will be pawed at by a cat to mark it as its territory, and de-clawing a cat is simply a lot cheaper than having to repair furniture. Also, if you have multiple cats, they may fight constantly, which does a fair bit of damage to the cats themselves if they do it while you're away at work or school.

The cats I've grown up with, though de-clawed, are quite resourceful and effective at killing rodents and such, though they were purely indoor cats for the first 7 years of their lives due to not being very adventurous cats and being terrified of the outdoors for reasons I honestly do not remember (the de-clawing came after they had become afraid of the outdoors), well before we ever got a dog, until we forced them out because they were in a turf war involving urine.

And there may be the possibility that some landlords require your cats to be de-clawed in order to have a pet in their building, and many landlords aren't very forgiving about damage to the apartment at all, even small scratches on the walls.

I see de-clawing as far more humane than leaving the cat in a shelter to be put down because potential owners were rejected on the basis that they were going to declaw the cat as soon as they got it.

Oryx
July 27th, 2011, 09:03 PM
I don't want it running away like every other outdoor cat I've had. I'm fine with the cat coming outside with me if I'm watching it. But I'm not letting my cat go out unattended, by any means. It's like a kid. Just don't want it getting into things it doesn't need to get into. I've taken my cat outside with me on the back deck for a nice cuddle. So I'm not being cruel and keeping him inside forever.

Just to back up your point, the average life span for outdoor cats is 1-5 years, while the lifespan for indoor cats is 12-20 years (source (http://www.catcaresociety.org/inorout.html)). It's safer for the cat to keep them indoors, while they may "naturally" be outdoor animals, they are also naturally not fed by humans and naturally not vaccinated, naturally left to die if they get sick and can no longer hunt. All of my cats have been indoor cats, because I care enough to want them to live a long, happy life instead of a 5 year long life "naturally". :x

Mr. X
July 27th, 2011, 09:43 PM
I've never had issues with my cat running away from home. He stays outdoors during the night with a couple of dropoff's and spends the majority of the day indoors.

Livewire
July 27th, 2011, 10:12 PM
I have no problem with it. We had my cat declawed, because he was A, mischievous and liked to scratch stuff, and B, they're really freakin sharp, seeing as I still have a 4 inch scar on my chest, from a decade ago, from where he jumped off me once. XD

-ty-
July 27th, 2011, 10:20 PM
One reason cat owners may opt to de-claw their cats is due to the extensive furniture damage they do when marking their territory, since they have scent glands in their front paws, if my memory serves me, and they paw at things with their claws extended like they're stretching out, and anything taller than the cat, especially if it's soft, will be pawed at by a cat to mark it as its territory, and de-clawing a cat is simply a lot cheaper than having to repair furniture. Also, if you have multiple cats, they may fight constantly, which does a fair bit of damage to the cats themselves if they do it while you're away at work or school.

The cats I've grown up with, though de-clawed, are quite resourceful and effective at killing rodents and such, though they were purely indoor cats for the first 7 years of their lives due to not being very adventurous cats and being terrified of the outdoors for reasons I honestly do not remember (the de-clawing came after they had become afraid of the outdoors), well before we ever got a dog, until we forced them out because they were in a turf war involving urine.

And there may be the possibility that some landlords require your cats to be de-clawed in order to have a pet in their building, and many landlords aren't very forgiving about damage to the apartment at all, even small scratches on the walls.

I see de-clawing as far more humane than leaving the cat in a shelter to be put down because potential owners were rejected on the basis that they were going to declaw the cat as soon as they got it.

I understand the landlord predicament, but I have cats and I have had to pass-up nice apartments, but it is my responsibility as a cat owner.

Here is some info from a veterinarian,
"It is serious surgery. Your cat's claw is not a toenail. It is actually closely adhered to the bone. So closely adhered that to remove the claw, the last bone of your the cat's claw has to be removed. Declawing is actually an amputation of the last joint of your cat's "toes"."

Essentially, it's like amputating a humans fingers to the knuckles! It may be convenient for the owners, but it is disfigurement for the cats. Unfortunately, those that do de-claw their cats, do not understand how important the claw is to the cat's infrastructure.

Livewire
July 27th, 2011, 10:35 PM
I understand the landlord predicament, but I have cats and I have had to pass-up nice apartments, but it is my responsibility as a cat owner.

Here is some info from a veterinarian,
"It is serious surgery. Your cat's claw is not a toenail. It is actually closely adhered to the bone. So closely adhered that to remove the claw, the last bone of your the cat's claw has to be removed. Declawing is actually an amputation of the last joint of your cat's "toes"."

Essentially, it's like amputating a humans fingers to the knuckles! It may be convenient for the owners, but it is disfigurement for the cats. Unfortunately, those that do de-claw their cats, do not understand how important the claw is to the cat's infrastructure.

That may be so, but remember we're talking about domesticated cats. It's not like they're hunting for food, which is what claws tend to get used for.

-ty-
July 27th, 2011, 11:12 PM
That may be so, but remember we're talking about domesticated cats. It's not like they're hunting for food, which is what claws tend to get used for.

http://www.declawing.com/images/Claw-sur-dia-color.gif

Here's a picture everyone. It just seems wrong to alter an animal's anatomy for convenience; Oh but even worse is when breeders chop off boxer's, and other breeds, tails purely for aesthetic appeal.

Here are some countries whom outlawed declawing cats:

England
Scotland
Wales
Italy
France
Germany
Bosnia
Austria
Switzerland
Norway
Sweden
Netherlands
Northern Ireland
Ireland
Denmark
Finland
Slovenia
Portugal
Belgium
Brazil
Australia
New Zealand
Yugoslavia
Malta
Israel

"General anesthesia is used for this surgery, which always has a certain degree of risk of disability or death associated with it. Because declawing provides no medical benefits to cats, even slight risk can be considered unacceptable. In addition, the recovery from declawing can be painful and lengthy and may involve postoperative complications such as infections, hemorrhage, and nail regrowth. The latter may subject the cat to additional surgery." The Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights (AVAR)

PkMnTrainer Yellow
July 28th, 2011, 12:36 AM
[FONT="Verdana"]If they are justifying removing their claws because of damage they do to humans, or other animals or whatever, it is a ridiculously flimsy reason... Animals are great at adapting, and if you take away one method of defence, they will simply use their others. Cats have sharp teeth and teeth are going to do more damage than claws in most cases.

On the contrary, my cat shows far more restraint with her teeth. Cats tend to learn that biting hurts real bad as kittens from their kittenmates. With claws, the lesson seems to fly over their head.

Soari
July 28th, 2011, 12:56 AM
I don’t support declawing at all. It would be like having someone physically cut off the first joint in your finger which is awful. DD: I don’t think it is fair to do such thing to an animal. Cats are born with claws for a reason. They use them to defend themselves. It helps them to maintain their balance, and to stretch and exercise. Declawing would do more damage than good especially for the older cats that might end up being traumatized and they might suffer behavioral changes. If you can’t handle a risk or getting scratched or having your furniture being ruined then don’t buy it, simple as that. Besides, there are other alternatives to declawing like you can provide him a scratching post, trim your cat’s nails on a daily basis or you can train them right from the beginning so yeah, I don’t really see any good reason to put your cat through this procedure.

Oryx
July 28th, 2011, 01:10 AM
Just pointing it out, if the owner really has a problem with scratching to the point that they feel it's necessary to declaw, they obviously must not know about the rubber claw tips. http://furlongspetsupply.com/soft_claws_for_cats.aspx That's 20 dollars about for 40 caps, that will last for 8 months at the least.

If an owner knows about the tips and doesn't want the hassle of replacing them, then they honestly shouldn't own a pet and obviously just care about their own convenience. And the price is imo the same thing; my family is very poor and owns a cat, if we had problems with him scratching, we would have made the sacrifice of 20 bucks every 8 months to keep from disfiguring your cat for your own convenience. If you can't afford the costs of owning a cat, don't own a cat. Don't use the fact that the cat can't express its choice in the matter and can't escape or do anything about the pain other than bear it let you think that it's alright to do it to them.

FreakyLocz14
July 28th, 2011, 02:12 AM
I have no problem with it. We had my cat declawed, because he was A, mischievous and liked to scratch stuff, and B, they're really freakin sharp, seeing as I still have a 4 inch scar on my chest, from a decade ago, from where he jumped off me once. XD

You and I agree on something? This must be a sign of the apocalypse.

I think that what we do with our pets is nobody else's business.

Blue Nocturne
July 28th, 2011, 02:32 AM
I don't have much against declawing cats, but I just keep Swift's claws trimmed and filed, seeing as completely declawing a cat isn't legal here in the UK. While it can be a little laborious to trim her claws every month or so, I'd rather do that than declaw her, from what I've read it's a pretty painful (and potentially dangerous) process. But if you want to declaw your cat, I don't have much of a problem with it, your business is your business.

Oryx
July 28th, 2011, 02:37 AM
You and I agree on something? This must be a sign of the apocalypse.

I think that what we do with our pets is nobody else's business.

That doesn't extend to animal cruelty. And before you claim that it's not cruelty because it's not cruelty under the law, what people who advocate banning are saying is that it should be considered cruel and inhumane. It's understandable if a pet owner can't always control their cats' scratching - not every cat is perfect, but of course we love them even if they destroy our furniture and claw into our shoulders so we don't want to just get rid of them. But there are alternatives that do not require you to put a cat through that kind of pain, fear, and risk. Saying "we should be able to do it anyway because we own them" is like saying beating a cat severely is something we should be allowed to do if they don't listen, when there are plenty of humane alternatives to teach a cat how to act.

Did you know that cats walk on their toes? The same toes you're advocating the free amputation of? Imagine having part of your toes amputated, and then being forced to walk on your toes instead of your whole foot. That's what it's like for cats. Many studies (unfortunately I'm having trouble finding more recent studies, but the process hasn't really changed) put the risk of complications as high as 50%. Imagine you have 2 cats, declaw them both. You have a very, very good chance that at least one of them will experience post-op complications: these range from lameness to hemorraging to necrosis to abscesses to bones shattering to the claws painfully growing back to nerves growing abnormally, causing lifelong pain for the cat. Some of those will require extra painful surgeries to fix.

There are no benefits to the cat that declawing gives them, that vinyl nail caps do not. The only difference is how much the person cares about their cat over their own convenience, since declawing is a one-time thing and nail caps have to be reapplied. But heaven forbid they actually put forth effort for the cat over allowing it to undergo a risky, painful surgery!

This may be tl;dr, but declawing literally disgusts me. My family has owned dozens of cats (over 20 at one time, for years), and not a single one has been declawed. There are alternatives, and if you care enough about your cat then you will look for them.

Hoenn
July 28th, 2011, 03:17 AM
I think it's kinda crewl, I have cats and I never plan on doing this to them..

インフェルノの津波
July 28th, 2011, 03:18 AM
I would never do something like that to my cats. I'd rather buy a scratching post.

Deerling
July 28th, 2011, 07:12 AM
I don't want it running away like every other outdoor cat I've had. I'm fine with the cat coming outside with me if I'm watching it. But I'm not letting my cat go out unattended, by any means. It's like a kid. Just don't want it getting into things it doesn't need to get into. I've taken my cat outside with me on the back deck for a nice cuddle. So I'm not being cruel and keeping him inside forever.

All of my cats have been indoor cats, because I care enough to want them to live a long, happy life instead of a 5 year long life "naturally". :x

Actually, I care very much for both my cats. I've had Raven since I was 8. I'll be 21 in April. So I've had my outdoor cat for a good number of years now. I'm not saying keeping your cats indoors is evil or cruel indefinitely. Just purely my opinion. Your pet is your business as is mine and what I meant was relating to the case of declawing them is that they still need their claws to catch themselves if they fall or do actually escape. Some people think keeping them in the house and then declawing them is a good option which is what I was opposing against (I've seen these sort of opinions in this exact topic on a Final Fantasy forum). It doesn't solve the problem in my eyes. Again, declawing is up to the owners. In Britain it isn't allowed here, so hence why I'm so strongly against it. I'm sorry if it seemed like I was targetting people who do infact think it is better to keep their cats indoors because I do see your reasoning. I just prefer letting mine outside because I feel she is happier that way.

We used to keep her indoors as a kitten because we had moved and she might have gotten lost. However, it only caused problems for when she did get out. Jumping out of windows or running past our legs when opening the door to a visitor. When we called her back, she never came. It wasn't until we did start letting her out, she would voluntarily run over to us or even straight back inside of the house when given a chance. So my opinion is soley based on my own experiance as a cat owner. As your opinions seemingly are too. In short, we all love cats amd want what is best for them. I think it's wonderful to see.

groteske
July 28th, 2011, 07:48 AM
I've spoken to vets and technicians who have described cats literally screaming in their cages after they wake from the surgery.

Declawing is a poor substitute for ignorant and/or inconsistent training. If you let a cat get away with something as a kitten, probably because it's "cute," guess what it's going to do as an adult, genius?

-ty-
July 28th, 2011, 09:08 AM
You and I agree on something? This must be a sign of the apocalypse.

I think that what we do with our pets is nobody else's business.

My cat bites too much; Should I have the right to remove its incisors?

Laws need to be instated to protect animals from cruelty; it is not an apocalypse!

Aorio
July 28th, 2011, 10:46 AM
You and I agree on something? This must be a sign of the apocalypse.

I think that what we do with our pets is nobody else's business.
That's like saying what you do with your children is nobody else's business. Cats can feel pain just like humans can. Declawing is cruel. It IS other people's business at that point.

Mr Cat Dog
July 28th, 2011, 10:56 AM
I've never even heard of the practice (considering it only seems to take place in North America and Asia), and from reading the Wikipedia page on it, it doesn't sound great for the cats. I couldn't see myself doing this even if I lived somewhere that did allow it. It just seems barbaric.

Ultraviolence
July 28th, 2011, 10:58 AM
Declawing cats is awful. There is no reason to put them through alot of pain!
If people are so worried that their cat would attack them; don't annoy it.

FreakyLocz14
July 28th, 2011, 12:36 PM
That doesn't extend to animal cruelty. And before you claim that it's not cruelty because it's not cruelty under the law, what people who advocate banning are saying is that it should be considered cruel and inhumane. It's understandable if a pet owner can't always control their cats' scratching - not every cat is perfect, but of course we love them even if they destroy our furniture and claw into our shoulders so we don't want to just get rid of them. But there are alternatives that do not require you to put a cat through that kind of pain, fear, and risk. Saying "we should be able to do it anyway because we own them" is like saying beating a cat severely is something we should be allowed to do if they don't listen, when there are plenty of humane alternatives to teach a cat how to act.

Did you know that cats walk on their toes? The same toes you're advocating the free amputation of? Imagine having part of your toes amputated, and then being forced to walk on your toes instead of your whole foot. That's what it's like for cats. Many studies (unfortunately I'm having trouble finding more recent studies, but the process hasn't really changed) put the risk of complications as high as 50%. Imagine you have 2 cats, declaw them both. You have a very, very good chance that at least one of them will experience post-op complications: these range from lameness to hemorraging to necrosis to abscesses to bones shattering to the claws painfully growing back to nerves growing abnormally, causing lifelong pain for the cat. Some of those will require extra painful surgeries to fix.

There are no benefits to the cat that declawing gives them, that vinyl nail caps do not. The only difference is how much the person cares about their cat over their own convenience, since declawing is a one-time thing and nail caps have to be reapplied. But heaven forbid they actually put forth effort for the cat over allowing it to undergo a risky, painful surgery!

This may be tl;dr, but declawing literally disgusts me. My family has owned dozens of cats (over 20 at one time, for years), and not a single one has been declawed. There are alternatives, and if you care enough about your cat then you will look for them.

Pets are not human beings, so we need to stop trying to treat them as such legally. They're property.

Sydian
July 28th, 2011, 12:41 PM
Pets are not human beings, so we need to stop trying to treat them as such legally. They're property.

It may not be a human being, but a cat is a living creature. It has a life, and I'm pretty sure the cat wants to live a comfortable life. Saying that it's just "property" kinda shows you shouldn't even have a cat or any pet. Pets are a part of the family and should be treated as such. Let's just all go beat up our cats, mkay? They're property so it doesn't matter! No.

Oryx
July 28th, 2011, 12:50 PM
Pets are not human beings, so we need to stop trying to treat them as such legally. They're property.

They're a living creature that feels pain and love and fear. A pet that has been with you for a long time isn't a pet, it's a part of the family that you cherish and care about. They're not plants. I hope you never own a pet if that's how you feel about them; no pet deserves that lack of love.

Aorio
July 28th, 2011, 01:48 PM
Pets are not human beings, so we need to stop trying to treat them as such legally. They're property.
That's ridiculous. Just because they can't speak and write like human beings can doesn't mean they can't FEEL PAIN and it doesn't mean they aren't emotional beings. Animals are NOT property, they deserve rights just as we do.

deoxys121
July 28th, 2011, 01:54 PM
Pets are not human beings, so we need to stop trying to treat them as such legally. They're property.

Really? Really?! In every household I've lived in, the pets are members of the family and we treat them as we would treat a human. Whenever considering whether or not to do something with them, we just say "How would we feel in their situation?" On the subject of declawing, the equivalent on a human would be to amputate your fingertips at the first knuckle. That's why I won't do it.

FreakyLocz14
July 29th, 2011, 03:37 PM
We can choose to treat our pets as members of the family. Some people don't choose that. People buy pets as guards (guard dogs), for agriculture (sheep dogs), for assistance (seeing-eye pets), and sports (dog fighting, **** fighting, etc.).

Our pets are our property. What someone does with their property is only their business.

Oryx
July 29th, 2011, 03:42 PM
We can choose to treat our pets as members of the family. Some people don't choose that. People buy pets as guards (guard dogs), for agriculture (sheep dogs), for assistance (seeing-eye pets), and sports (dog fighting, **** fighting, etc.).

Our pets are our property. What someone does with their property is only their business.

I hope you never own a pet.

FreakyLocz14
July 29th, 2011, 03:44 PM
I hope you never own a pet.

We have 3 cats, 2 dogs, and 1 deceased dog. We also had several llamas, and breifly had some sheep.

Nice personal attack, though.

Safir-Hime
July 29th, 2011, 03:55 PM
I personally find no reason in declawing cats. I thought about it with my cat because he destroys so many things with his claws. But then I discovered these cat claw covers that glue on. They work great, the cat still gets to enjoy his claws and he can't tear anything up. The only thing with those is keeping up on trimming them because they don't shed off like normal claws, so its easy for the claw to grow and curl underneath their paw. My cat has had them off for a few months now and I can tell he doesn't like his sharp claws anymore, he gets attached to everything when he tries to walk. DX

I suppose I consider animals property as well, they don't necessarily get the choice to live with us or not. We purchase them, feed them, and raise them. However just because they're property doesn't give someone the right to hurt them. De-clawing an older cat is indeed a torturous thing, just like renaming an animal. Its confusing, it hurts them, they can't walk right.
De clawing an indoor only kitten, while its still not very good, is much better because they grow up without them, so they adapt easier.

Livewire
July 29th, 2011, 03:58 PM
and sports (dog fighting, **** fighting, etc.).

Tell that to Michael Vick and that nice felony dog fighting charge.

Oryx
July 29th, 2011, 04:02 PM
We have 3 cats, 2 dogs, and 1 deceased dog. We also had several llamas, and breifly had some sheep.

Nice personal attack, though.

I've given all my points, given reasonable alternatives, given statistics that show how dangerous it is for cats, given logical reasons why no one should declaw. The only reason you can possibly still think it shouldn't be banned is a personal lack of empathy for other living animals, which may sound like a personal attack to you but that's honestly the only reason you would be willing to allow animals to go through that much pain. I feel sorry for those animals, if you really think of them as "property" and think that hurting them intentionally and scarring them long-term is an appropriate way to treat them.

By the way, dogfighting is illegal. So is "maliciously wounding" an animal. Just because you have legal ownership over an animal and they can't always fight back does not make them less able to feel pain. The government agrees with that, as far as I know there's no dispute that animal cruelty laws should be removed because "they're property and therefore they don't matter".

Do you have any reason other than the reason that has been already destroyed (they're property so it doesn't matter what pain they feel)? Because if you don't, then this conversation is pretty much over.

deoxys121
July 29th, 2011, 04:02 PM
Tell that to Michael Vick and that nice felony dog fighting charge.

Exactly. Dog fighting and **** fighting are just wrong. Making animals kill each other for human entertainment? That's just sickening.

Sydian
July 29th, 2011, 04:50 PM
We have 3 cats, 2 dogs, and 1 deceased dog. We also had several llamas, and breifly had some sheep.

Nice personal attack, though.

So you...kept the deceased dog? Am I the only one finding that strange? Anyway, dog fighting and **** fighting are illegal, so yeah, that is someone's business. Saying "you can do whatever you want with your property" is kinda like telling me my car is my property, so I can go run people over with it because it's mine. It IS my property, after all! Property or not, there are limits to what you can do with it, like guns, knives, cars, etc. You can't just do whatever you want with your property. There are laws to abide by, which I figured you of all people would know. So even if you do consider a pet property, there are laws protecting them against abuse and the likes.

Kirozane
July 29th, 2011, 04:53 PM
I honestly do not find de-clawing cats very humane... Since it is removing the last bone in the toe, it would be like someone coming in and cutting off our fingertips for safety reasons. I understand why some people do it. They don't want their cats hurting them or their loved ones, tearing up their furniture, etc. I understand the reasoning, and the procedure as a whole, but that doesn't make me support it. It can more than cripple the cat, what with infection and paralysis. Plus, when they do play, they lose the traction and thus extra support the claws give,so they can get hurt if they can't stop themselves.

Okay wow that was a terrible post... I had an opinion but didn't word it well. >.>

Smallbirdie
July 29th, 2011, 05:36 PM
Nobody has mention declawed cats and litter boxes, so I'd like to add my 2 cents. I use to volunteer at a no-kill cat shelter, and there was a room for cats that can't (or won't) use a litter box. There were many reasons why the cats might be there, some had bladder problems, one was paralyzed, some were sick and there temporarily... but the biggest single reason for a cat to end up in that room was because it was an indoor cat declawed by its owner.

People would get their cats declawed and bring them home. The cat would go to use the litter box and the grains of litter as well as the digging movements would cause them extreme pain that they began to associate with the litter box. And then they'd stop using it. And because the owners don't want a cat that won't use a litter box, they end up at the shelter. Even after their paws have healed most of them still won't ever use the litter box. They will more than likely spend the rest of their lives in that room because who would want to adopt them? Especially when there are perfectly healthy, litter-box-using cats in the next room over. The shelter tries to give them a good life, but it'll never be as good as with a loving family. In addition no one other than the regular staff hardly ever even visits that room because the smell is so bad.

They are sweet, loving cats that didn't deserve to have that happen to them. Declawing is a terrible, terrible thing.

Livewire
July 29th, 2011, 05:47 PM
Nobody has mention declawed cats and litter boxes, so I'd like to add my 2 cents. I use to volunteer at a no-kill cat shelter, and there was a room for cats that can't (or won't) use a litter box. There were many reasons why the cats might be there, some had bladder problems, one was paralyzed, some were sick and there temporarily... but the biggest single reason for a cat to end up in that room was because it was and indoor cat declawed by its owner.
People would get their cats declawed and bring them home. The cat would go to use the litter box and the grains of litter and the digging movements would cause them extreme pain that they began to associate with the litter box. And then they'd stop using it. And because the owners don't want a cat that won't use a litter box, they end up at the shelter. Even after their paws have healed most of them still won't ever use the litter box. They will more than likely spend the rest of their lives in that room because who would want to adopt them? The shelter tries to give them a good live, but no one hardly ever even visits that room because the smell is so bad.
They are sweet, loving cats that didn't deserve to have that happen to them. Declawing is a terrible, terrible thing.

We had my cat declawed when he was very young, after we got him from the pound. He lived a long, happy and fulfilled life some 13 years afterwards. So, yeah. Now obviously, there are risks and concerns with declawing a cat, and rightfully so. It should only be done if there is no alternative. It's not a decision that one should halfass. But an overall ban is ridiculous and unnecessary.

Safir-Hime
July 29th, 2011, 05:50 PM
Wow SmallBirdie, that brought tears to my eyes....that's really sad DX
I had no idea cats would do that, but it makes sense....that's just so horrible.

-ty-
July 29th, 2011, 06:01 PM
We can choose to treat our pets as members of the family. Some people don't choose that. People buy pets as guards (guard dogs), for agriculture (sheep dogs), for assistance (seeing-eye pets), and sports (dog fighting, **** fighting, etc.).

Our pets are our property. What someone does with their property is only their business.

Really? Dog fighting? People should be able to do whatever they want to with their animals b/c they are property?

I know people who had dogs that they barely fed and left them outside all winter, so I asked them to take care of their animal, because with ownership of dogs, cats, and other animals comes responsibility for the animal's well-being. They decided not to. So, I called animal control and the ass that was negligent of his animals had to spend 90 days in jail. You cannot treat them equivalent to an ordinary piece of property; Yes, animals are considered "chattel", but with having chattel you are responsible for its health.

Oryx
July 29th, 2011, 06:05 PM
We had my cat declawed when he was very young, after we got him from the pound. He lived a long, happy and fulfilled life some 13 years afterwards. So, yeah. Now obviously, there are risks and concerns with declawing a cat, and rightfully so. It should only be done if there is no alternative. It's not a decision that one should halfass. But an overall ban is ridiculous and unnecessary.

The point I'm trying to make is that there is always an alternative, there are many alternatives and the amount of alternatives will only grow in the future. There are spray bottles to keep them from scratching, there is nail trimming/grinding, there are scratching posts, and if the problem is ongoing and none of these work, there are Soft Paws (vinyl nail tips). There are only 2 differences between resorting to Soft Paws and declawing: 1. Tthe cat will suffer a few days of discomfort (imagine wearing fake nails kind of discomfort) with no pain with Soft Paws, while declawing will cause possible weeks of pain (depending on how you declaw them), a high chance of complications, all the things I already mentioned in previous posts. Soft Paws have none of those downsides. 2. The declawing is a one-time-only thing, where Soft Paws are every 4-6 weeks and requires the owner to be able to trim claws. However, in my experience with cats, trimming claws is not the most terrible thing to happen to a cat owner, especially if you have another person to help you. If it's that big a problem, I'm sure a vet would have no problem trimming the cat's claws and applying the Soft Paws.

I cannot think of a time when Soft Paws is not a viable alternative, even financially. If you're so hard up for money that you can't afford 20 bucks every 8 months, then chances are you will never be able to afford declawing in the first place, as well as food and such for your pet.

Mr. X
July 29th, 2011, 08:51 PM
For those saying you can do whatever you wish (including risk/cause the death of) a animal just because you own it I have a few words for you.

Get some damn morals or go remove yourselves from the genepool.

That is all.

~*!*~Tatsujin Gosuto~*!*~
July 30th, 2011, 09:21 AM
Being a cat owner I wanted to declaw them but I've heard that after a certain age they can not be declawed (since my oldest cat will be 5 in September) but after reading the complications, I wouldn't want my cats to go through this.


:t354:TG