Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Giggity, you are kidding me right? Come on!!! Declawing is strictly to protect furniture and really no other reason. Spaying/neutering is to stop the overpopulation of animals so that hundreds of thousands of them do not have to be killed every year for no reason.
Not to get off subject but certain women/men should be spayed/neutered as well!
So where exactly are you making a valid point that contradicts my view?
Spaying and neutering is purely to stop the overpopulation based on whose view? I don't think the animals see it as overpopulation.
They don't HAVE to be killed, we choose to kill them.
People see it as overpopulation and an inconvenience to deal with, just like damaged furniture.
Not all people declaw cats just to protect furniture.
I rescued an older cat who was already front declawed. A few months later, I adopted a little kitten (from uncertain death, actually). Once he was healthy (he was 4 months old by now), I introduced both cats and everything was absolutely great.
That was until they were playing and she hit him hard... and he hit back just as hard - except he had claws. After surgery, stitches and a nice large medical bill, we made the decision to have our little kitten front declawed at his 6mos neutering visit. We even paid extra for the stronger pain medication (just in case).
A year and a half later, he doesn't realize his front claws are gone. He's learned to climb without the front claws.
And yes, while some may find it to be absolutely atrocious to alter an animal for any reason, I would tell anyone to do what they feel is right. All I would throw in is to only do front de-clawing.
And for those who are all in arms about declawing, which would you rather have:
A) More cats in shelters for destroying furniture
B) More cats that are declawed, but have homes
Spaying and neutering is purely to stop the overpopulation based on whose view? I don't think the animals see it as overpopulation. They don't HAVE to be killed, we choose to kill them.
People see it as overpopulation and an inconvenience to deal with, just like damaged furniture.
Take a trip through a kill shelter, or a puppy mill. Or volunteer at a shelter, when they are literally dragging dogs or cats to a decompression chamber. In our county, the animals are given an anti=anxiety drug, and then an injection. They are still shaking and scared, and dragged into the room.
What are the county shelters supposed to do with over 3,000 animals they receive every year, and people on choose to adopt about 600.
Who could pay for their food, housing, their veterinary bills, their socialization? I doubt you would, or could.
Those stats are from the county I live in; count much more if you live in Detroit, NYC, LA, etc.
Overpopulation is much more than an inconvenience to humans. It's quite silly to say that animals don't see "it" as overpopulation. I'm sure the animals feel the tension when they're about to die, and fight not to go into a decompression chamber.
The real inconvenience is for people to think about what happens to the unwanted animals. A surgery that prohibits such gross overpopulation is a positive and necessary thing in my view.
Some three to four millions pet animals are euthanized every year (HSUS). Where would those creatures find homes? I'd call that an epidemic, not a mere inconvenience.
Please let me know what exactly you think should be done with those nearly 4 millions cats and dogs who will be euthanized in 2008? What are your suggestions?
Do you run a puppy mill, or breed dogs/cats to sell for money? I can see no other reason why you would pose such ludicrous statements. Now, that means I find your statement ludicrous, not you. Please be able to differentiate between the two.
Or, we could always send the cats (especially valued in China) oversees to make pillows, scarves, dolls, toys, gloves out of their fur. Might that be a viable solution to pet overpopulation?
There seems to be defensiveness and sarcasm in your responses, since the first thing you can come up with is insulting a poster who disagrees with you.
Be kind, and let the rest of the world know how you would "fix" the problem of pet overpopulation.
I believe declawing a cat is a vile thing to do. but if this is the LAST option left, I'd rather see a cat declawed then one being surrendered to a shelter. to the OP, make sure you've explored all the options out there before taking this drastic step.
if you decide to go through w/ the procedure, you better make DAMN sure you're willing to care for these cats FOREVER! don't mutilate your cats then dump them at the shelter further down the road. it's amazing and depressing how many declawed cats ended up in shelters and PTS (I've heard from some that adopting out declawed cats is harder than clawed cats) I have nothing but disgust for people who mutilate their cats in this way then surrender them in a year or so because someone has allergies, or because they moved, or because the operation caused problems w/ the cat and the owners don't want to deal with them. be prepared for care for them, through sickness and health, to the very end. be prepared for any physical and emotional issues that may pop up post-op; some cats that used their claws in play/defense will start using their teeth instead and begin biting; some cats have issues using the litterbox due to irritation.
personally, I don't believe any piece of furniture is more important than a cat's well-being. I'd rather see a car rehomed through relatives/friends then declawed. but I'd also rather see this operation done properly if it means the cat will have a secured home forever. no matter how bad I think declawing is, it's still better than euthanization
Watts76 before you start crying that people are being judgmental of you, think about why you posted and then think about where you posted it.
People get really mellow dramatic about the whole thing. The comparison to the toddler whose first digits are removed is one that is trotted out every time the subject come up. The bottom line though, is that they are right, it is a form of mutilation and just because it has "always been" does not mean that it should continue to be. This is just fact, not opinion or emotion. When you lop off a healthy part of a living creature's body it is mutilation.
And it will be harder for your adult cats to recover both physically and mentally. That's not to say they won't indeed recover - heck animals deal with amputations of whole limbs with relative ease (compared to people - we're a whiny lot) - but don't kid yourself into thinking it will be like declawing a kitten. The weight of an adult cat puts stress on the incisions and there is often quite a bit of bleeding before things heal up completely.
Bottom line, however, I would rather see a live declawed cat instead of a dead cat with all of it's digits. While I would never declaw, I know of plenty of cats in wonderful homes who are declawed.
Which by the way brings up the argument that declawed cats are harder to adopt out... Where the heck to you live, Eevee? Around here the rescues make people sign contracts agreeing not to declaw cats that have their claws and, while many people blow that off, many more people look closely at the cats that are already declawed because of this. Plus there's the el cheapo factor, as in, "And you mean he's already declawed?! Great, one less expense..."
Which by the way brings up the argument that declawed cats are harder to adopt out... Where the heck to you live, Eevee? Around here the rescues make people sign contracts agreeing not to declaw cats that have their claws and, while many people blow that off, many more people look closely at the cats that are already declawed because of this. Plus there's the el cheapo factor, as in, "And you mean he's already declawed?! Great, one less expense..."
like i said, this is something I've heard from other shelter workers. it could be because declawed cats that have developed issues after the procedure may get dumped b/c of those issues and therefore harder to adopt. again, not sure if this is true or if there's any data to back this up (and in case this matters, I'm mostly dealt w/ shelters in Boston). in general adult cats are hard to adopt out, and maybe cats that appear "broken" or less "whole" have a strike against them. I'm sure some people actively seek out declawed cats at shelters, but I have no doubt many are being PTS regardless
also, another issue oft looked over when the topic of declawing comes up is that these cats can NEVER be let outside and lack their main natural defense/attack system. if a declawed cat ever got outside, it's screwed since it can't even climb trees to get away from attackers
A few years ago, I adopted an adult cat from a rescue group. They had not realized he was de-clawed on the front paws until I asked them to trim his nails before I took him home. Whatever he had, maybe rough edges or pads developing in an odd place, he ruined several prs of slacks by kneading my leg. OK by me, he was a wonderful cat.
The last foster mom had a dog door and he went out every day and had no injuries. The rescue group had to vaccinate him again, not sure why, since they found out he was outside on a regular basis. He died of congestive heart failure (I had a necropsy done) and the vet said he had gotten a virus years ago to have so much damage. I had him less than 2 yrs but I treasure every minute.
While I would never de-claw a cat, I understand why some choose to do so. Based on my cat, they seem to do fine, on average.
Take a trip through a kill shelter, or a puppy mill. Or volunteer at a shelter, when they are literally dragging dogs or cats to a decompression chamber. In our county, the animals are given an anti=anxiety drug, and then an injection. They are still shaking and scared, and dragged into the room.
What are the county shelters supposed to do with over 3,000 animals they receive every year, and people on choose to adopt about 600.
Who could pay for their food, housing, their veterinary bills, their socialization? I doubt you would, or could.
Those stats are from the county I live in; count much more if you live in Detroit, NYC, LA, etc.
Overpopulation is much more than an inconvenience to humans. It's quite silly to say that animals don't see "it" as overpopulation. I'm sure the animals feel the tension when they're about to die, and fight not to go into a decompression chamber.
The real inconvenience is for people to think about what happens to the unwanted animals. A surgery that prohibits such gross overpopulation is a positive and necessary thing in my view.
Some three to four millions pet animals are euthanized every year (HSUS). Where would those creatures find homes? I'd call that an epidemic, not a mere inconvenience.
Please let me know what exactly you think should be done with those nearly 4 millions cats and dogs who will be euthanized in 2008? What are your suggestions?
Do you run a puppy mill, or breed dogs/cats to sell for money? I can see no other reason why you would pose such ludicrous statements. Now, that means I find your statement ludicrous, not you. Please be able to differentiate between the two.
Or, we could always send the cats (especially valued in China) oversees to make pillows, scarves, dolls, toys, gloves out of their fur. Might that be a viable solution to pet overpopulation?
There seems to be defensiveness and sarcasm in your responses, since the first thing you can come up with is insulting a poster who disagrees with you.
Be kind, and let the rest of the world know how you would "fix" the problem of pet overpopulation.
The China idea doesn't sound all that bad. Better to get some use out of them than just destroy them and send them out as landfill.
If you can't see that taking away a pet's ability to breed is just as elective as declawing it, I can't explain it to you, you've got blinders on.
And I encourage go back and look at Fat Freddy'soriginal response to Watts76. If you can't see why I posted my response to him in the fashion I did then again - I can't explain it to you, you've got blinders on. His post was as ignorant, if not more ignorant than mine. Watts76 doesn't deserve to have a cat because she's considering declawing it? Please....
It doesn't hurt them; they don't care; they don't miss the claws.
Not true.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
