Feelings on Declawing

[JohnBrown1917]

There is a home for every cat in every shelter now? I don't think that's actually the case.

According to my google search

Approximately 7.6 million companion animals enter animal shelters nationwide every year. Of those, approximately 3.4 million are cats. Each year, approximately 2.7 million animals are euthanized (1.4 million cats). Approximately 2.7 million shelter animals are adopted each year (1.3 million cats)

Would you rather be the declawed cat or the euthanized one?

I'd go for neither.

[JohnBrown1917]

Sterilizing the pet isn't good for the pet, it's good for it's owner.

Like declawing?
You're only showing your own hypocrisy.

- - - Updated - - -

That's silly and you know it. Would you prefer 90%+ of cats end up euthanized instead of 75% of cats in shelters, as is currently in the US? That is the real alternative to telling people not to get cats if you can't handle their behavior--they'll take you up on your advice, and won't. .

I'd vote for neither, it should be illegal, end of discussion.

[Celista]

The reason my country has something outdoor cat problem is because piece of shit people don't neuter their animals :/ ... cats getting thrown out because of behavioral issues (that would be remedied with declawing) isn't really that big of an issue. Sure it might happen occasionally but it's basically just a drop in the ocean.

I do hate outdoor cats too, there is absolutely no reason to have outdoor cat (declawed or not) and I personally consider it a form of animal neglect.

There's a reason for animal behavior, always. Usually it's a very simple reason. Preventing the behavior that follows said reason does not resolve the problem. Declawing a cat will just "prevent" that behavior (poorly, might I add, since it can lead to further problems) and you did nothing to actually address the issue.

Yeah I agree, in most cases. The OP said at one point his family had 23 animals, not sure if at once but if so that could indicate destructive scratching due to stress. That's a lot of animals in the home, also indicates a potential hoarding situation.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd vote for neither, it should be illegal, end of discussion.

It's not an either/or question, if you tell people that they have to put up with bad behavior no matter what then less people will adopt. Or people will dump their animals in less humane ways (side of the road, etc).

[God Save The King]

If the choice is between declawing and sending them to a shelter to live their days in a caged cell until dying or being put down, never experiencing love again, I'd be okay with the declawing.

But please try to train or manage your cat, there are loads of alternatives. You can even get little plastic caps for your cat's claws that stop them from scratching things!

[JohnBrown1917]

It's not an either/or question, if you tell people that they have to put up with bad behavior no matter what then less people will adopt. Or people will dump their animals in less humane ways (side of the road, etc).

Put it in a shelter/no-kill shelter. Maybe somebody who can handle cats will take it.
You will never find me supporting animal cruelty, I have standards. Its not okay to just let everybody do it because some can't handle their cats. No matter what petty excuses you lot come up with.

[Themius]

Several other posters have listed reasons that weren't superficial. And "superficial" is a pretty subjective term anyway, please
don't pretend that your self-righteous definition is the absolute.



Here is an example of an immature, and easily triggered child. Incapable of disagreeing with someone and resorts
to flaming in order to form any sort of "argument." Hell, you couldn't even be passive aggressive like some others
were.

When you grow up, you can join in the conversation with the adults. We'll wait for you.



Yes, these things can certainly be a result from the surgery, I make no argument against those possibilities.

However, they are not a 100% given. My cat never displayed any form of arthritis or have trouble walking. In fact,
she could still run (and quite fast) afterward. So explain why this "given" wasn't present with my pet? Or in some
of the other posters' cats?

You can't doesn't have the same grip running first of all because without claws to actually grip they do not have the same running methods. Also the arthritis is caused in the foot and "displaying" versus "suffering with" and two entire different things.

[SirMeo]

So, the cat has to live inside, shelters are already over populated, I'm not going to own a cat that destroys my house, so either I can declaw it or euthanize it. That's all there is to it.

Declawing a cat did nothing to address the actual issue the cat had, though. You just prevented the outlet in a needlessly cruel fashion. Maybe your cat didn't get lasting problems from the declawing (good for the cat I guess) but it was still a choice you did at your convenience, and "I would've had to euthanize the cat instead" is just an excuse.

Animal behavior always as a reason. Preventing said behavior is not addressing the reason.

I mean maybe it worked out for your cat, somehow. But every shitty animal owner (not referring to you here, just shitty owners in general) thinks their animal is that exceptional case where declawing is the option, and even if there is one success story I can't and won't accept declawing as anything but needless animal cruelty.

Yeah I agree, in most cases. The OP said at one point his family had 23 animals, not sure if at once but if so that could indicate destructive scratching due to stress. That's a lot of animals in the home, also indicates a potential hoarding situation.

"In most cases"? In which cases animal behavior doesn't have a reason?

[Paperfox]

It isn't illegal where I live. I had one cat declawed, and based on what happened I would never declaw another cat. Her personality changed for the worse. She realized that she lost a primary means of defense and so hissed more - a lot more.

[NoRest4Wicked]

Yeah I agree, in most cases. The OP said at one point his family had 23 animals, not sure if at once but if so that could indicate destructive scratching due to stress. That's a lot of animals in the home, also indicates a potential hoarding situation.

We only have the one animal at the moment. The 23 animals was because my wife and her mother ran a pseudo rescue out of their house, taking in dogs that were hit by cars and left for dead and the such in to nurse them back to health until they could find proper owners.

[Tinykong]

Declawing a cat did nothing to address the actual issue the cat had, though. You just prevented the outlet in a needlessly cruel fashion. Maybe your cat didn't get lasting problems from the declawing (good for the cat I guess) but it was still a choice you did at your convenience, and "I would've had to euthanize the cat instead" is just an excuse.

This wasn't something that was done lightly. How long is someone supposed to put up with the behavior? What if they can't afford expensive animal behavioral therapy? What if that therapy doesn't work?

The only other solution if the other stuff doesn't work is to get rid of the cat. In most of America, that means the cat will be dead, because shelters are already over populated. My wife and I found a stray cat a few years ago, and tried to give it to our county animal shelter, and they straight up told us not to bring it there because it would be destroyed after 7 days. Luckily we found a neighbor to take it, but, the reality is that a lot of cats that go to shelters will just be gassed in a large box with dozens of other cats because shelters just aren't equipped to deal with them.

I mean maybe it worked out for your cat, somehow. But every shitty animal owner (not referring to you here, just shitty owners in general) thinks their animal is that exceptional case where declawing is the option, and even if there is one success story I can't and won't accept declawing as anything but needless animal cruelty.

It might be cruel, but, it isn't always needless. I completely agree that is is painful and cruel. But, if the alternative is a dead cat, I'm fine with it. You're free to disagree, but you won't change my mind.

[jackofwind]

Yeah it's completely unacceptable and only shithouse vets are actually willing to do it.

[ls-]

I'm strongly against it. Don't make a fucking invalid out of your poor pet.

If you can't handle it, try to find it a new home, bring it to animal shelter. If shelter employees can't find a new home for a cat it obv will be killed, but death in this case is a way better outcome than declawing because for many declawed cats being put out of their misery is the best thing that can happen to them, which is sad.

If you have thoughts about declawing your current/future cat, you should really reconsider being a pet owner.

[Celista]

"In most cases"? In which cases animal behavior doesn't have a reason?

To clarify, I think that animal behavior always has a reason, and in most cases is correctable through training/alternative measures. I don't think *all* behavior in *all* animals can be corrected through changes in the animal's environment/training. Genetics, trauma, neurocognitive disorders are just some reasons why environment may have a negligible impact on behavior.

It really irks me when people make oversimplistic statements about animal behavior, such as "all behavior is due to poor training". That's like saying you can train the autism or schizophrenia out of people, or train a lion to stop chasing antelope.

- - - Updated - - -

We only have the one animal at the moment. The 23 animals was because my wife and her mother ran a pseudo rescue out of their house, taking in dogs that were hit by cars and left for dead and the such in to nurse them back to health until they could find proper owners.

Ahh gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.

[SirMeo]

-snip-

I suppose it isn't always needless - sometimes there might be a medical reason for it. But again, even if your cat was somehow special and got all their issues solved by mutilation, having a stance "well maybe sometimes is ok" will serve only poor pet owners who actually don't really care about their pet's well-being. People who would rather de-bark than do any training. People who would rather declaw than give their cat more enrichment or play with them.

There might be this 0,0001% of cats that actually benefit from declawing, but it should still be illegal unless there is a medical reason, and never be brought up on the table when regular behavioral problems are discussed.

Declawing cats is illegal in many countries, and the cat shelter problems in those countries aren't worse because lack of declawing.

To clarify, I think that animal behavior always has a reason, and in most cases is correctable through training/alternative measures. I don't think *all* behavior in *all* animals can be corrected through changes in the animal's environment/training. Genetics, trauma, neurocognitive disorders are just some reasons why environment may have a negligible impact on behavior.

It really irks me when people make oversimplistic statements about animal behavior, such as "all behavior is due to poor training". That's like saying you can train the autism or schizophrenia out of people, or train a lion to stop chasing antelope.

Literally did not say anything like "all behavior is due to poor training."

Indeed, my point was that ALL animal behavior has reasons. Trauma, genetics, disorders are also reasons for animal behavior. Maybe you got a pet that just really got a poor start on life and will never be physically, neurologically, mentally healthy. I don't think any of this justifies a mutilation of an animal. Already pained animal will not be LESS pained after going through declawing -- it will simply lose one outlet for its "bad" behavior. I personally feel that you either need to deal with the pet as is, find an owner who specializes in animals with special needs or, if the condition is really bad enough, euthanasia. This decision should of course not be made on a whim, and putting a pet down isn't easy, but I think declawing is always a human convenience at the expense of an animal more than anything.

edit: And, really, animals that are in such a bad place are a lot rarer than the amount of cats declawed so...

[LawnmowersUnited]

On one hand, I'm against it and I think it kind of petty to declaw a cat for the sake of your furniture, I would never think of declawing my cats. On the other hand, it's pretty logically inconsistent for me to be okay with slaughtering cows but not be okay with declawing a cat.

[Celista]

I suppose it isn't always needless - sometimes there might be a medical reason for it. But again, even if your cat was somehow special and got all their issues solved by mutilation, having a stance "well maybe sometimes is ok" will serve only poor pet owners who actually don't really care about their pet's well-being. People who would rather de-bark than do any training. People who would rather declaw than give their cat more enrichment or play with them.

There might be this 0,0001% of cats that actually benefit from declawing, but it should still be illegal unless there is a medical reason, and never be brought up on the table when regular behavioral problems are discussed.

Declawing cats is illegal in many countries, and the cat shelter problems in those countries aren't worse because lack of declawing.


Literally did not say anything like "all behavior is due to poor training."

Indeed, my point was that ALL animal behavior has reasons. Trauma, genetics, disorders are also reasons for animal behavior. Maybe you got a pet that just really got a poor start on life and will never be physically, neurologically, mentally healthy. I don't think any of this justifies a mutilation of an animal. Already pained animal will not be LESS pained after going through declawing -- it will simply lose one outlet for its "bad" behavior. I personally feel that you either need to deal with the pet as is, find an owner who specializes in animals with special needs or, if the condition is really bad enough, euthanasia. This decision should of course not be made on a whim, and putting a pet down isn't easy, but I think declawing is always a human convenience at the expense of an animal more than anything.

edit: And, really, animals that are in such a bad place are a lot rarer than the amount of cats declawed so...

Right, as I said in my post...in any case, I don't support declawing, but I also don't think the alternatives are any better for animals where the behavior isn't correctable and environment modification doesn't work (as I said, clearly a small minority of cases). If anything I think they're worse.

[SirMeo]

Right, as I said in my post...in any case, I don't support declawing, but I also don't think the alternatives are any better for animals where the behavior isn't correctable and environment modification doesn't work (as I said, clearly a small minority of cases). If anything I think they're worse.

You never replied me when I asked what "in most cases" all animal behavior has reasons though. Like what do you actually mean by that, especially after you needed to make that point about "all animal behavior is because of poor training"?????

And like, at what point is the person allowed to say "welp, tried everything, time to declaw"? Who makes that decision? Even if there is that one in a million cat who actually gets a better quality of life (NOT quantity) from declawing, lots of lazy people will get their cat declawed because "well I tried everything" after a week and might end up with a cat with even worse problems (= resulting in the cat getting euthanized or abandoned anyway) if declawing "after you've tried everything" is acceptable.

[Deleted]

No! dont declaw a cat! It's the same thing with cutting off a human's fingers! You should just cut it's claws regularly like we humans do with our nails :'3

[Tinykong]

Declawing cats is illegal in many countries, and the cat shelter problems in those countries aren't worse because lack of declawing.

Almost 90M cats are owned in the United States, and ~3M per year are taken to shelters. It's a problem in the US already even with declawing, removing that is only going to cause an increase in the rate of unwanted cats.

You can dance around the topic all you want, and cite smaller countries with different laws and norms surrounding pet ownership, but at the end of the day, if you are against declawing of cats you are advocating more cats going to shelters or not being adopted in the first place, and in turn, more cats being euthanized.

There are more cats than people who want to own cats, and by limiting the available size of the owner population by preventing declawing, we are going to euthanize more cats. If you prefer that to the cruelty of declawing, that's your decision, but, unwanted cats aren't going to just miraculously disappear, they are going to be euthanized.

[ThatsOurEric]

Hey, even if your pet made it out ok, it does not erase the fact that it can and often does lead to decreased quality of life in cats.Your cat made it out ok and that's good for her, but lots of cats don't. Lots of cats end up permanently in pain, unable to behave like cats and develop behavioral issues of varying degrees of severity. Actual experts have said this. You can't just go "well you can think it's inhumane but let others be " when the practice just IS inhumane and not a matter of opinion.

I never said it was a matter of opinion, I know for sure that it can absolutely be destructive for them. All I'm saying is
that it is not 100% guaranteed that it will be, and that it is not the worst form of animal abuse an owner can be done
towards this animal like some of the more irrational posters make it out to be.

If I had the choice, I wouldn't have had my cat declawed, but she was, and she didn't suffer for it. I'm just playing
Devil's Advocate here.

That being said, if she did suffer, I would've never forgiven my father (as it was his house, his rules at the time).
I have another cat now and have 0 intentions of declawing her.

Listed reasons?
Yeah damn dude, that furniture of yours is really important.
Lmao holy shit.

Can you quote where I said I value furniture more than my pet? Go ahead, I'll wait.

You're doing the exact same thing yourself, but please do go on.
Not that i need to just agree on a disagreement with someone who basically tortures their pet in the first place anyways, you're to me, nothing but vile disgusting dipshits, it's not something you blame on ignorance when we have so many experts in the field, who know a shit or two about this coming out against it, even in USA.

No, I'm not. I'm not resorting to open hostility, nor have I directly insulted any of the posters, including
you. Calling you a child is not flaming. Calling someone a "dipshit" is. Its pretty obvious that you can't
control yourself, so you really be on a forum to begin with.

I repeat, go up a little bit, then you can join us adults.

It's basically down to whether you value property more than the welbeign of your pet

To further play Devil's Advocate, you do realize that pets ARE, to an extent, a form of property yes?

We actively go to stores and breeders, even shelters, and BUY these animals. We PICK the ones that we want. When they die,
go feral, become a problem, are dangerous, etc., we get rid of them and get new ones.

First and foremost, pets were designed for personal human entertainment. They were all wild animals until we decided to keep
them, and then breed specific unnatural sub-breeds because we wanted different kinds of fluffy.

Mind you, I'm playing semantics here, but let's not pretend that pets don't serve a similar purpose in some way to property,
and that we don't do or treat both similarly within certain reason.