Declawing Cats

57 posts / 0 new
Last post
RebeccaA'07's picture
Joined: 11/19/07
Posts: 1628
Declawing Cats

http://www.care2.com/causes/israel-bans-cat-declawing-will-u-s-follow.html

Israel’s parliament passed a ban on declawing of cats. The ban was approved by the Knesset Monday, November 28. And, the new law has some bite to it. Punishment consists of up to one year in prison and a fine of 75,000 shekels (a little more than $20,000.)

Other countries that outlaw declawing or consider it inhumane are:

Australia
Brazil
United Kingdom
Finland
Estonia
Netherlands
Germany
Switzerland
Austria

Should declawing be illegal everywhere or should owners have a choice?

Joined: 01/18/06
Posts: 1626

Owners should have a choice. How many cats would just be sent out on the street for scratching children or furniture?

I would like to know if these countries also ban docking and cropping of dogs tails and ears.

RebeccaA'07's picture
Joined: 11/19/07
Posts: 1628

"JorgieGirl" wrote:

Owners should have a choice. How many cats would just be sent out on the street for scratching children or furniture?

I would like to know if these countries also ban docking and cropping of dogs tails and ears.

Did you read how it's done? It's equivlant to cutting a finger off at the knuckle. Just seems wrong. But I also think docking/cropping is mean.

I'll admit, I was ignorant before - I had a cat years ago that I got declawed. She died last year, but after reading how the procedure is actually done...I wouldn't do that again. But I also wouldn't own a cat again, so!

Joined: 01/18/06
Posts: 1626

Yup, I know how it's done. I still chose to declaw my cat. After a year of NOTHING working with him scratching our furniture, I made the choice. I don't regret it. And Keith is fine. I know there are people vehemently against it and I can see why. I've heard all the arguments. But I love my cat and it was either that or get rid of him.

Joined: 01/18/06
Posts: 1626

I want to add...it's not exactly like cutting off the first knuckle on a human foot. Cats have an extra bone for the claw, that is not used for walking or balancing. It's only used for extending and retracting the claws. My Keith still walks along the top of the banister with no fear and no falling just fine. Their tails are their primary source of balance. Not that extra bone on the tip of their front toes.

Joined: 01/06/03
Posts: 1175

"JorgieGirl" wrote:

Owners should have a choice. How many cats would just be sent out on the street for scratching children or furniture?

"JorgieGirl" wrote:

Yup, I know how it's done. I still chose to declaw my cat. After a year of NOTHING working with him scratching our furniture, I made the choice. I don't regret it. And Keith is fine. I know there are people vehemently against it and I can see why. I've heard all the arguments. But I love my cat and it was either that or get rid of him.

Ditto both of these. My previous cat was declawed and our current one will be getting declawed. Completely indoor cats btw... I wouldn't do it to a cat that goes in and out, but then again, I wouldn't have anything but an indoor cat. If somebody is against it, fine... don't do it. But it should be an individual choice, not one made for us.

Joined: 01/18/06
Posts: 1626

My cat is an indoor cat too, Marla.

Joined: 01/06/03
Posts: 1175

"JorgieGirl" wrote:

I want to add...it's not exactly like cutting off the first knuckle on a human foot. Cats have an extra bone for the claw, that is not used for walking or balancing. It's only used for extending and retracting the claws. My Keith still walks along the top of the banister with no fear and no falling just fine. Their tails are their primary source of balance. Not that extra bone on the tip of their front toes.

I'll ditto that too... Azul (my previous cat) carried on as if nothing was different after she was declawed. I expect Pekoe will too... aside from not being able to hang by his front claws from the windowsills while scrabbling and scratching up my walls with his back ones :rolleyes:

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

I'm fine with it. I get why some vegan PETA type person would feel strongly against this.....but to me, most people who might be "against" this eat animals, which is worse than taking out claws to make an indoor pet have a happier and longer life with a family. Honestly people who would let their innocent child get scratched by a pet probably trouble me more morally than someone who declaws their family pet to help them not hurt family members or destroy furniture or the like. That said, I don't really like cats. Or house pets, in general. I've gotten very scroogy about the mess and hair and germs of animals since having kids, I grew up a total dog person.

FLSunshineMom's picture
Joined: 06/07/06
Posts: 3859

At one time I had no problem with it, then I 'heard' that it was a painful procedure, but never did any further research on it. So coming to this thread I was on the fence, but then I read the following from the link given in the OP:

What is Declawing?
Declawing is a misnomer because in order to remove a cat’s claws, the first joints of each toe are actually amputated. Imagine trying to go through your daily routines of self care with only stubs at the end of each finger.
Declawing is also a very painful surgery that can negatively affect a cat’s behavior and instinctual abilities. Many declawed cats will start to bite because their natural defense – their claws – have been removed and their teeth are all they have left to defend themselves with.
Post-operative recuperation can take weeks with the kitty in severe pain from walking or scratching in their litter box — things they have to continue doing on a daily basis. Cats instinctively will not show pain; so pain relief is often not addressed as a post operative concern. It can also cause lameness and balance disturbances.
Alternatives to Declawing
There are some non-surgical alternatives worth considering. Teaching your cat to use a scratching post, offering cardboard scratching toys and routine nail trimming are but a few.

After reading that, my mind is made up. I don't like the idea and cannot imagine doing that to my cat. Thankfully, she listens well and after teaching her not to scratch certain things in our house, she stopped.

I don't fault anyone who has had it done to their cat, though. I just would not do it personally. As for whether or not it should be illegal, not sure on that one yet. Will have to think on it some more.
[LEFT]

[/LEFT]

RebeccaA'07's picture
Joined: 11/19/07
Posts: 1628

"Potter75" wrote:

I'm fine with it. I get why some vegan PETA type person would feel strongly against this.....but to me, most people who might be "against" this eat animals, which is worse than taking out claws to make an indoor pet have a happier and longer life with a family. Honestly people who would let their innocent child get scratched by a pet probably trouble me more morally than someone who declaws their family pet to help them not hurt family members or destroy furniture or the like. That said, I don't really like cats. Or house pets, in general. I've gotten very scroogy about the mess and hair and germs of animals since having kids, I grew up a total dog person.

See, this is why I don't have a cat with a small kid - because the cat could scratch/bite. I wouldn't take her teeth out because she COULD bite (which cats DO - another reason I'd never get another). Same as a dog, my small dog has jumped up on my 2 year old and scratched her leg. I wouldn't take her claws out, it happens. Sure, not as severe as a cat scratch.

Really, I'm not a cat owner so it doesn't get me fired up one way or another. I just saw the news article and was intrigued that countries were actually banning it. And reading about the procedue, just doesn't sound right!

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3189

I had a cat for years and I never considered getting her declawed. To be blunt, I always thought that if you wanted a declawed animal maybe a cat wasn't the best choice.

My cat was still around when my son was born and for a few years after that, and we never had a problem. We had her nails clipped regularly and kept a close watch, especially when he was little enough to not know how to be careful.

She did wreck some of our stuff, though. I certainly get it from a convenience angle but I could never justify it in my mind, so I never did it, and she was an indoor cat all the way.

The cat we had when I was a kid wasn't declawed either, although she was an indoor/outdoor cat.

elleon17's picture
Joined: 01/26/09
Posts: 1981

I refuse to declaw. I think it is wrong and hurtful to the cat.

If I didn't want something to chew, scratch, puke on, poop on, etc....I wouldn't get a pet.

I had to sign a contract that I wouldn't declaw my cat when I adopted her.

Also, on the chance they get out and run away, a declawed cat has no way of protecting themselves and surviving.

b525's picture
Joined: 06/06/07
Posts: 298

I'm with Melissa on this one. People neuter animals. Isn't that just as bad? People eat animals. Surely that's worse. People wear leather. I think the argument of "it hurts them" only works if you're a vegan who never consumes (eating or otherwise) animal products. I mean, even owning a pet is not "natural."

Now, I'm surely not going to say someone must declaw, but I don't think it should be illegal to declaw, either. People should be able to choose what works for their family, just like they can choose to neuter or not.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

I have never declawed a cat, but then I have always had indoor/outdoor cats. But I see nothing wrong with it as long as the cat is always indoors.

Prudence's picture
Joined: 05/02/05
Posts: 256

Well, I'll jump in here- why not?

My firm stance has been for a long time that owners should have the right to declaw their cats as long as they try other methods to curb bad clawing habits first (ie cat tree, Soft Paws, etc). Unfortunately, after having been exposed to multiple Sphynx cats (hairless) that were declawed, I changed my mind. You could see, without the fur present to mask it, the way declawing deforms the actual paw and how a cat stands on it. I wish I had taken photos to explain, but without seeing it in person, it might not seem as dramatic.

As is- there is some research out there that shows declawed cats tend to become less reliable on their potty habits as they age due to arthritis in their paws. Is this true? I don't know, but I will say- my two eldest cats (almost 15 and 11) are front paw declawed and have been known to pee out of the box from time to time. Is this due to their declaws? Or is it due to their personalities or conflict with other cats? I don't know, but I do tell people to keep this in mind when they choose to declaw a young kitten.

Personally, out of all of the animal battles out there- this is not one I choose to fight, but if I adopt out a cat/kitten, it is on a no-declaw contract now. (Of course- then there is the debate involving whether contracts are enforceable).

You can't compare a neuter/spay IMHO with a declaw, btw. Not spaying your female cat puts her at risk for pyometra. Unless you've seen a cat oozing ICK out of her backside due to an uterus full of pus- well, you might not understand the severity of pyo. As far as male cats, unneutered males will spray and unfortunately tend to be more interested in the unaltered girls in the neighborhood then being good pets. I think comparing a spay/neuter to declawing is apples to oranges.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"Prudence" wrote:

You can't compare a neuter/spay IMHO with a declaw, btw. Not spaying your female cat puts her at risk for pyometra. Unless you've seen a cat oozing ICK out of her backside due to an uterus full of pus- well, you might not understand the severity of pyo. As far as male cats, unneutered males will spray and unfortunately tend to be more interested in the unaltered girls in the neighborhood then being good pets. I think comparing a spay/neuter to declawing is apples to oranges.

I actually retched at the words *uterus full of pus*.

I don't think tha the bolded works to support your argument, however. I think that intentionally changing the entire nature of a pet in order to make it a *better* pet via cutting off its balls to tame it is pretty intense. I think that it could easily be compared to de clawing.

Alissa_Sal's picture
Joined: 06/29/06
Posts: 6427

I agree with Jordan and Marla. I had a cat that I simply could NOT get to stop clawing our furniture. I tried everything, bought all sorts of products, worked with her vet for ideas, everything. And still that cat kept clawing our couch. Finally, it got to the point where it was either declaw her or get rid of her. I talked to her vet about it, and his position was that he feels it is much kinder to the cat to declaw them if the other option is to remove them from an otherwise happy and loving home. So we got her declawed, and she *seemed* fine. Of course she couldn't tell me if anything hurt, but she never acted any differently except not clawing the furniture. I think it's possible that if they outlawed declawing, you would see a rise in people abandoning their cats. I think it should be up to the owner.

Jbaum2's picture
Joined: 04/19/11
Posts: 257

I have always had cats and have never declawed them. Reason being, if the cat ever got outside (which does happen - even to strictly indoor cats) and a neighbourhood dog went after them, they would need to defend them selves. We have a cat and won't declaw him. We also live ona farm so there are coyotes around. If he tried to scratch me or the furniture, I push his claws out on his paw and say no. He only tried to scratch a couple of times when we first got him. That trick stopped him from doing it. He sticks to his scratching post. Now I realize not all cats can be trained like that. My hairdresser, had a these things that go over the claws of the cat, so they can't scratch things. Worked really good and lasts a couple of months. of the people that I know who have declawed cats (this is people I know personally - not through message boards) it was for THEIR convenience. They didn't have a cat to have a pet, they had a cat to have a cat and most really didn't like their cats.

Joined: 11/28/06
Posts: 848

Personally, I'm not a fan of cats and find them to be unpredictable and creepy. If pigs fly and we do adopt a kitty we would most certainly have it declawed. No way am I risking my furniture and linens for a cat.

What bugs me are people that have indoor/outdoor cats. What makes them think I want their cat climbing on my car, pooping in my driveway, and running in my garage? I seriously don't get how a pet owner can think that's okay. Keep your cats in your own freakin' yard.

Vent over.

Joined: 01/06/03
Posts: 1175

"Alana*sMommy" wrote:

What bugs me are people that have indoor/outdoor cats. What makes them think I want their cat climbing on my car, pooping in my driveway, and running in my garage? I seriously don't get how a pet owner can think that's okay. Keep your cats in your own freakin' yard.

Vent over.

I HEAR YOU!!!! On the quiet dead end street beside us (we're a corner lot and in front is a busy, busy road) there are at least 4 indoor/outdoor cats constantly roaming around. At least one of which insists on using my front flower garden as a litter box :rolleyes: People are not allowed to have their dogs roaming all over the place, why the heck do cats seem to get a free pass???

boilermaker's picture
Joined: 08/21/02
Posts: 1984

We have a cat and we opted not to declaw her. After doing the research, it just seemed mean. Many of the vets in our city won't do the procedure.

We use Soft Paws-- http://www.softpaws.com/?gclid=CPjpi6PC_awCFWmhtgodcjjJTA

I'm not sure why these wouldn't work for most kitties.

And I'm so with you on the others letting their cats roam free-- drives me insane. My parents just got guilted into paying for surgery on a neighbor's cat, who came into my parents' fenced yard, and then was attacked by my parents' dogs. My parents' felt so badly for the kids next door that they paid the vet bill. Ridiculous (and yes, more my parents fault for agreeing to pay....but oy!) Grrrr.

I also don't think "so kids don't get scratched" is a good reason to declaw. Kids need to know boundaries with animals and I think it is one of the best lessons kids can learn from pets-- to respond to the animals' cues appropriately (now if you are keeping a crazy cat who viciously attacks your kids unprovoked....then I question your parenting.) But for most cats, not a good reason IMO.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"boilermaker" wrote:

I also don't think "so kids don't get scratched" is a good reason to declaw. Kids need to know boundaries with animals and I think it is one of the best lessons kids can learn from pets-- to respond to the animals' cues appropriately (now if you are keeping a crazy cat who viciously attacks your kids unprovoked....then I question your parenting.) But for most cats, not a good reason IMO.

I don't know. I've not met many young babies (like, crawlers) who are able to appropriately interpret cat signals. I have absolutely seen many photos of cat scratches on babies (faces no less) even posted on here or the like. My babies may just not be that bright, but I would not keep a pet with razor sharp claws among my many young kids and feel responsible about it or as though I am "helping" them learn good boundaries. There are plenty of opportunities for children to learn those lessons, without pain.

boilermaker's picture
Joined: 08/21/02
Posts: 1984

I think it is a parent's job to keep crawling babies away from cats that might scratch. I put that on parents. Just like I expect parents to keep crawling babies away from open outlets and stairs....and dogs that may bite.

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4103

I'm totally against declawing. The only people I know who have declawed a cat are those too impatient to deal with training their cat, or who can't be bothered providing other things for their cat to claw, or who don't keep their cat separated from the new baby & then do it in response to the baby getting scratched. I always wondered why they bothered to get a CAT vs. other pet options, and then chop off its toes when it does what a cat does. Get a different pet, get an older cat that's already been trained not to claw, use the Soft Paws. Those things are great; we used them on Hecate for a while when we moved to a new apartment & she started scratching one of our chairs. By the time they wore off, she'd stopped the behavior & we were all happy again. No way would I ever declaw a cat, it's a horrible procedure. Good for other places for banning it!

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

Yes, that is where gates, outlet covers, and declawed cats come in. I don't really know how one keeps a crawling baby away from a cat that might scratch (which, to me, is any cat with claws) short of locking up cat in a room or something. Not a great way for a pet to live, IMO. Also not a way I as a parent would be willing to live ~ honestly my kids need to be safe in their home, to me that includes being safe from animal scratches ~ I'm like the antithesis of helicopter parent and can't imagine having to hover around my baby all day to keep an indoor housepet with sharp claws away from it.

I just can't imagine living with a pet who traipses through its own feces then walked around my home ~ makes me gaggy, especially with crawlers and kids who are constantly on the floor. Maybe I dislike cats enough to not make the declawing thing that big of a deal to me emotionally. After all, the delicious turkey who I ate for dinner suffered a much cruel fate than a loved and declawed housepet, so it would be pretty hypocritical of me to want the right to declaw housepets outlawed.

Jbaum2's picture
Joined: 04/19/11
Posts: 257

"boilermaker" wrote:

I think it is a parent's job to keep crawling babies away from cats that might scratch. I put that on parents. Just like I expect parents to keep crawling babies away from open outlets and stairs....and dogs that may bite.

I agree 100% with this. You do not EVER leave your child unattended with the family animal. Here, a young mother AND her mother left a 3 week old baby inside ALONE with 2 big dogs to go have a smoke.. Needless to say, the baby is in heaven now. Animals are ANIMALS. No matter how much you think they are part of the family or one of your kids (Both my cat and Dog are my babies / kids and I love them dearly) but in the heirarchy of the house they are still pets and I would expect them to act like animals. I would never leave my kids unattended with them EVER!!!

If you are going to have both children and animals it is up to the parent to "train" (for better lack of a term) them both and keep an eye on them.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

How many children do you have?

Honestly the thought of never ever leaving a child out of my actual site or reach is completely untenable for our family. They move, and stuff, and its hard to chase them immediately when, say, changing a babies diaper or nursing a newborn. This is where if this was really the rule as declawing was made illegal I see scores of people getting rid of their cats, or not adopting them in the first place.

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4103

"Potter75" wrote:

Yes, that is where gates, outlet covers, and declawed cats come in. I don't really know how one keeps a crawling baby away from a cat that might scratch (which, to me, is any cat with claws) short of locking up cat in a room or something. Not a great way for a pet to live, IMO. Also not a way I as a parent would be willing to live ~ honestly my kids need to be safe in their home, to me that includes being safe from animal scratches ~ I'm like the antithesis of helicopter parent and can't imagine having to hover around my baby all day to keep an indoor housepet with sharp claws away from it.

I don't hover over my kids and I don't declaw my cats. It doesn't have to be an either/or. The babies were trained to leave the cats alone, and the cats were trained to leave the babies alone. Actually, neither of my cats was ever interested in either of our kids when they were babies, they stayed clear at all times, which might be because of the "pecking order" that we established as soon as we brought the babies home. But if the cats didn't stay away from the babies, then I'd have put SoftPaws on them to keep my babies safe. I had them ready JIC. Weston is two & I finally gave them away a couple of weeks ago!

And you're right, that turkey probably suffered a much more miserable life & death than a pet cat, declawed or not, and that's why I don't eat them. I want my body nourished by good energy, not factory-farmed miserable life energy.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"Spacers" wrote:

I don't hover over my kids and I don't declaw my cats. It doesn't have to be an either/or. The babies were trained to leave the cats alone, and the cats were trained to leave the babies alone. Actually, neither of my cats was ever interested in either of our kids when they were babies, they stayed clear at all times, which might be because of the "pecking order" that we established as soon as we brought the babies home. But if the cats didn't stay away from the babies, then I'd have put SoftPaws on them to keep my babies safe. I had them ready JIC. Weston is two & I finally gave them away a couple of weeks ago!

And you're right, that turkey probably suffered a much more miserable life & death than a pet cat, declawed or not, and that's why I don't eat them. I want my body nourished by good energy, not factory-farmed miserable life energy.

Clearly you have way more baby and cat training juju than most people. And remember your audience spacers, if ever there was someone who you could bet was NOT eating factory farmed miserable life energy meat it would be me. My turkey lived a lovely little pastured life at our local farm, and then I ate him up. Delish.

Do you neuter or spay your cat?

Prudence's picture
Joined: 05/02/05
Posts: 256

Um, at least one of my dogs have been known to eat their own poop- as many dogs have- and turn around and try to lick the first human they ever see. I don't see why cats walking through their litter box would be any different! Plus, my dogs have a back yard they potty in and they might avoid the poop piles before they are picked up, but they surely walk through spots where another dog has peed.

Animals are gross. That's just life. LOL.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"Prudence" wrote:

Um, at least one of my dogs have been known to eat their own poop- as many dogs have- and turn around and try to lick the first human they ever see. I don't see why cats walking through their litter box would be any different! Plus, my dogs have a back yard they potty in and they might avoid the poop piles before they are picked up, but they surely walk through spots where another dog has peed.

Animals are gross. That's just life. LOL.

Well, yes, but this hardly makes cat feces more palatable...just makes dogs equally foul. The thought of a dog or cat licking my child's face after licking their dirt star just is absolutely skeevy to me.

All children aside, my DH is also terribly allergic to cats. We could not have a relaxed long dinner at the home of someone with a longhair or more than 1 cat. Also, were I to get scratched by someones cat I would be pissed. I guess I just don't get the appeal. I sound like an old fogey, but really once you get without animals for a few years the ick factor is a lot to overcome. I hate leaving certain friends homes covered in pet hair!

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6568

This conversation is making me so thankful that we do not have any pets.

culturedmom's picture
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

I think declawing should be illegal as well as tail docking and ear clipping. Human's come up with hundreds of excuses why things that make their life easier and better should be done. I do to. But there has to be a line drawn at some point an to me, when that comfort is inhumane to another, then I see no real reason for it. The truth is we use animals for food, work, and companion. The least we can do is try and make their lives as comfortable as possible.

I have had 3 cats in my life, 2 of which I had before and during children. One died not long ago and we stillhave the other. Both are indoor catsand both have their claws. It is absolutely possible and easy to train a cat where to claw and where not to claw. It does not take some cat whisperers or PhD in cat science to do it. All it takes is consistency and giving a cat an alternate preferred place to do what it naturally does, scratch. The cat that just died I adopted when I was in college. I lived with a roommate who had a couch that was her great grandmas, so I had to make sure my cat went no where near it. So I bought a Salvation Army apolstered chair and a water bottle. Squirt the cat when she went near the couch (only took one time) and gave her a better place of her own to scratch and tada, trained.

Also, cats need to scratch and not just because they have nails. Their claws are used for balance, climbing(away from danger), stretching, and grooming. To take away their nails is to handicap them and I see no reason other then laziness and comfort, to do such a thing and those to me are not good reasons. Plus declawing is expensive and I don't think it is done all that much. And yes, maybe initially there would be an influx of cats being dumped if owners couldn't declaw them. But you know what? I think if you can only have an animal if it is altered in some way to suit your life style, then you shouldn't have an animal.

As to the sctratching of the children bit, well I have had 2 cats who grew up with my children and not a one has ever gotten scratched. Cats usually scratch when contained (like being held against their will) or being hurt. And they usually stay away from people who are loud and erradic (like children). So I don't buy the "I have to declaw my cat to save my child" theory. Again, if you have to go through the cost to surgicaly remove the cats nails to have them be apart of your home safetly then it's not the right home, nails or not.

culturedmom's picture
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

"Potter75" wrote:

Well, yes, but this hardly makes cat feces more palatable...just makes dogs equally foul. The thought of a dog or cat licking my child's face after licking their dirt star just is absolutely skeevy to me.

All children aside, my DH is also terribly allergic to cats. We could not have a relaxed long dinner at the home of someone with a longhair or more than 1 cat. Also, were I to get scratched by someones cat I would be pissed. I guess I just don't get the appeal. I sound like an old fogey, but really once you get without animals for a few years the ick factor is a lot to overcome. I hate leaving certain friends homes covered in pet hair!

I get your not an animal person. But I am confused then to why you would not be more apt to argue the side of people being responsible and not having a pet they cannot take care of rather then surgically removing a piece of that animalin order to make it more palatable for them? Cat's don't just scratch people out of the blue so I don't see the scenario where you would just randomly be scratched by someone's cat. Honestly, I think people go for the declawing method out of ignorance of animal behavior.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"culturedmom" wrote:

I get your not an animal person. But I am confused then to why you would not be more apt to argue the side of people being responsible and not having a pet they cannot take care of rather then surgically removing a piece of that animalin order to make it more palatable for them? Cat's don't just scratch people out of the blue so I don't see the scenario where you would just randomly be scratched by someone's cat. Honestly, I think people go for the declawing method out of ignorance of animal behavior.

I would argue that but it is as futile as arguing that people who cant afford children not have them. People will continue to have pets, I just believe that more pets will get abandoned, and we already have a terrible problem with unwanted pets (particularily cats) in this country. Its like why I can believe that abortion is killing a baby but still be pro choice. Or why I can argue that factory farming should be illegal, but know that that isn't going to happen, because it would price a country of meat eaters out of meat. Its why we won't own any pets, or abort our babies, or eat factory farmed meat ~ because of our personal beliefs. I care more about humans than animals, always and forever. I don't support animal cruelty on a whim, but I am 100% absolutely fine with taking away an animals balls or ovaries against its will, or eating one (who lived a nice untortured life), or taking out ones claws. Maybe I'm anthropomorphizing here but given the choice between having my claws taken out and being given away, I'd choose the former, hands down, every time. And you may say that it doesn't take a cat whisperer to train a baby and a cat.......I just tend to disagree that it is as easy as all that. At a time when many families are already overwhelmed (by say bringing a new baby home) I don't know that everyone is as awesome as spacers and her pecking order and whatnot. I think that many people who are attracted to cats in the first place are so because of the relative of ease of cats, not because of a deep seated desire to be one with the animal and to train it in the way of polite use of claws. I actually do consider myself an animal person ~ I just love them deeply where they belong, which is outside of my clean home, happily pastured outside on farms and the like. Wink

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"culturedmom" wrote:

I think if you can only have an animal if it is altered in some way to suit your life style, then you shouldn't have an animal.
.

This is exactly what I said to Prudence (was it prudence) about neutering a male cat.

culturedmom's picture
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

"Potter75" wrote:

This is exactly what I said to Prudence (was it prudence) about neutering a male cat.

No it's not the same thing you said to Prudence because the part you are overlooking in my post is where I say "suit your lifestyle". Spaying and neuturing an animal may be helpfult to people but it is life saving for animals. Not only does it reduce the likelyhood of certain cancers and deaths from birth, but it keeps animals from being born who would surely end up in a shelter or on the street. I don't see how that can be compared to declawing at all.

As for the slaughter of animals, well I don't consider eating meat a luxury (though I guess some do). And I believe if we are to slaughter animals even in a mass processing situation, it should be done with as much dignity and thought of the wellbeing of the animaas possible. I do believe you can mass produce livestock for consumption and still do it humanly and I make it a point to buy my meat from companies who have a better record of ethics.

I do not romanticize the use of animals for our pleasure. I hate PETA. However, certain processes are unnecessary and are just done out of ignorance or vanity or comfort and those are the ones I am against. And since I believe that I ma pretty knowledgable in animal husbandry and behavior, I can say with certainty that declawing a cat is unnecessary as is docking a dogs tail or ears. Much different then spaying an animal. And I question the expereince of anyone who thinks they are similar in purpose.

and when I say "animal person" I don't mean just someone who likes them. I mean someone who is around them and can't live without them and has expereince with them. I think running could be good exercise and have been known to do it when the occasion calls for it (like when a toddler waddles towards the street or I'm in a hurry) but I would not consider myself a runner or a "marathon person". Smile I'm just saying, if you are honest in saying you prefer your hands on expereince with animals outside your home, then how can you be so certain of your opinion on training domesticated animals for the home?

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"culturedmom" wrote:

I'm just saying, if you are honest in saying you prefer your hands on expereince with animals outside your home, then how can you be so certain of your opinion on training domesticated animals for the home?

Because I respect animals enough to not change their nature to suit my needs? I've had enough pets in my life to consider myself very experienced, and lived with scores of them who belonged to roommates or whatnot. I choose not to, now, because I've come to have opinions on small humans and house pets cohabitating, so I honor those opinions by not having pets. Frankly, I don't buy the "taking out animal parts to stop cancer" any more than I would justify someone cutting off their daughters breasts to prevent cancer. I'd be willing to bet that most people do it because it reduces their culpability and makes an animal which isn't all that suited to indoor family life (like a male cat) tamer and domesticated and therefore palatable as a housepet.

Honestly I have lots of opinions on things that I don't need to live with in my home to feel qualified to opine on.

If the only people qualified to respond to this debate are people who "cant live without animals"......well, I disagree.

culturedmom's picture
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

"Potter75" wrote:

Because I respect animals enough to not change their nature to suit my needs? I've had enough pets in my life to consider myself very experienced, and lived with scores of them who belonged to roommates or whatnot. I choose not to, now, because I've come to have opinions on small humans and house pets cohabitating, so I honor those opinions by not having pets. Frankly, I don't buy the "taking out animal parts to stop cancer" any more than I would justify someone cutting off their daughters breasts to prevent cancer. I'd be willing to bet that most people do it because it reduces their culpability and makes an animal which isn't all that suited to indoor family life (like a male cat) tamer and domesticated and therefore palatable as a housepet.

Honestly I have lots of opinions on things that I don't need to live with in my home to feel qualified to opine on.

If the only people qualified to respond to this debate are people who "cant live without animals"......well, I disagree.

well I didn;t say you were not qualified, I just said from what you have shared of your expereinces on not having animals in your home compared with my own, I questioned where your opinion stemmed from. All I know is what you share. You may have been a vet and a cat trainer but I don't know that unless you tell me. and from your previous posts it was VERY clear youw ere not keen on animals in the home.

And the only reason I brought up my definition of "animal person" was to explain what I meant not to disqualify you from having an opinion.

And I am pretty sure I brought up more then one positive for spaying an animal other then prevention of cancer so I find that very unfair and silly of you to liken my point to cutting off a childs breast. Give me a little more credit then believing the only reason to nueter or spay an animal is to keep them from getting cancer. Geez Louise. Seriously why would you even go there based on what I said? It is fact that spaying an animal lessens the likelyhood of them getting certain cancers (which some have a very high lilkelyhood in certain breeds).However if it were the only positive then I don;t think vets would be doing it. I said it was a positive, not the positive.

ClairesMommy's picture
Joined: 08/15/06
Posts: 2299

"Potter75" wrote:

Well, yes, but this hardly makes cat feces more palatable...just makes dogs equally foul. The thought of a dog or cat licking my child's face after licking their dirt star just is absolutely skeevy to me.

All children aside, my DH is also terribly allergic to cats. We could not have a relaxed long dinner at the home of someone with a longhair or more than 1 cat. Also, were I to get scratched by someones cat I would be pissed. I guess I just don't get the appeal. I sound like an old fogey, but really once you get without animals for a few years the ick factor is a lot to overcome. I hate leaving certain friends homes covered in pet hair!

lol....dirt star. love it.

And I as well as several here am very happy to have (at least for now) a pet-free home. I adore dogs and grew up with them my whole life. My ex and I had a yellow lab and I still miss him terribly. Cats, meh. Not a fan. I got scratched really bad as a kid. I was maybe 8 or 9 and I was at my friend's house. I came around the corner and their cat Whiskers leapt at me from the stairs and dug his front claws into my thigh, then started sliding down, claws still deep into my flesh. But, if he didn't have claws maybe he would've just bit me instead. IDK. Some animals chew, especially dogs, but I would've never considered having my dog's teeth removed for chewing my shoes or whatever. I guess I feel like if you want a cat, the potential to scratch goes with the territory. Thing is, I'm not totally up in arms over declawing either. I just wouldn't do it, personally. Probably best that I don't want to ever own a cat!

LauraT's picture
Joined: 03/07/02
Posts: 272

Another great product to stop scratching furniture is Feliway. It only took spraying it on my couch a couple of times and my boys completely leave it alone now.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"culturedmom" wrote:

well I didn;t say you were not qualified, I just said from what you have shared of your expereinces on not having animals in your home compared with my own, I questioned where your opinion stemmed from. All I know is what you share. You may have been a vet and a cat trainer but I don't know that unless you tell me. and from your previous posts it was VERY clear youw ere not keen on animals in the home.

And the only reason I brought up my definition of "animal person" was to explain what I meant not to disqualify you from having an opinion.

And I am pretty sure I brought up more then one positive for spaying an animal other then prevention of cancer so I find that very unfair and silly of you to liken my point to cutting off a childs breast. Give me a little more credit then believing the only reason to nueter or spay an animal is to keep them from getting cancer. Geez Louise. Seriously why would you even go there based on what I said? It is fact that spaying an animal lessens the likelyhood of them getting certain cancers (which some have a very high lilkelyhood in certain breeds).However if it were the only positive then I don;t think vets would be doing it. I said it was a positive, not the positive.

I have literally had an animal in my home from the age of 4 when I got a dog for my birthday until exactly two years ago. So, 30 years of experience with no less than 14 animals I could think of off the top of my head. Big fan of "the art of raising a puppy" and anything that those wacky new skete monks wrote. I'm hardly some sort of animal trainer expert, but always had great pets and do consider myself an animal lover ~ love to see them, love to love my friends pets, love to eat them, love to financially support animal rescue organizations, work hard to ensure that I support the humane treatment of animals by only buying from suppliers who support that etc. Had two cats through the years, did not declaw them (also did not have children). Though I do not currently have house pets, I do feel qualified enough to at least opine on them. Did happily spay and neuter every animal we had, and my last dog (a Wheaton Terrier) had a docked tail (though the longer, european dock as his father was from Sweden). Anyway. I consider myself an animal lover, but also a serious neat freak. And house pets and babies just don't jive, in my world. I am thrilled that other people make them work, and I think that declawing is one route many take (JUST LIKE NEUTERING A TOM) to make living with a pet more amenable to them, at the pets cost AND for the pets benefit (no balls or claws....but also no shelter euthanasia or being abandoned on the side of the road because they sprayed all over clean laundry or scratched dlittle Billy). I'm okay with that. I consider my views on the "rights" of animals to be really super consistent.

culturedmom's picture
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

OK. Well I guess we will just have to agree to disagree then because I see a big difference between spaying a pet and declawing a pet (and cutting off my daughters breasts). So I'm not sure where else our conversation can go though I appreciate you sharing your experiences with animals. Wheatons are very cute.

b525's picture
Joined: 06/06/07
Posts: 298

"Potter75" wrote:

I have literally had an animal in my home from the age of 4 when I got a dog for my birthday until exactly two years ago. So, 30 years of experience with no less than 14 animals I could think of off the top of my head. Big fan of "the art of raising a puppy" and anything that those wacky new skete monks wrote. I'm hardly some sort of animal trainer expert, but always had great pets and do consider myself an animal lover ~ love to see them, love to love my friends pets, love to eat them, love to financially support animal rescue organizations, work hard to ensure that I support the humane treatment of animals by only buying from suppliers who support that etc. Had two cats through the years, did not declaw them (also did not have children). Though I do not currently have house pets, I do feel qualified enough to at least opine on them. Did happily spay and neuter every animal we had, and my last dog (a Wheaton Terrier) had a docked tail (though the longer, european dock as his father was from Sweden). Anyway. I consider myself an animal lover, but also a serious neat freak. And house pets and babies just don't jive, in my world. I am thrilled that other people make them work, and I think that declawing is one route many take (JUST LIKE NEUTERING A TOM) to make living with a pet more amenable to them, at the pets cost AND for the pets benefit (no balls or claws....but also no shelter euthanasia or being abandoned on the side of the road because they sprayed all over clean laundry or scratched dlittle Billy). I'm okay with that. I consider my views on the "rights" of animals to be really super consistent.

Bahahahaah! Okay, your list cracked me up for the progression of the bolded. Smile

Jbaum2's picture
Joined: 04/19/11
Posts: 257

"Potter75" wrote:

How many children do you have?

I love how this tends to be your agruement in a few debates...like pushing a baby out somehow magically makes you an expert in raising children.

There are parents out there with 6 kids who have NO CLUE and people out there with none, but have a whole lot of COMMON SENSE. I have been around enough children and enough animlas to know that you do not leave your children unattended with your animals. It's call responsible parenting. I come from a large family, took care of my younger siblings, was a nanny for a number of years and have babysat countless numbers of times and never once did I leave those children unattended. That includes when I was taking care of 6 kids and their 3 large dogs. the kids ranged from 6 months to 8 years old. 3 at the time were in diapers. not once did I leave them unattended.

You introduce your children to your animals, show them and teach them what is acceptable behavior around them. Animals and children are NOT stupid. They can and will learn. You see too many parents make decisions based on what requires the least amount of work on their part - easy answer either don't have pets or don't have children. both are work. Both are worth the work that requires you to put in. If you don't think so, then that should be your short answer.

Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

I love how this tends to be your agruement in a few debates...like pushing a baby out somehow magically makes you an expert in raising children.

Ah yes, and like owning an animal who traipses through its own sh*t somehow makes you an expert in parenting. I think that it is an excellent debate point when engaging someone on a parenting topic who is not a parent. Don't know you well enough to continue discussing this with you, though I vaguely remember you giving unsolicited parenting advice before in a debate, when many people pointed this out to you, and lurking posters creep me out. I'm sorry if the intersect of reality and debating offends you. I'm glad you know enough about me to recognize that I don't generally put much stock in unsolicited parenting advice from people with no children, however, because you are correct.

I think that people who think that children are able to watched 24 hours a day are cute and funny (or else are helicopter parents, ick), so I will just pat your little head and move on. It is such an egregiously ridiculous opinion that it does actually cement my belief that you simply don't know what you are talking about. I feel sorry for an 8 year old who has to spend every moment of his day in the same room as babies and his caregiver. I believe that all humans (5 or 8 or 58) need a little more space and privacy and freedom than that. I do, and my kids (even at just almost 4 and almost 5) certainly do.

Alissa_Sal's picture
Joined: 06/29/06
Posts: 6427

"Jbaum2" wrote:

I come from a large family, took care of my younger siblings, was a nanny for a number of years and have babysat countless numbers of times and never once did I leave those children unattended. That includes when I was taking care of 6 kids and their 3 large dogs. the kids ranged from 6 months to 8 years old. 3 at the time were in diapers. not once did I leave them unattended.

This blows my mind. You never left any of them unattended, even the 8 year old? Ever? My three year old has free range of the house and back yard (including rooms that I'm not in) so I can't even imagine making an 8 year old stay in my presence at all times.

I don't think that not yet having a child of your own means that you are unqualified to discuss parenting....but I also think that your experiences and POV may change a bit when you have children of your own. I say that with zero disrespect, that's just my experience. However much time I spent caring for my brother and the many kids that I babysat in my life, my POV still changed pretty dramatically when I had a child of my own.

As to the rest of the debate, Lana, I am happy to admit that my pets live in my house at my pleasure. I am a loving pet owner, and I do my best to take care of them, but at the end of the day if they are causing a huge problem and I can't correct it (I, not some theoretical perfect pet owner that apparently has expertise in cat training) then it gets to a certain point where it's either shape up or ship out. Or be declawed. You'll be happy to know that I will never own another cat anyway, because DH is deathly allergic to them.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"Jbaum2" wrote:

I come from a large family, took care of my younger siblings, was a nanny for a number of years and have babysat countless numbers of times and never once did I leave those children unattended. That includes when I was taking care of 6 kids and their 3 large dogs. the kids ranged from 6 months to 8 years old. 3 at the time were in diapers. not once did I leave them unattended.

So how is a parent supposed to sleep at night? Just wondering.

culturedmom's picture
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

"Alissa_Sal" wrote:

This blows my mind. You never left any of them unattended, even the 8 year old? Ever? My three year old has free range of the house and back yard (including rooms that I'm not in) so I can't even imagine making an 8 year old stay in my presence at all times.

I don't think that not yet having a child of your own means that you are unqualified to discuss parenting....but I also think that your experiences and POV may change a bit when you have children of your own. I say that with zero disrespect, that's just my experience. However much time I spent caring for my brother and the many kids that I babysat in my life, my POV still changed pretty dramatically when I had a child of my own.

I agree with Alissa. Being a sitter and taking care of siblings is very different from having children of your own who are in your care 24/7. I think it may seem like they are always in your sight, but I doubt they always are. However, as a pet owner if you have young children who are not old enough to know how to respect an animal and don'tknow better then to grab a cats tail or pull a dogs whiskers, then there are ways to make sure that child and pet are not alone together. That is very possible and easily done no matter how many children one has.

As to the rest of the debate, Lana, I am happy to admit that my pets live in my house at my pleasure. I am a loving pet owner, and I do my best to take care of them, but at the end of the day if they are causing a huge problem and I can't correct it (I, not some theoretical perfect pet owner that apparently has expertise in cat training) then it gets to a certain point where it's either shape up or ship out. Or be declawed. You'll be happy to know that I will never own another cat anyway, because DH is deathly allergic to them.

You don't need to have cat expertise to keep a cat from clawing to the point that you would be willing to spend hundreds of dollars to declaw it. Not all pets fit into all families and sometimes the responsible thing to do is to find it a better home. A much cheaper and more humane option then declawing in my opinion.

FLSunshineMom's picture
Joined: 06/07/06
Posts: 3859

Melissa ~ C'mon now, is it really fair to include "pets" and "love to eat them" in the same sentence? *Tsk tsk* ROFL

Pages