Declawing: a big round of applause to West Hollywood

[istara]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2686125.stm

Councillors in West Hollywood have voted unanimously in favour of a draft ruling outlawing the de-clawing of cats.
If the draft goes on to be adopted the city, which lies in the Los Angeles area, would be the first in the United States to ban the practice.

In making their decision the councillors agreed with the view of animal rights activist that removing cats' claws is inhumane.

The tips of the cats toes are also removed along with the claws, activists say.

As an anti-declawer, I for one am delighted to see the first ban of this barbaric practice in the US, by West Hollywood. I hope other jurisdictions, states and countries will follow their excellent lead.

I know this is a contentious issue, with strong opinion on both sides. So this landmark decision for feline rights seems an appropriate time to open up a debate on Declawing: Acceptable or Unacceptable?

[jjimm]

Actually, there is already a debate going on, though haven't got time to find it for a link.

Anyway, my €0.02: I think declawing is unacceptable except in extreme circumstances. It's mutilation for the convenience of humans.

If I had an elephant, I wouldn't remove its trunk to stop it stealing buns.

[Odesio]

Originally posted by istara

I know this is a contentious issue, with strong opinion on both sides. So this landmark decision for feline rights seems an appropriate time to open up a debate on Declawing: Acceptable or Unacceptable?

I didn't know felines had any rights. Oh well, I suppose people in W. Hollywood can just take their cats out of town to get them declawed. Just sounds like one other California town passing feel good laws that won't amount to changing a thing.

Marc

[SPOOFE]

Possible advantages of this ruling:

Kitty feels better.

Possibly disadvantage:

People, after getting a cat, realize just how much of a pain in the ass their claws are. They take the cat to a vet for declawing, but ALAS! they cannot. They were willing to front the cash for it, but take the hours and hours to drive out of town, to a different vet, to do it? Forget it. They throw Kitty into a sack, throw the sack into the river, and tell the kids about Kitty Heaven.

Then they get a dog.

That sounds like a better solution to you? You monster!

(Note: This post to be taken partially in jest. Partially.)

[istara]

MGibson - part of the issue is that it's not just a "nail clipping" - it's the permanent surgical removal of their nail and top tendon (ie their actual digit). It is a maiming practice.

Felines may not have the right to vote, but I think anything that lives under our guardianship deserves to be treated with respect and decency during its life. This goes for food animals too - IANAVegetarian, I eat meat, but I expect the animals to be well treated for the duration of their lives.

[Liberal]

I spoke to our cat, Jane, about this, and he says you're argument is absurd.

You speak about declawing as "maiming", as though the cat is wrestled to the ground where it screams in pain as its limbs are ripped from it by nefarious punks who also tie cats' tails together and hang them over clotheslines.

It is in fact a surgical procedure under anesthesia, performed by a veterinary doctor, that is for the benefit of the animal so that it might live out its life in luxury. Jane is presently curled up in front of the heating duct on his favorite blanket, licking his chest, and savoring the aftertaste of his delicious and nutritious breakfast.

He could hardly be treated any better.

Were he to have claws, we could not be his servants and wait on him hand and foot in our home. He would probably already be dead, either run over by a car, eaten by a dog, euthanized by a humane shelter, or frozen to death in an ice storm. Instead, he's luxuriating in our warm home and probably wondering why I keep looking around at him.

[delphica]

First, I would never declaw a cat. It strikes me as both mean and unnecessary.

However, other people do lots of things that I would never do (for various reasons), and I don't think we need laws against them.

In sort of a perverse way, I'm more concerned about cats who are allowed to roam, and at least declawing keeps more cats inside-only. I'd support a no-roaming law, as the justification would be the protection of the property of others.

The fact that you can leave town without even knowing it (well, I can because I get lost all the time) in West Hollywood makes this law seem even sillier.

Does West Hollywood have an opinion on the docking of dogs' tails?

[erislover]

I can surgically remove your testicles, Libertarian, under the most pleasant of conditions. Doesn't make it any less of a maiming.

He could hardly be treated any better.

You suppose your boss demanded that you get your nails removed to keep your station in life (and I know you are your own boss so this thought experiment is slightly tortured hehe ) that you would feel that way?

[LouisB]

Will West Hollywood conclude that keeping cats indoors is contrary to a cat's true nature? Will they pass a law mandating that all cats be allowed to roam at all times? I would bet that West Hollywood already has laws in place that prohibit dogs from roaming. Keeping a dog confined in a kennel or in a fenced yard violates the dog's nature, doesn't it? Castrating a male dog or cat seems inhumane to me---I know I wouldn't like it even a little bit. Spaying a female cat or dog deprives the animal of its basic right to be a mother, doesn't it? Let's make that practice illegal while we're at it.

I think that a LOT of animal activists have completely lost touch with reality.

[TeaElle]

< hijack >
Lib, you have a male cat named Jane?

No wonder you don't find declawing to be inhumane!
< /hijack >

[robertliguori]

Good fuxzoring Lord, people. If declawing or neutering is maiming, then slaughtering a cow is murder. And cannabilism.
Animals don't have human rights. And whether or not people should declaw their animals is a different beast from whethere or not they should be allowed to.

[Liberal]

Originally posted by tlw
< hijack >
Lib, you have a male cat named Jane?

No wonder you don't find declawing to be inhumane!
< /hijack >

It's a long story, but the short version is that we thought he was a girl cat when we first got him. In visits to the vet, it never came up until we took him in to be (dare I say it?) spayed.

[erislover]

robert, declawing fits maiming as well as I can imagine:

maim: 1 : to commit the felony of mayhem upon
2 : to mutilate, disfigure, or wound seriously

I suppose permanently altering a cat's outward physical appearance isn't disfiguring to you? Or what?

Animals don't have human rights.

They don't need human rights. In fact, I will argue that all anti-cruelty laws are bunk because of it. But I have a strong opinion on animal mutilation and abuse. You can perhaps see that these are not contradictory opinions? Ah, yes you do:

And whether or not people should declaw their animals is a different beast from whethere or not they should be allowed to.

Yep, my side is: declawing is as unacceptable as a law being passed against it.

[Liberal]

Originally posted by erislover
I can surgically remove your testicles, Libertarian, under the most pleasant of conditions. Doesn't make it any less of a maiming.You suppose your boss demanded that you get your nails removed to keep your station in life (and I know you are your own boss so this thought experiment is slightly tortured hehe ) that you would feel that way?

My station? No. But the equivalent of Jane's? Hell, yes.

[erislover]

Oh, Lib brings up a good point... if we are against declawing are we also against population control through mutilation? Would we have to be?

[RickJay]

Originally posted by erislover
robert, declawing fits maiming as well as I can imagine

So do spaying and neutering.

So, has West Hollywood passed a law against spaying and neutering yet?

[you with the face]

I think a lot of people declaw their cats because they think it's one of those things that has to be done. Same with docking the tails of dogs. Same with circumsision. It's one of those pet-owner habits that until recently has gone unquestioned.

As someone who has performed neutering and declawing (oh my!), I can testify that although these are elective procedures, they are done humanely. Using the word "maiming" is misinformed hyperbole. Personally, I don't like declawing cats because it is unnecessary and may cause behavioral problems that result in worse problems than tattered furniture. Plus, any operation that requires anesthesia carries the risk of death. But I don't liken it to hacking off people's genitalia with a cold butter-knife. There's no need to use War On Drugs-like propaganda to express your disfavor of declawing, people!

This is what I believe: Veterinarians need to educate their clients when they come in requesting the procedure. The cool thing about claws is that they can be clipped rather easily; the finger-tips need not be amputated to spare upholstery. Perhaps if more people knew this they wouldn't be so quick to put Socks under the knife. Informing the clients about all the possible options is the most ethical thing a vet can do, short of banning the practice altogether.

ywtf, soon-to-be vet (5 months and counting!)

[Who_me?]

Originally posted by RickJay
So do spaying and neutering.

So, has West Hollywood passed a law against spaying and neutering yet?

NO, no, no!!! Spaying and neutering are for the animal's own welfare!!! Declawing is for the human's welfare!!!

[Liberal]

Why the false dilemma? It is hardly of benefit to the cat that he dies in the wild.

(Congratulations, Face!)

[erislover]

Please refer me to a better definition of maiming that demonstrates the hyperbole. It seems to me the one Merriam-Webster offers in number (2) fits the bill without any messy exaggeration.

So, has West Hollywood passed a law against spaying and neutering yet?

Well, RickJay, this is an interesting question. If we outlaw pot, do we have to outlaw alcohol to be consistent? Or can I say, if we allow alcohol to be legal, do we have to legalize cocaine to be consistent?

[grimpixie]

It is well worth noting that this is not an issue that is agreed upon amongst vets - the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons in the UK is against the practice and others like it, for example the docking of dog's tails - this from their Guide to Professional Conduct:

Claws, removal of
This procedure is only acceptable where, in the opinion of the veterinary surgeon, injury to the animal is likely to occur during normal activity. It is not acceptable if carried out for the convenience of the owner. Thus the removal of dew claws in certain breeds of dog where they protrude from the limb and are likely to become caught and torn is justifiable and even advisable. On the other hand, the removal of claws, particularly those which are weight-bearing, to preclude damage to furnishings is not acceptable.

They also refer to "mutilation" rather than maiming, saying that "...the term should be understood as covering all procedures, carried out with or without instruments, which involve interference with the sensitive tissues or the bone structure of an animal, and are carried out for non-therapeutic reasons."

Grim

[RickJay]

Originally posted by erislover
Well, RickJay, this is an interesting question. If we outlaw pot, do we have to outlaw alcohol to be consistent? Or can I say, if we allow alcohol to be legal, do we have to legalize cocaine to be consistent?

Well, actually, I happen to believe exactly that, erislover. The prohibition on pot while permitting alcohol is the most ridiculous sort of nonsense I can think of in the law today.

But look, it's not me saying it's maiming. IT'S YOU. Now I want you to explain, logically, why declawing is "maiming" but spaying and neutering are not "maiming." Please explain why cutting off the testicles isn't "mutilation or disfigurement" but cutting off the claws is.

[jjimm]

What Face said: I regularly clip Cookie's claws with a pair of nail clippers. She's learned to enjoy it. I've taught her not to scratch, but clipping catches any occasional mistakes. Just be sure not to go so far down the claw that you catch the nerve - that would be cruel.






Cookie is my wife, by the way.

[Liberal]

Posit that there is a cat and that ours is the only home for him. We will take him in if he is declawed; otherwise, he must fend for himself in the wild. From what is given, do those who applaud West Hollywood prefer that we not take the cat?

[you with the face]

by erislover:

Please refer me to a better definition of maiming that demonstrates the hyperbole. It seems to me the one Merriam-Webster offers in number (2) fits the bill without any messy exaggeration.

The problem is not that the definition is wrong. The problem is that it is used to inject emotionality into the debate. One man's "maiming" is another man's "elective amputation" and another man's "phalangectomy". Nothing is solved by using one term over another.

In other words, just because it meets the dictionary definition of maiming doesn't make it any more morally objectional. Technically my sister maimed herself by getting a breast reduction, but that doesn't mean anything morally, right? I can tell her that she maimed herself until the cock crows three times and she would still just ignore me. I wouldn't blame her.

Refuting the practice of declawing on rational grounds is much more effective than deliberately using words that have provocative connotations. That's what I meant to say when I wrongly said "misinformed hyperbole". Sorry.

[zwaldd]

Originally posted by Libertarian
From what is given, do those who applaud West Hollywood prefer that we not take the cat?

I would. IMO, a declawed cat, particularly a declawed indoor cat, is more pathetic than a cat on its own. But since that is simply my opinion, I don't really applaud the West Hollywood proposal, since many people enjoy the company of clawless, housebound, cat-shaped pets.

[Liberal]

Interesting choice. Right now, Jane is sitting comfortably on the window sill as he watches a wild gray cat outside, wet from freezing rain and shivering in 10 degree cold.

[erislover]

Technically my sister maimed herself by getting a breast reduction, but that doesn't mean anything morally, right?

Of course. So them "maiming" isn't injecting any moral component into the debate that wasn't already there.

You want me to not use maiming? Ok. Surgical disfigurement. Howzat? That a little less charged for you?

Refuting the practice of declawing on rational grounds is much more effective than deliberately using words that have provocative connotations.

If you suppose that my entire argument is based on your perception of "maiming" as emotionally charged, I am very sorry. I thought my suggestion of people permanently removing their fingernails in order to keep their station in life—say, a job or a loan on their house from the bank—to be more along the lines of how I actually feel.

[erislover]

Originally posted by RickJay
But look, it's not me saying it's maiming. IT'S YOU. Now I want you to explain, logically, why declawing is "maiming" but spaying and neutering are not "maiming." Please explain why cutting off the testicles isn't "mutilation or disfigurement" but cutting off the claws is.

Let me get this straight. You want me to rationally explain why surgically removing testicles—something I characterized as maiming—isn't actually maiming, in an attempt to show me how wrong I was for characterizing surgical removal of claws as maiming?

I said
...if we are against declawing are we also against population control through mutilation? Would we have to be?

[xenophon41]

We've conditioned Harlee the cat to use her scratching post and to stay away from the carpet and the furniture. We also trim her claws because she's not so considerate about laps. We decided to do this after talking with the vet about possible behavioral problems associated with declawing; however the decision to avoid those problems was counterbalanced against the likelihood that she'd at some point destroy something else we cared about. I can't see the point in censuring someone else over deciding differently. The declawed cats I've known seemed quite happy and completely untraumatized.


Note to future vet you with the face: An interesting behavioral issue has developed with Harlee during our claw trimming sessions. Normally, her favorite colors seem to be "brrown" or "prrrrrple", but whenever I trim her claws, they change to an emphatic "brrllackk!" or red. (I think it's red; she can't seem to get beyond the "rrrrrrrrrrrrRRRRRR" part...)

[you with the face]

In all fairness, erislover, your response to Liberitarian...

I can surgically remove your testicles, Libertarian, under the most pleasant of conditions. Doesn't make it any less of a maiming.

...prompted my comments about your use of maiming. To me, it looks like what you are saying is that surgically removing Lib's testicals consitutes maiming and therefore it's wrong. I disagree. Castrating Lib may be perfectly moral. In fact, "maiming" him in that way may be just what this country needs right now.

Sorry if I misinterpreted you.

[you with the face]

by xenophone:

An interesting behavioral issue has developed with Harlee during our claw trimming sessions. Normally, her favorite colors seem to be "brrown" or "prrrrrple", but whenever I trim her claws, they change to an emphatic "brrllackk!" or red. (I think it's red; she can't seem to get beyond the "rrrrrrrrrrrrRRRRRR" part...)

That's funny. When I'm doing the deed, my cat sounds like a motorcycle being revved up. And by the time I get to the last toe the little Kawasaki is ready to amputate my fingers. With her mouth.

[erislover]

I definitely am not saying that maiming = wrong. I am saying maiming in order to achieve or maintain a station in life = wrong. Hope that clears it up!

[you with the face]

So that means we can castrate Lib?

Hip-hooray!

[zwaldd]

Originally posted by erislover
if we allow alcohol to be legal, do we have to legalize cocaine to be consistent?

That depends on why we're outlawing cocaine. If it's because it's potentially addictive and deadly, then yes we'd have to legalize cocaine to be consistent. If we say because it's snorted, and we just don't like snorty things, then no, we wouldn't have to legalize it. So if we're outlawing declawing because it's mutiliation, then we'd have to outlaw neutering if we wanted to remain consistent. If we're outlawing declawing because it removes a cats defenses, then no we don't need to outlaw neutering, unless you think neutering removes a cat's defenses, and arguably that may be so (ever seen an intact tom go medieval on a neuter? not pretty).

[Liberal]

Originally posted by you with the face
So that means we can castrate Lib?

Hip-hooray!

I hereby withdraw my congratulations!

[erislover]

[you with the face]

I hereby withdraw my congratulations!

Nope, too late.

[xenophon41]

..._{wonder what Lib's favorite colors are...}

[jayjay]

Originally posted by xenophon41
..._{wonder what Lib's favorite colors are...}

I would guess breEEEEYOOOOOWWWWWNNNN, just offhand.

[Odesio]

Originally posted by istara
MGibson - part of the issue is that it's not just a "nail clipping" - it's the permanent surgical removal of their nail and top tendon (ie their actual digit). It is a maiming practice.

I'm aware of what declawing does to a feline I'm just in the camp that doesn't think it is a problem.

Felines may not have the right to vote, but I think anything that lives under our guardianship deserves to be treated with respect and decency during its life. This goes for food animals too - IANAVegetarian, I eat meat, but I expect the animals to be well treated for the duration of their lives.

I don't think that being declawed diminishes the quality of life for a cat. Did W. Hollywood also make laws against spaying and neutering? Those seem like maiming practices to me as well. Or is it ok to maim the animals in your care when you want to?

Marc

[Liberal]

Originally posted by xenophon41
..._{wonder what Lib's favorite colors are...}

My favorite color is brown.

[SPOOFE]

IMO, a declawed cat, particularly a declawed indoor cat, is more pathetic than a cat on its own.

Why? A cat is more than just its claws, you know. It's not like it's getting a lobotomy.

[erislover]

I know I've been able to sleep at night having justified all the surgery I've done on people like that. I mean, avoid the brain and give them a little shelter... they should be greatful all I did was remove their claws!

[zwaldd]

Originally posted by SPOOFE
Why? A cat is more than just its claws, you know. It's not like it's getting a lobotomy.

I should have said specifically a declawed indoor cat. Declawing an outdoor cat is just plain cruel. I suppose once you make the decision to confine a cat to the house for the rest of its life, declawing it is not going to make much of a difference in its ability to suit your pet needs.

[Azael]

I have three cats (my girlfriend has this thing about rescuing small animals) and I would never think of declawing them. IMO it is cruel and shows a certain degree of callousness as well as selfishness on the part of the owner. Cats use their claws all the time, whether it be for gripping, balance, self-defense or shredding your furniture. It's part of the package.

That said, I am well aware that many people out there do not agree with me. That's fine, it's just my opinion. It's not like we can ask the cats themselves how they feel about it.

I don't think that being declawed diminishes the quality of life for a cat. Did W. Hollywood also make laws against spaying and neutering? Those seem like maiming practices to me as well. Or is it ok to maim the animals in your care when you want to?

Apples and oranges. I suppose getting a vasectomy is a "maiming practice" as well? Not to mention that spaying and neutering help to keep the population from booming out of control. That's the sort of situation that lends itself to far worse animal abuses than anything we are talking about here. Throwing around loaded terms like "maiming" and "mutilation" doesn't really help either side of the debate.

It's simple, would you like it if you had the tips of your fingers cut off? That's enough for me, but not everyone sees it that way.

Just for the record, I hate the way they've gone about this in West Hollywood. The law doesn't do anything, people will still be able to find places to get the procedure done. And if they really feel it's necessary, then that is their perogative. A piece of "feel good - do nothing" legislation IMO. Not like I expected anything more.

[capacitor]

If I am going to declaw a cat, then I'm taking him to Bed-Stuy gym so he can learn how to box.

[ElJeffe]

I'm moderately opposed to declawing, but I disagree with this law. As has been mentioned, all you have to do is drive ten minutes and you're outside of town. The law is useless. However, even if it wasn't useless (say, a nationwide ban), I would still be opposed. Declawing is a pretty minor thing, in the grand scheme of things, for an indoor cat. And there are legitimate reasons for having it done. I'm considering it for one of my cats, for example, because he doesn't clean himself too well, and regardless of how clean the litterbox is, he alwasy manages to step in his own crap, which gets under his claws, and infects them. To me, that's a good enough reason. What if the vet disagrees? What if the vet say, "Tough noogies, just clean his paws everyday with Q-Tips", and I get denied? Is the vet necessarily a better judge of what will make my cat's life better than I am? I think we should leave the decision up to the people. Let the vet try to talk them out of it, but ultimately, it should be the owner's decision. I don't think that declawing is so horribly cruel that it should be outlawed.

I do have some questions, though, of those who know more on the matter. How does having a cat declawed affect the cat's everyday activites? Is it kinda like me having my earlobes removed? Does it affect their balance? (My cat is a total clod anyway - I don't think he could get clumsier.)


Jeff

[you with the face]

How does having a cat declawed affect the cat's everyday activites?

It doesn't, AFAIK. A significant number of owners, however, will report that declawing causes cats to avoid their kitty litter boxes. Probably because the cats find the litter granules to be irritating to their nubs.

[Liberal]

Unbiased cite? Our cat has not problem with the litter box. It's just crushed clay — same stuff they use to clean up oil spills.