Poster by Ruth
In the imaginary court room scene above, poor Mrs Trustedher has no hope of winning her case against Dr Claw. She was mislead by her trusted vet, just like many people are in real life.
Mrs Trustedher doesn’t want compensation, all she wants is for Dr Claw and other declaw vets to stick to their oath to cause suffering to no animal, therefore to stop declawing.
But sadly it is still legal in the USA and Canada to declaw cats and the AVMA turn a blind eye to the vets who do it routinely for convenience sake, even though it is supposed to be only performed as a last resort.
This is a quote from declawing.com:
‘Many vets and clinic staff deliberately misinform and mislead clients into believing that declawing removes only the claws in the hopes that clients are left with the impression that the procedure is a “minor” surgery comparable to spay/neuter procedures and certainly doesn’t involve amputation (partial or complete) of the terminal-toe bone, ligaments and tendons. Some vets rationalize the above description by saying that since the claw and the third phalanx (terminal toe bone) are so firmly connected, they simply use the expression “the claw” to make it simpler for clients to “understand”. Other vets are somewhat more honest and state that if they used the word “amputation”, most clients would not have the surgery performed!’
How very true! The number of times we read something like this:
‘I feel so guilty now, I didn’t know it was more than removing the claws’ – I regret declawing my cat
Why do some vets deliberately withhold the truth from their clients? They have them sign a consent form for surgery and I’m sure that form will absolve the clinic from any blame if the operation goes wrong, if the cat dies or if there are any complications from the declawing. The form may also give a brief description of what the surgery actually entails, but how many people just glance at it without reading it all? Because they trust their vet, most of them I would say. Especially if the clinic staff had recommended declawing when the kitten was booked in for neutering, saying: ‘It’s better to do it as a kitten under the one anesthetic, they bounce back quickly’ and/or ‘ The cat will be more comfortable in the house without claws’ and/or ‘The kids, the dog and the furniture will be safe from being scratched’
I expect some of those brainwashed clients would feel guilty if they refused the offer of that ‘marvellous’ operation.
But later when they learn just what had been done to their pet, many feel even more guilty.
Do those vets who push declawing think when in the future the cat returns with mental or physical problems the client who never did find out their cat had suffered ten amputations, won’t realise that the declawing caused those problems? I’d think that is very likely.
What a lot of money is to be made from all those consultations and medication!
Or it was so before the days of the Internet, but now the tide is turning and millions of people can read the truth by looking up declawing. They can see videos and pictures of cats having painful, crippling, unnecessary surgery and they can see pictures of cats suffering afterwards. They can read about alternatives, such as trimming claws, scratching post training, soft paws, etc.
Some still decide to go ahead, they think the amputation of the cats toe ends is a fair price to pay for having a home. Sadly they are not the cat lovers they call themselves.
Then there are those in denial, calling the people who are trying to educate others and stop this abuse ‘insane, animal rights activists’ and other much less polite terms. Only a ban will stop those people. And what about those who have no access to all the valuable information on-line?
This is why the truth about declawing must be available to everyone, by education in schools, by posters in public places, by articles in newspapers and magazines etc, until it is banned, just like it is in other civilised countries as the pre-meditated animal abuse it really is.