Just Answer Gives Unjust Answer on Declawing
by Michael
Declawed Serval. The photographer (by neutralSurface - Flickr) described the cat as "mean". Are we surprised?
Further to Babara's post on the pay-for-an-answer website, Just Answer, in which she described a shoddy answer on declawing cats (Money Grubbing Online Vets), I thought I would ask a question or two myself on this subject to see what came back.
After all, Just Answer claim to have hundreds of experts just waiting to answer our questions.
I paid $18 and chose high priority so I got an answer while I waited.
This is how it unfolded:
The Question:
Could you please explain why the vast majority of veterinarians in the United States do not consider it unethical and immoral to declaw cats for non-theraputic reasons (and as a first choice rather than a last resort), and further would you agree that the veterinarians of the United States are giving a mixed and misleading message to the public when on the one hand their role is to promote animal welfare and on the other they are mutilating cats for the convenience of the cats' owners?
{Note: there were a thousand questions I could have asked and it is difficult to know which is the best under these circumstances so I asked two fundamental questions.}
I waited for the answer. The first person to come forward was a nurse (
for people) and she declined to answer it (I was pleased!).
Then a veterinarian named Drew came online (you can see the people coming up in small pictures and the website says that Mr X or Ms Y is reading the question).
Dr. Drew declined to answer the question (surprised?). Then another veterinarian came online, "Critical Care Veterinarian". She rejected the question.
Then Doctor W a "Cat Veterinarian" came online and he or she also rejected it. Would someone answer this question, I thought? I waited with anxiously.
And up turned another veterinarian, Dr. Mary P (they don't give the full names on the page I saw). This is her answer (produced about 30 mins after asking the question):
The Answer:
Hi. I would like to try to help you with this question. I don't doubt that there may be some veterinarians that see this surgery as a part of their "business." But I also believe that there are many veterinarians that see a significant number of clients (with cats) that have complaints about their cats destroying property, such as furniture. When a client has spent several hundred or thousand dollars on furniture, it is understandable that they may get very upset with the situation. And I understand the argument that people should not have cats if they can't handle a little (or a lot of) property damage. But when we, as veterinarians, see that perhaps thousands of cats are relinquished from their homes or euthanized each year for this reason, we see a need for a surgery such as declawing.
I do not believe these veterinarians see it as an immoral or unethical decision to declaw when they believe these cats will live a better and happier life.
I also believe that many of these veterinarians counsel their clients on alternatives before using this as a "first choice" answer. But I also know that if given time to see whether a cat will become destructive in the home or not, a year or two may pass before that decision is made and declawing an older cat can be more painful and make for a more difficult recovery afterward. I believe that is an important consideration to make as well.
In an ideal world, onchyectomy, or declawing, would not be performed and cats would not destroy people's property.
I see this question as a complicated one to answer but I hope that this has given you a some insight that can help you understand the situation a little better.
Dr. Mary
Dr Mary added a post script:
I would also like to add that I have had requests from people who are on medications, blood thinners for medical reasons, that have a cat and have requested declawing to reduce the risk of bleeding when being scratched.
My Reply:
The website allows a reply or it says it does:
Thank you for your reply. I won't keep you. Many vets package delawing with neutering and give out coupons to encourage it. This flies in the face of what you say. By implication you agree that many vets don't counsel on alternatives. Why isn't the AVMA stopping them? And research indicates that declawed cats are more likely to be relinquished than clawed cats. This also contradicts you. What would you say to these comments?
This reply was not answered. I am not sure why. A message came up:
Somebody has posted ahead of you. You can edit your post in the message box or continue to post it.
My Thoughts:
It is the same old denial. A denial of the research that says that declawed cats are relinquished more than clawed cats (Cat Declawing Myths and Truths)
They justify declawing ethically and morally on their version of the "facts" (actually misrepresentations) that declawing saves lives so it is the lesser of two evils.
They also quote human health issues repeatedly. This is also a distortion of the facts (All Creatures Animal Hospital Mislead Us is one example).
Important: We need, I think, to tackle the vets more on their misuse and distortion of the facts. If we can prove that their arguments are false it should undermine their position substantially.
One good thing. By implication, Dr Mary admits that many veterinarians do not counsel the client on alternatives because she says that "many..counsel their clients.." (i.e. many others don't therefore).
From Just Answer Gives Unjust Answer on Declawing to Declawing Cats
