Lux, the cat branded as violent should not receive “therapy” unless a very careful analysis has taken place and that there is a real and genuine reason for it. By therapy I presume that the cat’s owner is referring to some sort of medication such as a tranquilliser to medicate the cat and make him more calm and amenable. As far as I am concerned, it is far too early to be considering tranquillising a cat or therapy. The first focus should be other things including the people involved.
Also, in my opinion, there can only be rare instances when a cat needs tranquillising, permanently, because people think the cat is violent. Tranquillising a cat permanently has potentially damaging side-effects both in terms of the cat behaviour (which the cat owner may also dislike) and in terms of physical illness. That is why this sort of medication should be a last resort.
There is ample evidence in this sensationalised story to suggest that either (a) this cat may be suffering from a health-related condition that causes chronic pain and which in turn will cause the cat to be sensitive to physical contact and possibly irritable and/or (b) this cat was provoked. Defensive aggression by a cat when provoked is absolutely normal and this of course should be ticked off as being irrelevant in a careful analysis before therapy options are considered. The first checks should be done on whether the cat is suffering from chronic pain. Let’s not forget however, that the cat was suffering from pain of some description when first his tail was pulled by the baby and secondly when the baby’s father kicked (we are told) the cat in retaliation to the cat scratching the baby (the baby suffered minor scratching we are told).
It could be argued that both the tail-pulling and the kicking are a combination of events, which for that moment made the household a hostile place and a painful place in which to live for this cat.
I sense, having read lots of articles about cats, that there may be a slight tendency to over use tranquillisers on cats when it would be far more sensible for a thoroughgoing analysis of the environment in which the cat lives to take place to assess whether any so-called “bad cat behaviour” is reactionary and caused by the environment. It is unusual for the cause of aggressive behaviour to come from within the cat as if it is a characteristic that was inherited.
Apparently, as Sarah Hartwell has said, some cats are resistant to the kind of domestication that people like and perhaps this cat is one of those cats but the obvious reason for this cat’s so-called violent behaviour is because of the 2 reasons stated above, namely, chronic pain (unlikely, I sense) or provocation and an environment, at least temporarily, that the cat perceives as being hostile which puts the cat on edge even when there is no actual violence directed towards him.
The environment under which a cat lives should be as calm and reassuring as possible because after all, the cat lives in a land of giants i.e. humans and that in itself has to be compensated for because humans can simply, by their presence, intimidate a cat.
Please can we see a bit of common sense, reason and calm injected into this overhyped sensationalised cat story for the sake of this beautiful Himalayan cat?