Support NeoGAF

[Harry Potter]

We have two relatively new kittens that we're training to claw only their scratching posts but they lapse occasionally and I might look into some of these for them.

It's a pretty good product. We used them on our second cat when she was a kitten. One of her nails grew funny with it on, like an ingrown nail so we stopped using them. Helped us through those scratch heavy months before she figured out the scratching posts on the cat tree.

 

[blame space]

opiate, it is wrong to deny an animal with its own basic rights, whether it's a pet or it's livestock that you never see.

pet population control recognizes this fact, and exists in addition to it. i'm going to log out before you ban me for posting in your thread for trolling.

 

[davepoobond]

i think its a personal decision. i dont see anything morally wrong with declawing a cat.

making the analogy of "how would you like to have your fingers cut off" makes no sense because cats dont use their claws to type on computers and play piano etc etc etc.

they use their paws to walk around. they use their claws to kill things, and claw things.

if there is actual evidence stating that cats feel pain every time they walk then it would be a valid concern, but cats kill too many things and they dont exactly need to claw things either. they are fed and they are given everything they need if the owner isn't abusive.

if you keep your cat indoors they dont "need" defenses for anything. if they get out and they are primarily an indoor cat, they'll be dead anyway, since they don't learn any of the survival skills they need early on.

they still have their teeth, too.

 

[Slygmous]

All those poor declawed cats out there must be so so itchy

making the analogy of "how would you like to have your fingers cut off" makes no sense because cats dont use their claws to type on computers and play piano etc etc etc.

they use their paws to walk around, kill things, and claw things.

The analogy is about how you actually use your finger tips in day to day life.
Cats use their claws to climb and hold things, like our finger tips.

 

[DiscoJer]

I'm shocked that they still de-claw cats to be honest. In the 25 years of owning cats, not once has a vet ever mentioned it to me. I mean, they're cats, they aren't tigers. They can scratch stuff, but it takes years to do any serious damage to wood.

I mean, it's basically the equivalent of cutting off the tips of your fingers so you don't have any

Anyway, as an alternative, there are plastic caps that go on them.

http://www.softpaws.com/

But it's also something you can simply train your cat not to do. Get a scratching post and get them to use it. If they try to scratch something else, either squirt them with water (though some don't mind that) or just pick them up and move them to the scratching post.

Heck, the cat I have now didn't even need to be taught to scratch the post. And she was actually feral, I guess, I found her under my porch one day, she was living there and eating the moths drawn by the porch light.

 

[triplestation]

U are destroying an animals natural right here just so you can be a yuppy cat owner

Its childish and selfish

 

[Opiate]

there are many post op complications.

Yes, this does seem true, and the point I've seen cited most rationally in this thread. I also noticed that many of these complications can be persistent, like litter box issues.

If cats are homeless, it is because we have not spayed and neutered them and not because they have claws.

Again, invalid. If we deny cats to people who are going to declaw them, then we de facto create another homeless cat. A cat was going to have a home, and now it doesn't. That cat may later be chosen by another home, but that means some other cat is not chosen.

 

[Xpite]

We have two relatively new kittens that we're training to claw only their scratching posts but they lapse occasionally and I might look into some of these for them.

I'm pretty sure I've seen them at petsmart. You can buy colourful ones too so that it's easy to tell if any of them fall off.

 

[Devolution]

I also wondered why -- as a separate point -- it's not considered cruel to let your cats outdoors.

Considering all of the cats we adopted were already outdoors and the males did not take well to being indoor only, it's not a black and white issue.

 

[MrToughPants]

Get your cats declawed it's perfectly fine.

 

[senahorse]

Damaging furniture is certainly a lesser expense, but I don't think it's an unreasonable one, either.

People arne't made of money and there are definitely people out there who would like to take care of cats but couldn't realistically afford to if that cat is tearing stuff up. For example, my parents considered putting my cat down when I was younger because he was peeing on everything and causing significant damage to their home (they ultimately decided not to).

Would they have been bad cat owners if they had put him down? If so, how much money does a "good" cat owner have to be willing to spend on their cat? Many of my parents carpets are worth tens of thousands of dollars (authentic Persian rugs). If my cat was costing my parents hundreds of thousands, would they have been been "Bad" owners then? What's the limit? Should everyone be expected to spend unlimited amounts of money on owning a cat? What about poor families who can afford to keep a low-cost pet but can't afford one which can/will destroy some of their furniture -- should they not be allowed pets?

These are serious questions, by the way, and not rhetorical. I'm not sure where to draw the line here. I'll just reiterate that we already have a cat population problem and whatever you think of people's treatment of their cats, in most cases further cat homelessness is almost certainly worse.

I think in every one of your scenarios YES they would be bad owners. Taking on a pet is in a way similar to adopting/having a child. You don't go into the arrangement without taking these types of things into consideration. If you take on the responsibility to have a pet you should also love it unconditionally. It's hurting your material possessions, well there are things you can do to stop that, you don't just kill it. I am on the side that declawing is cruel, there are many complications that can be had from the surgery in the first place that can cause the cats lifetime problems and distress. If you are worried more about your furniture than the animal, you shouldn't get one in the first place.

 

[NervousXtian]

My previous cat was declawed. My furniture was pristine.

We didn't have a cat for years, since we'd had kids.. now had a cat for like a year and half. I regret not declawing him. We love the cat, but he's destroyed hundreds of dollars of furniture. He's a perfect cat otherwise, but shit he just randomly scratches some things.

I'm with opiate, you can't say it's bad for the cat when we cut their testicles off.

 

[Alchemy]

Can we start removing the tongues from kids that are loud and obnoxious?

 

[encephalon]

Or just teach them it's wrong and keep a water bottle on hand for when they're being naughty.

They'll just do it anyways until you're close enough to punish them.

Note: this isn't meant to be in defense of declawing.

 

[TekGryphon]

Minor training and smart choice of furniture is all that's needed.

If a person is too stupid to do minor training and too materialistic to get a microfiber couch over a leather couch then the answer isn't declawing. The answer is don't get a pet. Or procreate.

 

[Arment]

Get your cats declawed it's perfectly fine.

I'd hate to have a perfectly fine day in your world if 'perfectly fine' fits declawing in any way there.

 

[Twilight Gap]

I also wondered why -- as a separate point -- it's not considered cruel to let your cats outdoors.

My cat used to love going out to hunt, eat grass, and sunbathe. She's played in the snow, chased countless rodents and birds, and enjoyed the summer breeze while climbing trees. But In doing all this, she's also gotten bitten by a raccoon, infested with fleas, sprained her leg, fought with other cats, and fell down a storm drain. Then of course there are all the days she's slept outside and gotten rained on.

Had I kept her indoors all those years, will I be able to say she truly enjoyed life? Now that she's old, she barely goes out for more than 30 seconds. At least she had a chance to experience that.

 

[filler]

i mean, or you could just train them to not ruin you/r shit. and not take away a vital part of their being.

Train them how, by spraying your cat with a water bottle? So I should waterboard and torture my pets instead?

 

[bangai-o]

removing vocal chords from dogs is new to me. So many lazy owner out there. They should just buy a pet plant.

 

[Opiate]

Considering all of the cats we adopted were already outdoors and the males did not take well to being indoor only, it's not a black and white issue.

Yes, I can definitely imagine that, Dev. I just don't understand why it isn't even discussed.

Declawing also strikes me as "not a black and white issue," and sure enough, there is a lot of discussion about it. It's a complex topic that even veterinarians seem to disagree on.

Outdoor cats have average lifespans of three years. Indoor cats live, on average, four times as long with less health complications and (According to the humane society and several other sources I just read), no loss of happiness.

 

[blame space]

spraying a mist on your cat when they do something wrong is not the same as retarding their fingers permanently.

 

[Johnny Cage In The Shower]

I will 100% advise against it,

Not once you mentioned the life of the cat in your OP. you just mentioned that they will stay indoors all the time. But what about the cat? how active will this cat's life be even if he/she will stay indoors all time? how big is the space for this cat? Would the cat have enough room to run at full speed? is their stairwell, she/he can dart off and run up and down? can the cat have "safe" place to hide (where no human can reach her/him) in this house, if she is threatened by visitors, loud noises etc.

Trust me when I say this: Cats will constantly remind themselves their entire life that their claws are missing every time they have the urge to act like...well.. a cat! jumping, pouncing, swatting etc.

Imagine that you are a cat, you can leap vertically to great heights, well technically you should be able to, but guess what...you got no claws to jump and hold on to what you need to hold on to get to places...

I have a luxury to live in a home with a fairly sized yard (backyard). My (front paws declawed) cat is semi-indoors cat, she loves to go and play in the yard, chase rabbits, birds, mice etc. clean her teeth with grass, lie in the shade of thick bushes, like she was some tiger in the jungle...Cats love the outdoors, cat's are not the most docile and domestic pets, they carry the genes of their bigger, wild, feline counterparts, they need space to run, jump, claw, stalk/hunt prey and exercise... Having said this, my cat really never saw the outdoors the first two years of her life, she had to understand that she can't just wonder off, and thankfully so far (almost six years) she doesn't wonder off too far from the house and is always near by.

I mean I kind of get why people with small apartments want cats, but at the end of the day, having a declawed cat cooped up in a tiny apartment with very few windows all the time will not give that cat the happiest or even an ideal life. depends how good of an owner you are, and what breed the cat is, but chances are that cat will be miserable and overweight/obese in no time and have health issues about 4-5 years into her/his life. It's perfectly fine to have cats indoors all the time, but those cats still need space to run, jump, climb stairs, scratching posts etc. and have a happy and active life.

Even if indoor cats live a "longer" life, the question is how healthy and happy those cats live the last 3-4 years of their (indoor) life before dying?

Most old/dying indoors cats I've encountered have been cats that suffer from serious heath issues, severe pain and suffering, immobility, blindness and cost their owners crazy amount of vet bills.

There really is no shame in a cat dying out in the wild 3-4 years earlier than his/her "time" by the hands of some wild animal (Raccoon, dog, weasel, Opossum etc.) because that is their nature, they are indeed wild creatures that hunt or be hunted. ( I had a cat that was killed by an opossum) They probably wouldn't want it any other way: granted they still have their claws to at least defend themselves and fight to their (inevitable) death with that said wild animal.

 

[shadowkat]

I think this is a sticking point for me. I understand you don't mean harm, but I want to make sure we are aware that realistically we already have a cat homelessness problem in most of the first world, and denying cats to people because they plan to declaw them only exacerbates that problem.

My point more was that getting your cat declawed does not necessairly mean your stuff won't get messed up. Like I said, I had a cat that was declawed who would always throw up on the carpet when he was sick.

I would never deny a cat a home but it makes me sad to see someone declaw their cats.

 

[Norua]

If you are declawing your cat, you are indeed, a dick.

You decide to get a cat into your life. This is your decision alone.
You think this gives you the right to do whatever you please with that being's life just because you "can"? No one forced you to get a cat. If they did, you can give it to a shelter or to someone who will care for it better than you do.


How can someone in their right mind put their furnitures above the happiness of another animal and choose amputation as a way to not have a scratch on a fucking sofa?

They get stuffed with meds during the operation to make you think that it's okay because he didn't feel anything, but what the vet may not tell you is that the nerve endings will hurt for months and that it will fuck up his joints for the second part of his life, making him ache every time he has to jump.

I don't get how some countries can allow that, but I'm not surprised the US is one of them.
A lot of vets in the US start to move away from the procedure and refuse to operate, but this is, after all, the land of consumerism and comfort. God forbids there is a scratch on a table or a door.
And if you're afraid of a getting harmed, grow a fucking pair or don't get a cat in the first place. If you need a fucking hug, get a plush. A cat is not a toy.

You were born into materialism and it shows. This is fucking sick and you should be ashamed.

 

[Devolution]

Yes, I can definitely imagine that, Dev. I just don't understand why it isn't even discussed.

Declawing also strikes me as "not a black and white issue," and sure enough, there is a lot of discussion about it. It's a complex topic that even veterinarians seem to disagree on.

Outdoor cats have average lifespans of three years. Indoor cats live, on average, four times as long with less health complications and (According to the humane society and several other sources I just read), no loss of happiness.

There honestly shouldn't be a disagreement. It fucks with their defenses, quality of life, they can get perpetually infected paws from the litter box and unless you are taking the cat to good vet it can seriously mangle the paw worse than you're already doing. The only reason it's okay is people are putting furniture or carpet vanity first.

 

[FyreWulff]

I also wondered why -- as a separate point -- it's not considered cruel to let your cats outdoors.

If we end up with a kitten, we train them to be indoor cats. However, a notable amount of our cats came from the outdoors as strays or were outdoor cats from the previous owner.

It is near impossible to make an outdoor cat stay inside. We're not making them go out, if you try to prevent them from leaving they'll hide nearby and bolt out when you open the door.

That being said, I wouldn't declaw the indoor cat either. It's inhumane and fucks up their ability to do things. They still need their defenses against the other pets, and to properly stretch/use litter/do other things. It's not worth defacing my cat just to save my couch.

 

[Harry Potter]

If you are declawing your cat, you are indeed, a dick.

You decide to get a cat into your life. This is your decision alone.
You think this gives you the right to do whatever you please with that being's life just because you "can"? No one forced you to get a cat. If they did, you can give it to a shelter or to someone who will care for it better than you do.


How can someone in their right mind put their furnitures above the happiness of another animal and choose amputation as a way to not have a scratch a fucking sofa?

They get stuffed with meds during the operation to make you think that it's okay because he didn't feel anything, but what he may not tell you is that the nerve endings will hurt for months and that it will fuck up his joints for the second part of his life, making him ache every time he has to jump.

I don't get how some countries can allow that, but I'm not surprised the US is one of them.
A lot of vets in the US start to move away from the procedure and refuse to operate, but this is, after all, the land of consumerism and comfort. God forbids there is a scratch on a table or a door.
And if you're afraid of a getting harm, grow a fucking pair or don't get a cat in the first place. If you need a fucking hug, get a plush. A cat is not a toy.

You were born into materialism and it shows. This is fucking sick and you should be ashamed.

Great post. I like you.

 

[oneils]

Yes, this does seem true, and the point I've seen cited most rationally in this thread. I also noticed that many of these complications can be persistent, like litter box issues.



Again, invalid. If we deny cats to people who are going to declaw them, then we de facto create another homeless cat. A cat was going to have a home, and now it doesn't. That cat may later be chosen by another home, but that means some other cat is not chosen.

It is valid. Eventually the population is controlled to the point where only people who don't declaw them get them as pets. Spay and neuter your pets, don't multilate them and eventually most pets will have a responsible owner. Obviously we will always have homeless cats, but not simply because they have claws. They are homeless because of irresponsible owners. The whole declawing thing is a red herring.

 

[ThreePiMatt]

Why not just get some Kitten Mittons?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fP4emqw7O4

 

[Opiate]

My cat used to love going out to hunt, eat grass, and sunbathe. She's played in the snow, chased countless rodents and birds, and enjoyed the summer breeze while climbing trees. But In doing all this, she's also gotten bitten by a raccoon, infested with fleas, sprained her leg, fought with other cats, and fell down a storm drain. Then of course there are all the days she's slept outside and gotten rained on.

Had I kept her indoors all those years, will I be able to say she truly enjoyed life? Now that she's old, she barely goes out for more than 30 seconds. At least she had a chance to experience that.

I have looked around and haven't seen any evidence to suggest that indoor cats are inherently less happy than those who live outdoors.

Also, as noted earlier, I'm surprised no one mentions how destructive cats are to the environment. They literally kill more animals in the US than any other species (well, sans humans), often devastating bird populations. Again, I'm not suggesting that this means you should never let any cat outdoors, but I do think it should be part of the discussion. I don't understand why many chalk billions of bird deaths a year up to "the circle of life" but take objection to the notion of ever declawing cats, unless we're engaging in an appeal to nature.

 

[kurahador]

Again, invalid. If we deny cats to people who are going to declaw them, then we de facto create another homeless cat. A cat was going to have a home, and now it doesn't. That cat may later be chosen by another home, but that means some other cat is not chosen.

This isn't about preventing ppl who will declaw cats from owning one, but how declawing is essentially the easy way out of taking care of your cats better.

 

[triplestation]

Johnnycage you are a good person

 

[Xpite]

Train them how, by spraying your cat with a water bottle? So I should waterboard and torture my pets instead?

We give our cat 'time outs' by putting him in the bathroom for a bit if ever he does something bad. He has food, water, and litter box in there, so I don't see how that is any more torture than parents sending their kids to their room when they're bad.

 

[umop_3pisdn]

Damaging furniture is certainly a lesser expense, but I don't think it's an unreasonable one, either.

People arne't made of money and there are definitely people out there who would like to take care of cats but couldn't realistically afford to if that cat is tearing stuff up. For example, my parents considered putting my cat down when I was younger because he was peeing on everything and causing significant damage to their home (they ultimately decided not to).

A lot of people make the decision pretty frivolously, I think the suggestion against declawing cats is more about responsible or conscientious animal stewardship where you respect their integrity as living beings or whatever. Ideals are valuable to have and one would expect in cohabiting with a living being that there would be some form of compromise, having people enter into the arrangement with that kind of understanding bodes better than seeing it as a form of ownership. Avoiding something like declawing is an obvious extension of that, but no it's not obligatory.

If so, how much money does a "good" cat owner have to be willing to spend on their cat? Many of my parents carpets are worth tens of thousands of dollars (authentic Persian rugs). If my cat was costing my parents hundreds of thousands, would they have been been "Bad" owners then? What's the limit? Should everyone be expected to spend unlimited amounts of money on owning a cat? What about poor families who can afford to keep a low-cost pet but can't afford one which can/will destroy some of their furniture -- should they not be allowed pets?

I don't get spending tens of thousands of dollars on authentic Persian rugs, but I wouldn't keep a pet either, so I have trouble placing myself on either side. I can refer again to the ideal circumstances as a form of reference, generally in moral situations a person's motive is most important because even doing something good for the wrong reasons is problematic. So if you're keeping a pet primarily to give it a home, this is less likely to be a concern; if you're adopting it as a fancy it's more likely you will run into problems. It doesn't mean a person shouldn't do it, most people keep pets as a fancy, but it's pretty valid to examine the degree of morality a person can claim to hold by the way of their motives.

These are serious questions, by the way, and not rhetorical. I'm not sure where to draw the line here. I'll just reiterate that we already have a cat population problem and whatever you think of people's treatment of their cats, in most cases further cat homelessness is almost certainly worse.

Fair enough, I don't think any moral discussion is devoid of ambiguity, normative claims are just like a form of ethical shorthand, they're valuable guidelines and there can be varying levels of guidelines.

 

[davepoobond]

We give our cat 'time outs' by putting him in the bathroom for a bit if ever he does something bad. He has food, water, and litter box in there, so I don't see how that is any more torture than parents sending their kids to their room when they're bad.

talk about taking the easy way out to taking care of your pets.

you think you can just lock them in a bathroom and keep them from their right of running around and clawing shit and killing birds?

All those poor declawed cats out there must be so so itchy


The analogy is about how you actually use your finger tips in day to day life.
Cats use their claws to climb and hold things, like our finger tips.

and why is it a necessary thing for an indoor cat to be able to do those things?

 

[senahorse]

Also regarding indoor cats, you can still provide safe ways for them to go outside. Our cats can currently go onto our large front balcony as we have put netting around so they can do so safely. Once we do some work downstairs we will be building a cat run with an external enclosure so they can still go into the yard, albeit, without most of the environmental risks to themselves and native wildlife. They are bengal cats, hence, very active, but they are happy cats and get plenty of indoor fun.

edit: by having the netting on the balcony (and catdoor built into a sliding door) we can also leave the litter trays out there

 

[Cipherr]

Had that one all queued up, huh?

Says the guy who quickly "FIRST" posted this thread with this gem?

If you declaw a cat, you're a dick. Plain and simple.

Hah.

 

[bangai-o]

Outdoor cats have average lifespans of three years. Indoor cats live, on average, four times as long with less health complications and (According to the humane society and several other sources I just read), no loss of happiness.

i think you might have your statistics mixed up or not associating them properly. The average life span of an outdoor STRAY cat is 3 to 4 years. Since we are speaking about cat ownership, that makes it not a stray cat. The life span of an outdoor-indoor cat average is only shaved by 2 to 3 years when compared to an exclusively indoor cat.

i looked at internet for this data, but it just seemed too logical, because many people have outdoor-indoor cats that live longer then 3 years.
http://www.vetinfo.com/indoor-outdoor-cat-life-expectancy.html

 

[umop_3pisdn]

double post, whoops

 

[filler]

We give our cat 'time outs' by putting him in the bathroom for a bit if ever he does something bad. He has food, water, and litter box in there, so I don't see how that is any more torture than parents sending their kids to their room when they're bad.

Would you lock your kids in the bathroom too? That sounds terrifying.

 

[TomServo]

Reading this makes me sad that I made the mistake of declawing my cat. I love the guy to death - I jokingly call him my familiar sometimes. He gets the best vet care now, my wife and all of my friends adore him, and I *did* rescue him from the parking lot of my college home in Atlanta, but damn I still feel terrible about it.

 

[siddx]

Norua and Johnny Cage went over why very well so I won't just repeat what they said, but I find the act incredibly cruel and selfish.
I've owned cats all my life and it never even was talked about because the idea was just so insanely brutal. Like cutting off someone's fingers to stop them from getting stains on everything.

 

[Opiate]

There honestly shouldn't be a disagreement. It fucks with their defenses, quality of life, they can get perpetually infected paws from the litter box and unless you are taking the cat to good vet it can seriously mangle the paw worse than you're already doing. The only reason it's okay is people are putting furniture or carpet vanity first.

There obviously is disagreement, even among experts. I cited not only veterinarians, but also well known animal activist groups like the animal humane society.

Of course, some disagree with that, too. But I don't think it's obvious there should be no disagreement. What you refer to as "vanity" others would refer to as "cost." One of the primary benefits of a cat over a dog or other pet is low cost of ownership, and clawed cats can sometimes significantly reduce that benefit. For some people, that isn't just a benefit of vanity, but one of necessity. Further, even if it is not technically necessary, I don't think people should be considered cruel because they don't want to pay lots of money to keep their pet.

For example, if people are told they need to pay 1,000 to perform a procedure on their dog, they often choose instead to put it down. That is completely reasonable and acceptable, because we often have to choose to kill our pets rather than pay for them.

 

[Harry Potter]

Would you lock your kids in the bathroom too? That sounds terrifying.

Wait, are you the person who compared spraying a cat with a water bottle to water boarding? Ok, never mind.

 

[Mumei]

This isn't even about "indoor / outdoor" to me. Even if you do have an indoor cat, what is the rationale? You're cutting off the first joint of their 'fingers' because, what, you can afford to purchase some scratch posts or a crate when you aren't around to supervise? I don't see how you can't afford these things if you were able to afford the cat, the litter, and feeding it.

I've never understood the need for unnecessary mutilative surgeries of pets, from declawing cats to docking puppy tails (Imagine a basket full of puppies. Now imagine a basket full of puppies with their tails cut off without anesthetia and another basket full of recently detached puppy tails. Congratulations! You saw what I saw on several occasions working at a vet clinic)

 

[Necromanti]

Honestly, the more I try to research the matter, the less firm of a conclusive I reach as to whether I think it should be a viable option or not. True, there have been documented post-op complications, a slightly higher chance of behavioral problems, litter-box usage issues, long-term complications, potential lameness, and so forth, but the reported cases are seldom the majority of those that had the procedure done. However, the numbers do seem slightly higher than I would be comfortable.

Considering the nature of the operation and the fact that it has a permanent end result, I think it should be a last resort, especially when there are perfectly viable alternatives. Like with the issue of having a cat stay indoors exclusively or allow them to be indoor/outdoor cats, I feel like the issue also becomes a matter of what is convenient for the owner, versus the quality of life for the pet. It may be the most convenient, but at the point, the relationship and nature of why one would have a pet to begin with becomes less of one between companions, and more of one between owner and property.

And naturally, a pet that is never exposed to any outside sources for injury or disease will live longer lives. But at the same time, they also are more subject to higher incidences of psychological and behavioral issues, boredom, and so forth. I'd imagine most intelligent animals may be more likely to suffer the consequences of what could be considered prison-like enclosures. It may be offset by the fact that they may not have known anything else and have grown to fear the outside world, but then it again boils down to what is humane.

So honestly, the acts of both declawing a cat and keeping them exclusively indoors with no leeway in that regard are things that I would personally avoid with the exception of extenuating circumstances.

 

[Opiate]

A lot of people make the decision pretty frivolously, I think the suggestion against declawing cats is more about responsible or conscientious animal stewardship where you respect their integrity as living beings or whatever. Ideals are valuable to have and one would expect in cohabiting with a living being that there would be some form of compromise, having people enter into the arrangement with that kind of understanding bodes better than seeing it as a form of ownership. Avoiding something like declawing is an obvious extension of that, but no it's not obligatory.

Yes, this I can agree with, especially with the added information in this thread. I suspect a lot of people who do not need to get their cats declawed do so anyway.

I don't get spending tens of thousands of dollars on authentic Persian rugs, but I wouldn't keep a pet either, so I have trouble placing myself on either side. I can refer again to the ideal circumstances as a form of reference, generally in moral situations a person's motive is most important because even doing something good for the wrong reasons is problematic. So if you're keeping a pet primarily to give it a home, this is less likely to be a concern; if you're adopting it as a fancy it's more likely you will run into problems. It doesn't mean a person shouldn't do it, most people keep pets as a fancy, but it's pretty valid to examine the degree of morality a person can claim to hold by the way of their motives.

Yes, I definitely agree that the benefits and downsides are subject to situation and circumstance. And I also agree that probably more people err on the side of declawing than probably should, based on the evidence provided in this thread.

 

[Devolution]

There obviously is disagreement, even among experts. I cited not only veterinarians, but also well known animal activist groups like the animal humane society.

Of course, some disagree with that, too. But I don't think it's obvious there should be no disagreement. What you refer to as "vanity" others would refer to as "cost." One of the primary benefits of a cat over a dog or other pet is low cost of ownership, and clawed cats can sometimes significantly reduce that benefit. For some people, that isn't just a benefit of vanity, but one of necessity. Further, even if it is not technically necessary, I don't think people should be considered cruel because they don't want to pay lots of money to keep their pet.

For example, if people are told they need to pay 1,000 to perform a procedure on their dog, they often choose instead to put it down. That is completely reasonable and acceptable, because we often have to choose to kill our pets rather than pay for them.

The disagreement is because there are so many cats without homes, let's do this so they can get in some homes. They should not however be arguing about how horrible it is to do to the cat, because it's cruel. It is indeed vanity not just cost. If you take on some pets you have to accept some consequences, financial consequences are a part of life with pets.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

How is cutting a cats balls off acceptable but declawing them "childish"?

 

[MrToughPants]

I'd hate to have a perfectly fine day in your world if 'perfectly fine' fits declawing in any way there.

Some cats will have sensitive paws for a day or two and then they're back to normal.

Our 3 cats are clawed since they go outside.

Our family cats, well over 50 in the past 30 years, have all been declawed (front only) and they lived horrible, torturous lives into their late teens and early twenties. Just a life of agony.

Not like this outdoor cat who sits at our driveway entrance that is missing an eye, piece of their tail cut or the dozens of cats flattened in the country roads every time I drive to work.

Oh shit how are you gonna climb on shit without your front claws!!!

Oh the agony I'm sorry for getting you declawed

No claws, loving life.

Romeo led a miserable life, 16 years.

Like I said miserable poor cats just mistreated.