Was it right for a clinic to do this?

[168135]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I'm pretty upset over something that just happened, and I was wondering what you guys would do in this situation.

In October, a stray cat showed up at my door. I couldn't keep her and worked my butt off to get her to a rescue where she wouldn't have been put to sleep. The rescue took her to a vet where she was estimated to be between 10 and 12 years old, FIV- and they weren't sure if she was spayed or not. She then got very sick. She was already very thin, but she got thinner. She had a fever, her abdomen was full of fluid, and she had to be fitted with a feeding tube. They thought she might have had FIP and after the fact, they were thinking H1N1. She almost died. She spent time in that shelter and a rescue while she was sick, and both rescues had a couple cats or kittens suddenly become ill and pass away.

Anyway, she got better! She was soon adopted out to a lady in my hometown. In the adoption contract, the cat was not to be declawed. The new owner took her to a vet clinic for a spay in December. She was full of mammory gland tumours, which was keeping her in a constant heat. She now needs to be checked out regularly to make sure the tumors won't return.

You know what she did last month?

She got her declawed... due to the number of problems she had in the last few months and her age, I don't think this is right! The rescue was very angry. I used to volunteer at this clinic, which is already pretty sketchy, but isn't it just a bad idea to agree to a declaw in this situation?

Just want some opinions.

 

[katryn]

I think for me it would totally depend on if the cat was in good health at the time of the declaw. Did the spay alleviate the mammary tumors? Did getting adopted to a full time home with good food and shelter bring her up to an acceptable weight and health score?

If someone brought in a 12 year old cat who was in good health despite previous health issues, I would probably cover my butt with pre-anesthetic screenings, but if it seemed like the owner was reasonable educated about the procedure (or was willing to be educated about it)....I'd do it. That's a lot of ifs though, and I don't know which of those ifs are true for this situation.

I know it's controversial to declaw adult cats of any age, but I would rather have the opportunity to educate a client and do the procedure properly than let the other clinic down the road do it with no questions asked.

Edit: I'm guessing at the true heart of your question that this cat was still recovering, or not exactly in top condition....in which case, I think the vet who did it is....well, shady is putting it politely.

 

[Azarael]

Wow, that cat sounds like it's been through a pretty rough time.

Yeah, I'd agree with you that it wasn't really honorable of the owner to do that. Though, in general, I think that owners should have the option to make the decision to declaw their cats, I think that since this lady signed the adoption contract and then broke it (only 3 months later), it really wasn't right for her to do what she did.

The exception would be if there were some sort of extenuating circumstances which would require declawing... but from what it sounds like from your post, there weren't any. And really, are there ever any real merited reasons for getting a cat declawed? (Personally, I don't think there are.)

 

[VeganSoprano]

I think that if the hospital had a copy of the contract and still did the declaw, that's not okay.

However, the person who is adopting out the cat also has the responsibility to make sure it's the kind of home they want. If you feel strongly about declawing, then make sure your adopters end the process feeling the same way you do.

It's also not okay to adopt out sexually intact animals. This needs to be done *before* adoption.

From what very little information I have, it looks like neither the hospital nor the rescue are blameless. The new owner did adopt a senior cat with known health issues and while I hate declawing, this may be a situation where the potential good for the cat outweighed the negatives of a declaw.

 

[168135]

I see your points 🙂

It's also not okay to adopt out sexually intact animals. This needs to be done *before* adoption.

The SPCA here only has the funding to fix a handful of animals in a certain period of time. The ones that aren't fixed, they have a list of vets that agree to do it at a discounted price. Also this rescue was planning on getting her fixed when the funding became available, but before that happened, the woman came asking if there was a orange and white cat that she could adopt. The woman has two or three cats and a dog, all fixed, but the rescue didn't think about asking if they were declawed. They'll be asking that question now when they interview potential adopters.

 

[Bill59]

Contract law binds only the parties that sign it -- in this case the client and the rescue organization. Not the DVM. The veterinarian's responsibility is only to the client and patient. So the contract is irrelevant when it comes to the medical care of the patient. If there are any legal repercussions regarding violating the contract, it's between the client and the rescue group.

Whether or not the cat's medical condition was a contraindication for an elective surgery such as a declaw is a medical judgment. Although we can speculate on that, the only person qualified to make that judgement is the attending veterinarian who has actually examined the patient and talked with the client.

 

[Tobysgirl81]

Contract law binds only the parties that sign it -- in this case the client and the rescue organization. Not the DVM. The veterinarian's responsibility is only to the client and patient. So the contract is irrelevant when it comes to the medical care of the patient. If there are any legal repercussions regarding violating the contract, it's between the client and the rescue group.

Whether or not the cat's medical condition was a contraindication for an elective surgery such as a declaw is a medical judgment. Although we can speculate on that, the only person qualified to make that judgement is the attending veterinarian who has actually examined the patient and talked with the client.

THIS ^

Furthermore, it is up to the owner of the cat to disclose any legal information - such as whether or not it can be declawed - to the veterinarian. If the vet was not informed of that stipulation in the contract it's hard to hold them liable for not enforcing it. Especially since the vet may ask for previous health history, but not necessarily the adoption contract.

Now, having said that...if I had a 12 year old cat come into my clinic with the owner wanting it declawed would I do it? Likely not. But then again, I don't believe in declawing. I know that there are ethical reasons why you might want to, but I've seen more "convenience" reasons than actual NEED reasons during my time in a variety of clinics. I have my own little soapbox about that, but I'll just leave it at this for now.

They're probably currently just checking to make sure there is no recurrence of mammary growths. Its not unusual for an older intact female to develop mammary tumors - good reason for people to spay/neuter early in life! So long as she has no metastasis to the lungs or other complications that may preclude her from surgery, there's no reason she COULDN'T have another procedure done. While it might not be what you or I would do, so long as she was healthy enough to undergo the procedure there's no reason the vet had to wait. Especially if he was uninformed.

 

[purplesaurus]

I don't know how it works legally, but that's a really crappy thing to do. We have a cat rescue in town with a similar contract. Fortunately, it seems like the vet clinics are aware of and supportive of the policy (in my experience, as long at the owner discloses that the cat was adopted from this rescue). If a client brings in a rescue cat and asks for a declaw, they will generally call the rescue first, so the rescue can talk with the owner about it (and about their contract, but I am not sure what sort of legal actions are available to the rescue).

Other people have brought up some good points, so I'm about to do a lot of quoting! 😀

It's also not okay to adopt out sexually intact animals. This needs to be done *before* adoption.

From what very little information I have, it looks like neither the hospital nor the rescue are blameless. The new owner did adopt a senior cat with known health issues and while I hate declawing, this may be a situation where the potential good for the cat outweighed the negatives of a declaw.

VeganSoprano brings up some good points here. They definitely need to fully vet their potential adopters.

The woman has two or three cats and a dog, all fixed, but the rescue didn't think about asking if they were declawed. They'll be asking that question now when they interview potential adopters.

Seems like a good thing to know!

Now, having said that...if I had a 12 year old cat come into my clinic with the owner wanting it declawed would I do it? Likely not. But then again, I don't believe in declawing. I know that there are ethical reasons why you might want to, but I've seen more "convenience" reasons than actual NEED reasons during my time in a variety of clinics. I have my own little soapbox about that, but I'll just leave it at this for now.

I agree with you here. It seems like (and I realize this is anecdotal...) a lot people who I have seen get their cats declawed do it for the furniture, but have never actually tried training to stop them from scratching it. Really as just a convenience to avoid some hassle, but not as an actual last resort. I know you can train cats not to scratch furniture! I've seen it!

As for declawing an older animal... I don't think it should be done, and that's partly based on talking to vets about it. A kitten can learn to adjust more easily to a life without claws than an older cat who is set in her ways. And doing it to a 12-year-old cat just seems mean! A kitten is also very small (generally speaking), and the weight put on each paw during recovery of a kitten would likely be less than that of an older cat (so I'm told). I have heard that, because of this, it is easier for a kitten to recover, and a bit less painful.

Of course, I also realize I'm fairly biased and think no one should declaw. I think that's part of the "cat package," and that someone who who doesn't accept that maybe isn't the best owner for a cat. (I also realize I have old, second-hand furniture, and I don't care if it is scratched to bits, but even with new furniture... a living being would never be less valuable to me than an inanimate piece of furniture, but I don't really care so much about the "look" of my house as I do about the happiness of everyone in it.) However, I'm not at this point ready to say that there are no circumstances in which a cat should be declawed.

I'll get off my soapbox right now, too. 😉

 

[david594]

I don't know how it works legally, but that's a really crappy thing to do. We have a cat rescue in town with a similar contract. Fortunately, it seems like the vet clinics are aware of and supportive of the policy (in my experience, as long at the owner discloses that the cat was adopted from this rescue). If a client brings in a rescue cat and asks for a declaw, they will generally call the rescue first, so the rescue can talk with the owner about it (and about their contract, but I am not sure what sort of legal actions are available to the rescue).

Thats just asking for trouble. The bigger question is what legal actions are available to the owner after you broke confidentiality with the client and called the rescue to tell them the client wanted to declaw their cat.

(Hint, your screwed. This would be a very valid board complaint)

 

[Tobysgirl81]

Of course, I also realize I'm fairly biased and think no one should declaw. I think that's part of the "cat package," and that someone who who doesn't accept that maybe isn't the best owner for a cat. (I also realize I have old, second-hand furniture, and I don't care if it is scratched to bits, but even with new furniture... a living being would never be less valuable to me than an inanimate piece of furniture, but I don't really care so much about the "look" of my house as I do about the happiness of everyone in it.) However, I'm not at this point ready to say that there are no circumstances in which a cat should be declawed.

I'll get off my soapbox right now, too. 😉

That's pretty much how I see it too 🙂

 

[168135]

In this case, the only thing the rescue can do is demand the cat back. The damage is already done though, so they don't see the point. Now they're working at making sure this doesn't happen again.

I feel crappy about the whole thing. The woman emailed me shortly before getting the cat, asking me about her. I didn't think much off the email at the time. She was asking me if she scratched a lot and was worried about having to have her declawed. I talked about my cat and her scratching problems, and listed off the alternatives to declawing. She said she would look into the alternatives *headdesk*. I didn't know the rescue had a policy about declaw, and didn't even think of mentioning it to the rescue, because she acted as though she wasn't aware of the other options out there and I genuinely thought she was going to look into them 😛

 

[purplesaurus]

Thats just asking for trouble. The bigger question is what legal actions are available to the owner after you broke confidentiality with the client and called the rescue to tell them the client wanted to declaw their cat.

(Hint, your screwed. This would be a very valid board complaint)

I never really thought about it that way. Maybe I am misremembering and the vets just strongly urged the clients to call the rescues themselves to discuss it. It would seem out of character for them to break confidentiality. Hmmm...

 

[PrimalMU]

What, so what's the actual question? Was it appropriate for the clinic to declaw despite the contract the owner signed? Or was the a question of an elective surgery being performed knowing the cat's medical issues?

If it's the former, it's really none of the clinic's business. It's not their job to police the rules of the rescue organization, not to mention the legal aspects of breaking doctor/client confidentiality already mentioned. If it's the latter, then it really is a judgment call for the veterinarian.

 

[168135]

It's the latter... declawing is already pretty controversial... but to declaw an elderly cat that has had a large number of problems in the recent past?

 

[Tobysgirl81]

It's the latter... declawing is already pretty controversial... but to declaw an elderly cat that has had a large number of problems in the recent past?

That's an ethical question that only the vet can decide. And really, if a patient is healthy at the time the surgery is going to take place there's nothing saying they SHOULDN'T be anesthetized. Assuming the cat has fully recovered from previous illness and is now under regular watch for further tumor regrowth, it is a HEALTHY candidate for surgery. Would I do it? No. But if there's nothing precluding it from surgery - poor bloodwork, metastasis to the lungs, current illness - then there's no reason the surgery CAN'T be performed.

 

[sumstorm]

I go round and round on this one. I am not a fan of declawing. however, now owning a cat (9 yo) that has done damage past the 5 figure mark and scratched my immunocompromised husband when he tries to trim her nails and chews off nail caps and has ample scratching oppurtunities and has a trainer for her other owner (me) who has followed all the detailed, recommended protcols for re-training the behavior (which ONLY started after our last move when she was 7 yo) I have to say I am on the fence when folks have tried everything else. There comes a point where an owner really has to ask 'is this really ok? do I really have to accept MAJOR household damage and health risks to family members to be a loving and good owner to this pet?'

So, what are my alternatives? Deal with it, which includes damaging hardwood floors, drywall, furniture, and people. Have her nails trimmed evey couple weeks by the vet clinic, which is extremly stressful to her (hypersalivation, post visit anorexia, stress panting, etc.) Declaw which will be a surgical procedure, but can be done and over once. There are certainly risks, including litter box issues, infection, general anesthesia risks. We are at a point where vet behaviorists believe declawing is the best option (I currently live seperate from my husband due to school, and we are not moving this cat again due to her stress reaction to the last move.)

I am on the fence, torn. I still haven't decided, other than to investigate what the options are for declaw and knowing that if I go through with it, it will be with an amazingly compassionate vet and be done via laser with several days of recovery at the clinic rather than at home. I have been struggling with this decision for over 2 years. It isn't just about nice furniture vs claws, it is about my husband's health, the value of our actual home, the cost of expensive repairs, and the frustration that boils up when you have tried and failed at everything. For those opposed to declawing, give me a viable alternative. I have asked this many times, and some folks have been very generous with their suggestions, which are very good, but have failed for this cat. I encourage everyone who objects to really dig into the issue for the owners. If you aren't able to help with the issue in other ways, it can result in a dead or outcast animal...and when you universally say 'it should never be done' you are rejecting dedicated owners as well as those who are approaching this from a convenience angle..and losing oppurtunities to educate and understand both.

Off my soap box, and I am VERY serious about suggestions.

As for this question; contract was between the rescue and the owner. DVM's relationship is with the patient and the client. I will not discuss a client/patient with a rescue when it has an owner.

As for the surgery, we can't really judge.

 

[Tobysgirl81]

My reasons for being anti-declaw are very personal ones. In your case with an immune-compromised husband I would be more willing to make an exception. However, I've seen things go poorly after declaw surgery and the results of them. I've seen people who barely give their cats a chance, or give them NO chance at all and immediately have them declawed.

My "favorite" was a couple who had a 4 year old cat that they had owned for her whole life. The couple was thinking about having children (note, did not have children yet) and were worried the cat might scratch their children. So they decided they should declaw her to prevent their future children from maybe getting scratched by the cat. This situation COMPLETELY burned me up because a) they never gave the cat a chance to prove herself with children and b) they aren't allowing the cat the opportunity to defend herself. I'm not saying she SHOULD scratch kids, but ya know...if they're yanking on her tail or hurting her maybe a scratch or two would teach them NOT to do that.

Like I said, its the above situations that happen more often than the REAL ethical dilemmas. And seeing what the cats go through...It just really bothers me. We talk about animal welfare, but then are willing to proceed with ear cropping, tail docking, declawing and other cosmetic surgeries just to please owners. Its rather hypocritical.

 

[DVMDream]

Like I said, its the above situations that happen more often than the REAL ethical dilemmas. And seeing what the cats go through...It just really bothers me. We talk about animal welfare, but then are willing to proceed with ear cropping, tail docking, declawing and other cosmetic surgeries just to please owners. Its rather hypocritical.

I would rather do the ear cropping, tail docking, declawing or other cosmetic surgery safely, under anesthesia, and with adequate pain control than to see a botched attempt by an owner that could potentially severely harm or kill the animal. And yes people do attempt these procedures on their own at home. I mean look at what people did when abortion was illegal.

As far as the OP: I think this is more of an owner problem than a clinic problem. I agree that the adoption agreement was only between the owner and shelter and that the vet was not bound to the agreement. And for the vet to mention anything to the shelter goes against the client/patient/doctor relationship. As far as the getting the 12 year old cat declawed I would have to really talk with the owner and figure out why she is wanting the cat declawed. I would probably give her some suggestions for avoiding declaw but if in the end NOTHING worked I would probably be willing to declaw the cat. Think about it: 12 year old cat with history of major medical problems actually finds a decent owner willing to deal with these issues; what are the chances this cat will get lucky a second time and find another good home? Also, shelters adopting out animals that have not been fixed is not a good thing; even if they are given the procedure for a discount. I have never seen that happen; even shelters that do not have a vet on staff to do S/N send adopted pets to clinics to have the procedure done at NO cost to the new owner. I think many things were done improperly here. The owner should not have gone against the contract, but the shelter should not be requiring people to pay for S/N, even if for a discount. How are you supposed to be SURE that they get these pets S/N? People could easily take these animals and breed them, adding to the pet overpopulation.

 

[ColoradoDVM]

So, what are my alternatives? I am VERY serious about suggestions.
I am also torn on the declaw issue. I am fortunate that all of my cats allow us to trim their toenails, but I did have a cat do serious damage to another one of my cat's eyes....2 surgeries and partial blindness. I feel like my cat's keeping their claws is part of the package, but ? if other pets/ people should pay the price instead.

 

[lazyjayn]

I'd actually be interested in what the rescue's contract actually says. Some of them word it in a way that the animal is in the care of the adopter, but don't actually transfer ownership.

But yeah, the adopters would have broken the contract anyway, most likely, and the rescue could easily reclaim the cat. Don't know how many would bother with it tho- the legal/ possible court costs can eat a lot of funding.

still- they adopted out an unaltered animal? Did they do it before the cat was totally healthy too? How odd.

 

[Nexx]

You saved a cats life. It could be dead, not have a home now, or it could be declawed and living with a nice old lady. Which choice would you prefer?

I wonder about the actual legality of some adoption 'contracts' -- that is reclaiming animals if the contract is broken, somehow I doubt they are very enforceable except in cases of neglect, etc. Prescreening of applicants is more likely a reasonable area where in this case there was a breakdown of communication.

Also, there is info left out.. did they do the spay/declaw at the same time? While yes there may be more healing time and surgical 'open' time, you are only putting the cat under GA once versus multiple times. Also a lot depends on the skill of the surgeon, technique used, and the after care.

Yeah the cat is old, yeah it had medical problems... was the clinic wrong to do the procedure, I don't think that is necessarily the case but I'm also not the one holding the scalpel yet either.

The most important thing in my head is that the cat is alive, has a home, and is presumably happy and healthy now.

 

[sunshinevet]

Think about it: 12 year old cat with history of major medical problems actually finds a decent owner willing to deal with these issues; what are the chances this cat will get lucky a second time and find another good home?

You saved a cats life. It could be dead, not have a home now, or it could be declawed and living with a nice old lady. Which choice would you prefer?

Yeah the cat is old, yeah it had medical problems... was the clinic wrong to do the procedure, I don't think that is necessarily the case but I'm also not the one holding the scalpel yet either.

The most important thing in my head is that the cat is alive, has a home, and is presumably happy and healthy now.

These points absolutely.

The fact that a rescue even pursued treating and adopting out such a sick cat seems somewhat financially irresponsible on the part of the rescue... just because I look at shelter med with a utilitarian point of view. To find someone willing to adopt a 12 year old cat is hard enough - let alone one who is willing to actually get surgery for tumours etc. Lets weigh the bit of bad with the heaps of very, very good...

And as others have said, whether or not the animal should undergo the procedure is a judgement call of the vet. Sure, he's had problems in the past, but if he's otherwise in good health, renal and liver function is fine, no tumour metastises, why not? I don't know about you, but with the ages we've been seeing cats at in clinics these days, 12 actually isnt prohibitively old.

 

[168135]

still- they adopted out an unaltered animal? Did they do it before the cat was totally healthy too? How odd.

This is what went down:
Cat comes into the rescue: gets needles, deworming, FIV tested, and they shaved her belly but couldn't tell if she was spayed or not. New owner expresses interest in the cat.
Cat get very ill.
Cat gets better.
New owner sets up appointment with her vet to get her spayed.
Cat goes to new owner.
Cat gets in for surgery... turns out she wasn't spayed and was full of tumors that was keeping her in a constant heat.
Cat gets declawed about a month later, obviously not enough time to try the alternatives.

Yes... it's irresponsible to adopt out animals that aren't spayed. SPCA does it... they offer a discount with certain vets, and they also have a program where you can get your animal spayed for $50 or under depending on how much you make. They get no funding at all from the government and it's located in one of the poorest counties in all of the country. This can't be the ONLY shelter in all of North America that operates like this 😛

Also, at this rescue, if they can seize your animal for declawing, I'm pretty sure they'll seize it for not getting it fixed, since that is in the contract also.

Also, this isn't some huge scale rescue. This is a woman who takes cats into her home. She only has room for six or so at a time and sometimes has to cherry pick and takes those in who are in the greatest need.

I'm just on the fence about whether or not it was okay to do such a gruesome procedure on an older cat that had almost died and was riddled with tumors just a couple months beforehand. In my eyes, that's rediculous! I think they're just doing it for the $$$. If it was my clinic, I'd say "Are you aware that declawing is this and we prefer to do it on cats at this age because.... try softpaws or training... come back if you don't see results" at least 😛 Well, I wouldn't say it like that. Gah. I'm just mad 😛 My parents take our cat to that clinic 😛😛😛