Cats, Claws, and Judgment Calls
A beloved faculty member, now retired, sometimes told stories from his early days in practice to illustrate changing societal and professional mores—and to get a rise out of his much-younger listeners.
One such story went like this: The banker in the small town where he practiced was taking the family on a month-long vacation and asked to board the family cat while they were away. The veterinarian’s response was: “Well, I’ll have to charge you $2 a day. Why not just put this one down and I’ll get you a new one when you return?” (The cat was boarded.)
One of our 2020 graduates recently published an essay about the case of a young dog with a very bad hind-limb fracture. The owners couldn’t afford the amputation surgery and declined to relinquish their dog to someone who offered to adopt it and pay for the surgery. They insisted that the veterinarian euthanize the dog. Which, after a heart-wrenching review of his options, he did.
I share these stories because, as we all know, being in veterinary practice demands much more from us than clinical knowledge and competence. There are judgment calls, all the time. You ask yourself: “What is the best option, when there is not a perfect option?”
Declawing cats—amputating the last segment of the digit on the paws—is a procedure that sparks controversy in the veterinary and lay communities. As I write this, Illinois House of Representative Bill 1533 (HB1533), which would ban the procedure in this state, is making its way through the House.
What is the source of the controversy in the veterinary profession? There is widespread agreement that pain management is necessary before, during and after the procedure. It is standard practice to educate owners about what the surgery entails, the natural scratching behavior of cats, and other ways to manage unwanted scratching behaviors.
There is still debate on whether declawed cats show an increase in negative behaviors, like not using the litterbox and biting, and whether declaw bans have led to changes in the number of cats being relinquished or euthanized.
But even veterinarians who choose not to perform the procedure themselves may be reluctant to support legislation to ban it. And that is because, as the AVMA’s policy on declawing puts it, we respect “the veterinarian’s right to use professional judgment when deciding how to best protect their individual patients’ health and welfare.”
“Many people have a very emotional reaction to the idea of declawing,” says Dr. Heidi Phillips, associate professor of small animal surgery at our college. “As a surgeon who routinely performs medically necessary amputations for pets suffering from cancer and other diseases, I think about the procedure from a different perspective.”
Dr. Phillips does not take the declaw procedure lightly. “Declawing is not a panacea for cat behavioral issues,” she says. “It should not be a cavalier decision, but one that is made judiciously. We’re not just talking about an owner worried about the cat damaging a leather couch.”
She believes there can be extenuating circumstances in which the professional judgment of the veterinarian comes into play: cases where a household member (an immunocompromised person, young children, or even other pets) could suffer serious consequences from an errant scratch, or households in which “the cat may not enjoy the same status” (i.e., being allowed in all the living spaces the people occupy) if it retains the ability to scratch.
“If a declaw procedure appears indicated for the health and welfare of the cat and family, as a surgeon, I would much rather be the one to perform the procedure than to have the procedure performed with poor technique or in a way that is inhumane,” says Dr. Phillips.
“My concern is not that it should never be done, but that if it is to be done to maintain the cat in the home, it should be done carefully with attention to behavioral, anatomic, surgical, and analgesic principles.”
Declawing has been banned in my native Australia, as well as in most of the European Union, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Israel, and other countries. Other states and several U.S. cities have enacted bans. The tide of public opinion could be turning, as it has on so many fronts, veterinary and otherwise, over our lifetimes.
In the meantime, we follow the science, uphold our oath to practice “conscientiously, with dignity, and in keeping with the principles of veterinary medical ethics,” and rely on our professional judgment.