Commentary: Cat declawing is cruelty to animals. NH should pass bill to ban it.

Cat declawing is a barbaric and cruel practice and should be outlawed in New Hampshire.

New Hampshire House Bill 231 would prohibit “the removal of claws from cats.” The bipartisan bill is sponsored by Representatives Mike Bordes (R-Laconia) and Ellen Read (D-Newmarket)  and I strongly urge lawmakers to please carefully consider passing this important legislation.

I can hear eye rolls from some of you, but please, hear me out.

I’ve learned following this legislation, that many people do not truly know what “cat declawing” is.  As the Humane Society explains on its website (humanesociety.org), “Declawing is the amputation of the last bone of each toe. It would be like cutting off your fingers at the last knuckle.” Did you know that? They aren't removing claws from little cat toes, they’re cutting off little cat toes.  The recovery is long and excruciatingly painful, as evidenced by several videos and reports you can find online, that I won’t describe to you because it is simply too horrific to repeat.

It permanently changes how a cat walks, because their feet don’t hit the ground with steps as their natural bodies were intended.  It removes any defense mechanism they have if an indoor cat were to sneak outside … they’re just sitting ducks for predators, or territorial outdoor cats, or loose dogs. While some support the practice, no one denies, it is actual mutilation, of an animal, of a family pet. It begs the question, why?

The No. 1 and almost sole reason people declaw their cats is to protect their precious furniture. Yep. That’s a fact. A horrendous, grotesque fact. I cannot imagine why anyone would knowingly, physically and mentally harm a living creature to maintain an aesthetically pleasing living room, but people do it. I cannot imagine why we continue to allow it.

Drive Free or Die?:NH considers restricting pets in cars

One of the leading reasons people are opposed to outlawing the practice, is the idea that it’s not the government’s business to get involved. I disagree. I am someone who agrees with the concept of limited government and want it out of my life as much as humanly possible, but government exists because sometimes it must enact laws to protect people and property and even pets. There are obviously a lot of laws on the books regarding animal cruelty. Our government recognizes animals have the right to be protected from cruelty. I think cat declawing could and should easily be considered animal cruelty, but, apparently we need a separate law covering it, so let’s do it.

Many questions and testimony this past week on a hearing regarding this bill focused on the “getting between a patient and doctor” argument.  Or, in this case, a veterinarian and cat owner. We get involved in that all the time, whether it is human or animal. What drugs are legal, how much can be prescribed and for what. There are too many examples to list. With pets, we have protections such as you can’t let Fido joyride in the back of your pickup, because it's dangerous for the dog. The government is already in our personal business when it comes to healthcare, and animal welfare, this is just the reasonable next step involving an arcane, inhumane practice, that we understand more about in the modern world.

Others argue, very few veterinarians will conduct the procedure these days anyway, so if it's not being done, why do we need a law to ban it? Well, it is still being done, although it is certainly not as common of a practice as it used to be, but furthermore, if it’s not being done then no harm in banning it anyway. Right?

I believe when discussing potential laws the “public good” should be considered. What is the public good of cat declawing? There isn’t any. There is a “public good” about banning the practice because as our animal welfare laws indicate, it is in the government's interest and jurisdiction to protect animals as part of the public good.

'This one really hit me':NH SPCA rescues neglected dog living in squalor

"My cat scratches people when they come over.” So, cut its fingers off? If Fifi the Chihuahua bites your visiting friend, are you going to rip its teeth out?  Speaking of ripping a dogs teeth out, I’ve had lots of dogs in my life and had a lot of shoes and furniture destroyed during their puppy years.  Since cat declawing is predominantly to protect that cute love seat you paid too much for, should we allow removal of puppy teeth so you can train them not to chew on furniture and floors while their adult teeth grow in?

There are very rare cases where a veterinarian would advise the medical practice of amputating a toe or other body part, for things such as tumors or other medical ailments. Fortunately, House Bill 231, has an exception for such situations. There is no down side here.

Two states in America have banned the practice and it is before legislatures in several states this year. Twenty countries have national bans on declawing, including England, Germany, Spain and Australia.

I may be a loony dog mom, and not a crazy cat lady, but I’m “Team Feline” on this one, because I’m team “sentient being" in all situations. I urge our lawmakers to please consider the well being of an innocent animal over the blanket concept of limited government intervention in personal lives. In this circumstance, as with all of your animal welfare laws, the personal life that matters, is that of the cat.

Alicia Preston Xanthopoulos is a political consultant and former member of the media. She’s a native of Hampton Beach where she lives with her family and two poodles. Write to her at PrestonPerspective@gmail.com.

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Columnist supports NH bill to ban the declawing of cats