The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) take different positions with respect to the declawing of wild cats and domestic cats. This point has been highlighted by The Paw Project in a tweet on Twitter. You can see it below. They ask why there's a difference in policy. They don't explain therefore I will provide my reasons.
Is a cat a cat? Why do you think the American Veterinary Medical Association CONDEMNS the declawing of wild and exotic cats and yet CONDONES declawing domestic cats? pic.twitter.com/DYjKcqBOIl— The Paw Project (@pawproject) November 25, 2020
Declawing of domestic cats
The AVMA wants their member veterinarians to be allowed to declaw domestic cats because it provides a very good income for them. In order to not rub their members up the wrong way they argue that their veterinarians should have the option to declaw based upon their discretion in conjunction with a consultation with the client.
The problem is that often American veterinarians quietly or overtly promote the declawing of domestic cats. And we don't know what goes on in these conversations between themselves and their client. There's no doubt in my mind that they do not discourage the declawing of domestic cats as advised by their association. Often they do the opposite. I repeat: the vast majority of American veterinarians do not discourage declawing and they do it for monetary reasons. This is obvious because millions of these operations are carried out annually. It is impossible for there to be a reason for it other than the cat owner wants it.
It is a very cruel procedure and completely against the veterinarian's oath in which they state they will only do surgery in the interest of an animal's welfare. Declawing is done at the convenience of the animal's owner not in the interests of the animal's welfare.
|Recently declawed cat. Horor and a vet did this legally. Shame.|
Declaw exotic and wild cat species
The AVMA condemn the declawing of wild cats because they say there's no reason to do it. They allow it for true medical reasons, of course, which is extremely rare but they argue that there "appears to be no justification for performing the procedure in this population of cats". Of course, I completely agree but exactly the same assessment applies to domestic cats!
They argue that sometimes domestic cat owners need to be protected from the claws of their cat companions. But this is exceedingly rare and in any case those people who are perhaps vulnerable to being scratched can take measures to avoid it. That's part of being a good cat owner. If they can't do that then they should not have a cat in the home. That's the ultimate solution and the best solution because it avoids animal cruelty. To try and find a feeble and brutal compromise by modifying the anatomy of a cat to fit in with the mentality of humans who do not have the attitude necessary to be a cat owner is completely immoral.