02/05/2021
It's troublesome that the executive director of the Arizona Veterinary Medical Association(Emily Kane email: [email protected])views a simple medicating procedure as a reason to declaw. Administering sub-Q fluids can be done by entry level shelter workers, and by the way, IS daily. Some animal care professional aren't very good at it either, but it needs to get done and mostly sufficiently does. Many vets will send needles, hose and lactated ringer home with private pet owners who have never done it with just a short tutorial. I(who am not a vet) instructed someone over the phone who was able to successfully and safely do it. It's that rudimentary and simple. Are there cats that resist or even throw claws and teeth? Sure, but there are simple techniques to avoid these things such as "burrito-ing" and distraction to name just 2(I have a few more).
I wonder if Emily Kane's cats enjoys getting pills administered. Most cats don't but alternative solutions to pilling cats come easier to most. Crushing in food, dissolving in water and put into an oral syringe.
How does declawing even come up as an option for administering simple meds? Sub-Q fluids are not even meds and to say not getting them is life threatening, is a bit of an exaggeration. It's defiantly not serious enough to warrant a declaw.
If you choose to email Emily Kane at [email protected], be polite and change minds, don't attack and put her on the defensive. That lowers the chance of really changing minds and making a difference with these influential people who are just speaking from information they have, either googled or were fed and/or personal experiences
Be kind, change minds.
**Trust me I know it's not easy to do with such an inflammatory topic, but it is a crucial element to advancing the cause.
THIS PUBLIC LETTER - FROM AN OFFICIAL OF THE ARIZONA VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION - WAS RECEIVED OPPOSING THE ARIZONA ANTI-DECLAW BILL, HB 2626.
"I am writing to express my opposition to H.B. 2626 that would prohibit declawing surgeries performed on domestic cats. As the executive director of the Arizona Veterinary Medical Association and a cat enthusiast, I would like to provide you with information regarding the reasons why this bill could do more harm than good for cats.
Veterinary care decisions for animals should remain with the veterinarian. ... there remain situations where the procedure is indicated. A ban will surely lead to unintended consequences.
I currently have four cats. ... my oldest cat has developed kidney issues which will soon require daily fluids under the skin. I know for a fact that she will not be a willing candidate for this life-saving treatment and that the only way for me to administer it, would be to remove her front claws. If she does not get this treatment she will surely die. Without the choice to have her declawed, the only alternatives are to euthanize her, or travel out of state, where the procedure is legal, which seems unfair. ...
Please vote NO on this bill and leave medical decisions to the judgment of the client, who in consultation with a veterinarian and with full informed consent, can make the best decisions for their beloved pet and their entire household. No one loves cats more than I do and I am very concerned about the consequences of banning this procedure. ...
Thank you for your attention and consideration.
Emily Kane, Executive Director, Arizona Veterinary Medical Association
[NOTE: Ms. Kane is the Executive Director of the AZVMA, but is not a veterinarian]
