Protecting Cats or Protecting Declawing Vets? The ASPCA’s Declawing Stance Tells the Real Story
Sept. 1, 2025. The ASPCA claims to be the nation’s voice to prevent animal cruelty — yet when it comes to declawing, it sides with veterinarians who profit from this act of mutilation, not with cats.
The ASPCA’s declawing position shamefully condones cat declawing — a cruel and inhumane amputation procedure — hiding behind the flimsy excuse that in rare cases it might prevent euthanasia.
If the ASPCA truly cared about saving cats from being euthanized, they’d just support the humane alternatives to declawing or re-homing, not this barbaric and inhumane mutilation. They would also support laws to ban declawing. ASPCA Petition
Also, the ASPCA’s “grave risk of euthanasia” exemption as you can see in this screenshot is nothing more than a gift to lazy or selfish cat owners who don’t want to provide scratching posts, use humane deterrents, or put in the effort to train their cats. These are the very people most likely to abandon a cat anyway — especially once the declawed cat develops painful complications like biting or litter box avoidance.
Declawing doesn’t save lives, it destroys them.
Even major veterinary leaders like VCA, Banfield, and the Feline VMA have debunked this myth, recognizing that declawing causes more harm and actually increases the risk of relinquishment and euthanasia.
Humane solutions — or rehoming as a true last resort — always exist. The ASPCA should put an end this harmful loophole once and for all.
If the ASPCA truly used its influence to prevent cruelty to animals, declawing might be banned in the U.S. by now.
Instead, its stance is used by the veterinary lobby to block legislation that would protect innocent and healthy cats from this horrific cruelty, betraying their mission and cats and hands a gift to declawing veterinarians, enabling them to continue profiting from this barbaric, inhumane, and unnecessary amputation procedure.
Want proof? Here it is.
The ASPCA’s declawing stance has already been used to block anti-declawing legislation in Wyoming (2021), Arizona (2022), and Illinois (2023).
2021 Sheridan, WY Anti-Declawing Ordinance:
Wyoming declawing vet, from an AAHA Accredited Animal Hospital, Mountain View Veterinary Hospital, Dr Peter Pelissier, testified to the city council against the anti-declawing ordinance. This AAHA declawing veterinarian mentioned the ASPCA’s declawing position in his testimony and lied numerous times.
One of the City Council members admitted in an email to City the Kitty nonprofit that he voted no on the ordinance because of Dr Pelissier’s testimony.
We checked to see if this AAHA hospital is still declawing cats in 2025, and according to an employee they regularly perform front declaw procedures, a neuter/declaw is around $900, and Dr Angelica does their declaws.
2022: Arizona Anti-Declawing Bill.
Here’s an example of how the lobbyist with the AzVMA used the ASPCA’s declawing position on March 23, 2022, during her testimony to successfully stop the anti-declawing bill in AZ. AzVMA lobbyist uses ASPCA’s declawing position
Also, Dr Wayne Anderson, AzVMA’s Advisory Council Board Member, testified to the Arizona legislators against this AZ bill. Here are just some of the lies he said in his testimony:
“We don’t do them that often, it’s very rare.” “Maybe one or two a doctor might do in a years time.” (Many of the employees at his clinics said that they do declaws regularly and one, Arrow Animal Hospital said that they do declaws “all the time.” The average cost for a 2 paw declaw at an AzPetVet clinic is around $1000- $1200. The cost of a neuter/2 paw declaw at Arrow Animal Hospital is around $1000- $1200. They even perform 4 paw declaws.)
“I get referrals from staff at the Humane Society to declaw cats.” (Steve Hansen, the director of the AZ Humane Society said in his testimony to these legislators that they do not refer people to AzPetVet to get their cats declawed.)
“It’s a non-weight bearing bone.” “Cats do not walk on their claws, they walk on the pads of their feet.” (A veterinarian who is a feline expert said the bone that is amputated in a declaw procedure is a weight bearing bone because weight bearing is on the joint between P2 and P3. Removing P3 changes the anatomy so that P2 begins to stick through the skin as the toe pads atrophy.)
A survey in August 2025 by City the Kitty found that most of Dr Anderson’s AzPet Vet clinics, now Lovet Pet Healthcare, are still regularly declawing cats.
2023 Illinois Anti-Declawing Bill :
Link to Dr Joanne Carlson’s two Letters to the Editors where she used the ASPCA’s declawing position. Chicago Sun Times.
Shaw Local Northern Illinois newspaper
Illinois State Veterinary Medical Association president, of Loving Care Animal Hospital in Palatine, IL, Joanne Carlson openly misled the public to defend declawing when a bill to ban it was introduced. She claimed the procedure is rare, that it protects cats’ well-being, and even said, “There is no evidence that cats… experience any long-term difficulties.” In a radio interview, she went further, falsely stating, “Really there are none (long-term impacts) if done properly… these kitties… will be walking the very same day.” Here’s our investigative story about Dr Carlson and our survey of 74 random vet clinics in IL, 85% of them declaw cats and 60% of them said they declaw cats on a regular basis.
These are blatant lies that ignore overwhelming evidence showing declawing causes chronic pain, lameness, and behavioral issues that often lead to abandonment or euthanasia. Instead of protecting cats, Carlson protected her member vets’ profits. And she had cover: she leaned on the ASPCA’s weak “last resort” policy to justify keeping this cruelty legal.
By refusing to take a strong stance, the ASPCA is giving veterinary leaders like Dr Carlson, Dr Pellisier, and Dr Anderson the ammunition they need to mislead lawmakers and keep cats mutilated for profit.
Here’s our full story.
The Leading Veterinary and Animal Welfare Organizations Who Completely Condemn Declawing
While all the other leading animal welfare organizations like Humane World for Animals, PawProject.org, Alley Cat Allies, Feline Veterinary Medical Assn, World Small Animal Veterinary Association, Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), International Cat Care, Best Friends Animal Society, and the Feline Veterinary Medical Assn completely condemn declawing as cruel, document its severe and devastating harm, and many fight for bans, the ASPCA clings to a weak, outdated position.
If a cat’s behavior truly cannot be managed, the humane and ethical last resort is re-homing — not cruelty and long term suffering.
Declawing causes more harm to a cat, leading to chronic pain, litter box avoidance, biting, and aggression. And it doesn’t even guarantee a cat will stay in its home — in fact, declawed cats are often abandoned or euthanized because of the very behavioral issues caused by the procedure.
In 2021, the Animal Humane Society realized how wrong this outdated justification is and took it off their position.
In 2021, after CitytheKitty.org educated them with facts showing that declawing causes more harm, increases cat relinquishment, abandonment, and euthanasia, they removed the sentence from their policy that once claimed declawing was “preferable to abandonment, euthanasia or relinquishing ownership of a cat.”
The ASPCA, however, continues to cling to this harmful and antiquated death or declaw excuse.
Unlike all the humane and science-based animal welfare organizations who completely condemn this animal cruelty, the ASPCA refuses to stand on the right side of history and the right side of this issue.
Instead, their position enables declawing veterinarians to keep profiting from this barbaric cruelty, leaving thousands of healthy cats mutilated and suffering every year.
Here’s what the ASPCA says:
•”The ASPCA does not perform declaw surgeries and we believe the only circumstances in which the procedure should be considered are those in which all behavioral and environmental alternatives have been fully explored, have proven to be ineffective, and the cat is at grave risk of euthanasia.” ASPCA’s Position Statement.
•”Legislation to make declawing illegal, while well-intentioned, can be problematic, because, in rare cases, the procedure may be justifiable as a last resort to prevent euthanasia. There is also no meaningful way to enforce a law that includes this exception.” ASPCA’s Position Statement.
•”The only circumstances in which the procedure should be considered are those in which all behavioral and environmental alternatives have been fully explored, have proven to be ineffective, and the cat is at grave risk of euthanasia.” Link to the ASPCA’s Destructive Scratching section.
But there is NO credible research, evidence, or studies that show that declawing saves lives. NONE.
Real data shows the opposite: declawing often causes serious behavioral problems like biting, aggression, and litter box avoidance, which are leading reasons cats are surrendered to shelters and euthanized. (1-2)
The ASPCA’s declawing position, which is similar to the AVMA’s and state Veterinary Medical Association’s positions, lacks data-driven support and appears to prioritize the financial interests of veterinarians who profit from declawing over the welfare of cats.
The AVMA’s declawing position has a “Cat Benefits” section that lists information that the pro-declaw side uses to perpetuate the declaw or death myth but all of those points are debunked in our story by a very accomplished veterinarian, Dr Jean Hofve, who is an expert in this issue.
If the ASPCA is using the AVMA’s declawing position to condone declawing as a last resort to prevent euthanasia, then they really should get up to date on all the latest credible data that proves the opposite happens.
The ASPCA opposes debarking dogs, ear-cropping, and tail-docking without exception — yet carve out an exception for declawing. This contradiction exposes a glaring double standard.
Declawing is no less cruel than debarking and in facts causes more harm to cats long-term, yet the ASPCA defends it as a last resort to prevent euthanasia — a claim with no supporting data and overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Real data and scientific research show declawing causes chronic pain, aggression, and litter box avoidance, which actually increase the risk of cats being surrendered or euthanized.
By siding with veterinarians who profit from declawing, the ASPCA enables ongoing cruelty. Their inconsistent stance raises serious questions: do they value dog welfare more than cats — or are they protecting the financial interests of declawing vets?
Where’s the ASPCA’s Evidence and Scientific Research?
Yet when advocates from City the Kitty ask to see their evidence and scientific research that backs their pro-declawing stance, the ASPCA refuses to provide it.
If the ASPCA has credible evidence and scientific research that shows that declawing saves lives, why hide it?
The ASPCA opposes bans on declawing because they say in rare cases it may be justifiable to prevent euthanasia — yet no peer-reviewed studies or data support their claim.
Declawing is linked to increased behavioral problems (biting, litter box avoidance), which lead to higher shelter relinquishment and euthanasia — the opposite of what the ASPCA claims. (1)
The ASPCA’s evolving declawing position.
From condoning it for the health and safety of the cat owner, to now citing rare euthanasia prevention — appears aligned with veterinary industry interests, not cat welfare. (2)
Why did the ASPCA change their excuse to condone declawing?
Excerpt from a story in the Washington Post in 1998.
“The claw of a cat is the anatomic counterpart of the last phalanx, or bone, of a human finger or toe. A cat uses its claws to defend itself, to seize prey, to climb, to help balance as it walks and to mark territory. The principal reason for routine scratching is to peel the old sheaths off the nails, said Jacque Schultz of the ASPCA. “The new nail grows inside the old nail,” she said. Scratching also seems to be a form of exercise, an instinctual feline yoga that stretches and presumably refreshes.
The ASPCA recognizes exceptional cases, Schultz said. “If you live in a household where someone has a physical complication {for example, geriatric diabetes or AIDS} where a scratch could mean the loss of a limb or a severe infection . . . we’re not telling people put your own health at risk just so the cat can keep its claws. If you have tried everything, if you’re at the point of turning the animal into the local animal shelter, then get the animal declawed.”
The ASPCA’s declawing position statement in 2015 and before: “ The ONLY circumstance in which the procedure could be condoned would be if the health and safety of the guardian would be put at risk, as in the case of individuals with compromised immune systems or illnesses that cause them to be unusually susceptible to serious infections.”
The ASPCA’s declawing position statement in 2016. ” The ASPCA is strongly opposed to declawing cats for the convenience of their owners or to prevent damage to household property. The only circumstances in which the procedure should be considered are those in which all behavioral and environmental alternatives have been fully explored, have proven to be ineffective, and the cat is at grave risk of euthanasia…”
The AVMA and ASPCA acknowledge declawing’s harm, including chronic pain, yet both hide behind the “last resort” excuse and oppose bans, protecting veterinarians’ profits while betraying cats’ welfare.
Multiple state lawmakers have cited the ASPCA’s opposition to bans to block anti-declawing legislation. This alignment suggests a desire to avoid industry conflict, not protect animals.
No Valid Justification for ASPCA’s Declawing Position
No credible data supports the ASPCA’s claim that declawing prevents euthanasia. . Meanwhile, overwhelming evidence shows declawing increases behaviors that cause euthanasia.
Several U.S. states and many cities have banned declawing without increased shelter intakes.
Progressive veterinary leaders and companies like VCA, Banfield, the Feline Veterinary Medical Association, and Fear Free Pets and 8 more veterinary companies have banned the practice outright.
The ASPCA is lagging far behind.
Bottom Line
The ASPCA is not standing with cats — it’s standing with veterinarians who profit from declawing.
Until the ASPCA fully condemns declawing and supports bans, it is enabling cruelty.
Declawing is inhumane, unnecessary, and cruel. Humane solutions exist.
Subaru, the biggest corporate donor to the ASPCA, must act now and use its influence to push the ASPCA to do what’s right and put cats first, not declawing veterinarian’s profits. The ASPCA does not care about City the Kitty’s donation offer but will care about losing SUBARU’s millions of dollars.
Please reach out to Subaru’s person in charge of their Share the Love campaign, Danton@subaru.com and custdlrservices@subaru.com and ask them to inspire the ASPCA to be on the side of cats and help ban declawing and to prevent cats from going through this animal cruelty!
Here’s our petition to Subaru.
Also, when you search the word “declawing” on the ASPCA’s website, the 6th link that comes up is this, “USA: Urge Our New Congress to Improve Laws for Animals | ASPCA” but the ASPCA does NOT want declawing banned and does NOT work with the other animal welfare organizations to help pass laws that would protect cats from this barbaric amputation procedure.
Here are the ASPCA’s legislation priorities:
- End the cruel and unnecessary slaughter of America’s horses.
- Demand better government oversight of puppy mills and real consequences for cruel breeders.
- Build a more rational, sustainable and humane food system.
- Ensure existing animal-protection laws are not overturned.
- Improve housing policies to help keep people and pets together.
Those are all important animal cruelty issues to address and DECLAWING should be on their list!
Is the ASPCA trying to deceive people to think that they want to help ban declawing? Please ask them. Legislation@ASPCA.org
————————————————————–
References and Data.
The Evidence: Declawing Causes Harm And Euthanasia.
(1) Behavioral Issues After Declawing
* 18.5% more likely to bite; 15.6% more likely to avoid litter box (Bennett et al., 1988)
* 40% higher incidence of house soiling (Morgan & Houpt, 1989)
* 31% developed behavior changes, including biting and inappropriate urination (Yeon et al., 2001)
* 52.4% of declawed cats relinquished to shelters had litter box issues vs. 29.1% of non-declawed (Patronek et al., 1996)
* Declawed cats were 7x more likely to eliminate inappropriately, 4x more likely to bite, 3x more likely to show aggression, overgrooming, or back pain compared to non-declawed cats (Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery – Martell-Moran, 2017)
*Declawed cats experience more pain than cats with arthritis. Declawed cats exhibited worse mobility and increased sensitivity to touch. -Declawed cats displayed permanent signs of chronic pain. Pain in declawed cats was persistent and long-term, even years after the surgery. Université de Montréal Declawing Study (2025)
(2) Shelter Relinquishment & Euthanasia
**Shelter Relinquishment & Euthanasia**
* 70% of cats surrendered for behavior issues were declawed (Caddo Parrish, 2001)
* 75%+ of cats surrendered for litter box problems were declawed (Delaware Shelter, 2002)
* 80% of declawed cats surrendered were euthanized due to behavior issues (Gloucester County, 2003)
* After declaw bans, shelter intake dropped 43.3% (Los Angeles Animal Services), and adoptions increased
*A 2021 study analyzing six years of data from 74,587 cats in British Columbia—three years before and three years after a declaw ban—found a decrease, not an increase, in both cat intake and euthanasia at shelters. Destructive scratching was also found to be a rare reason for surrender. Study- 2021 BC Study
– A 2000 study by Patronek in the *Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science* identified inappropriate elimination (e.g., outside the litter box) and aggression as leading causes of cat relinquishment. Since the 2017 study ties declawing to these exact behaviors, it’s reasonable to infer a potential pathway: declawing → behavioral problems → surrender → possible euthanasia.
Declawing was banned in New York State in July 2019 and there hasn’t been an increase of cats in shelters or cats being euthanized in that state. Here is a June 26, 2020 statement from the biggest animal shelter in the world that is based in New York. North Shore Animal League America.
Joanne Yohannan, Senior Vice President of Operations, North Shore Animal League America, “We are approaching the one year mark since the ban went into effect on July 22nd, 2019. We have not seen an increase in owner surrendered cats as a result of the ban. NSALA supported the ban and did not provide declawing services in our Pet Health Centers even before the ban went into effect. There are many other humane options to address the cat’s innate need to scratch. We have seen firsthand the damage caused by declawing both physically and behaviorally when owners want to surrender their declawed cats. We are happy to know that this practice has stopped in New York.”
Here’s a June 26, 2020 statement from Animal Care Centers of NYC, Katy Hansen, Director of Marketing and Communications. “Anyone thinking that the declawing ban would lead to an increase in cat surrenders in New York City might be surprised to learn that ACC, the only open-admission shelter in NYC, has actually seen a decline in cat intake. At the same time we have seen a 25% increase in the amount of direct adoptions our organization has processed over the past year. The ban does not seem to have affected people’s desire to adopt cats in their natural state.”
———————————————————————————-
(3) VCA, Banfield, and Feline VMA’s information about using the euthanasia/relinquishment excuse to condone declawing.
VCA 2020, “Studies have shown that if an owner is intolerant of a cat scratching the couch, it is likely that same owner would be intolerant of the cat not using the litter box or beginning to bite harder and with increased frequency.
Why do cats stop using the litter box and begin to bite? When a cat comes home from having the declaw surgery, that cat might go to use the litter box and find the experience very painful to its recently amputated toe nubs, and then might subsequently decide never to use the box again. That same cat might also begin to bite because it feels that is the only way it can protect itself. Most owners won’t insist on declawing their cat if they understand that declawing is linked to other, far worse, behavior problems than the scratching ever was.
It is a common misconception among veterinary professionals that scratching behavior is one of the most common reasons for relinquishment of cats to shelters. Our experience and that of shelter operators has taught us differently. Other problems, house soiling and aggression, are listed as the top two behavioral reasons cats lose their homes. Scratching behavior is far down the list, right next to reasons like the cat requires too much attention, and scratching is rarely a reason given for relinquishment.”
Here is VCA’s 2020 full declawing position statement- https://citythekitty.org/vca-animal-hospitals-stopped-declawing/
Here is what Banfield’s 2020 declawing position says,“Current evidence does not support the use of elective declawing surgery as an alternative to relinquishment, abandonment, or euthanasia.” Link to it- Banfield Declawing Position
AAFP, American Assoc. of Feline Practitioners came out with a new declawing position statement that said, “There is no current peer-reviewed data definitively proving that cats with destructive behavior are more likely to be euthanized,abandoned or relinquished. The decision of whether or not to declaw should not be impacted by these considerations.” Link to their statement- AAFP Declawing Position