kvrdave

You keep you cat indoors? Man, that's cruel.

MechanicalMan

Why? Because you say so?

Jimmy James

A condition of adoption for my second cat (from an agency that made us sign rules) was that the cat be an exclusively indoor cat. I think that takes us full circle back to agency rules now.

kvrdave

Yes. That seems to be the ultimate criteria when it comes to what is acceptable and what is not with pets. After all, that poor dog almost went to children.

To hell with what your vet says, I say declawing is wrong and cruel!!! Because I say!

kvrdave

They would probably make me sign the same thing, and I live on 40 acres. How did cats ever survive before we started building houses?

MechanicalMan

If declawing is acceptable, then what about just amputating all of their limbs? I doubt you would have a problem with that either, but I just wonder where you draw the line.

Letting cats outside, unconfined is irresponsible. It shouldn't be allowed by any adoption agency. Outdoor cats get sick, they get killed, and they're a menace. BTW, people who assume that all cats have a deep, burning desire to go outdoors are idiots. Domestic cats are perfectly content indoors. They aren't wild animals. My cat sees me go in and out of the house several times a day (I smoke), and she makes no effort to go outside. She doesn't touch window or door screens. She doesn't cry or move towards open doors. She doesn't want out.

They are domesticated animals, brainiac. Have you ever heard of cattle? Or silkworms?

Jimmy James

Declawing certainly still has its supporters in this nation, unlike in Europe where it is extensively banned with varying levels of medical/well being of the animal exceptions. The largest American advocacy agencies (the national Humane Society and the national ASCPA) side against the procedure. It appears that the very real trend is going against declawing at present. California has banned it. So has the city of Norfolk, Virginia.

MechanicalMan

Declawing is an expensive, profitable procedure. Most vets in this country will tell you to have your cat vaccinated against everything imaginable and to follow up with completely unnecessary annual booster shots. Ka-ching

Count Dooku

Portia DeRossi signed the contract.

Count Dooku

You don't need to explain further.
Repeatedly calling them NAZIs makes it perfectly clear why they are NAZIs.

Snowmaker

Well, our two cats have all 4 paws declawed, never go outside and never even want to. They are spoiled, cared for, and perfectly happy. And so is our leather couch.

Declawing or not, its still better than keeping them in a cage in hope that someone else comes along wanting them.

And then there's the shelters that euthanize after so long. Is that more humane than declawing?!

I don't care if you're against declawing. Just don't go preaching your beliefs to me.

Jimmy James

This isn't an issue of beliefs. It's an issue of the growing consensus against declawing. We're not talking about what power in the sky you prefer and on what basis you made that choice. This is a factual issue.

Jimmy James

Thanks for updating me on that. In that case, we're back to the various issues that would arise over whether the contract is enforceable. That obviously could be a real mess if anybody wanted to take it to that level.

Snowmaker

You would think its the prior one the way some people take it so seriously.

educator_bhoy

declawing is an extremely cruel and lazy way to solve a problem that can be easily solved by Soft Claws or teaching a cat to scratch on a scratching post rubbed with some cat nip.

Its is equal to having someone's fingers chopped off at the first knuckle, now try to tell me thats not cruel and horrible in order to save a couch?

Snowmaker

This is the kind of preaching I'm talking about.

MechanicalMan

Oh, please. Any shelter that forbids declaws is obviously a no-kill shelter.

WTF? YOU are the one who brought it up. Don't "preach" about your belief that declawing is acceptable if you don't want anyone to respond to it.

BTW, your cat may seem fine now, but you have increased its chances of developing problems like arthritis as it ages. Do you know what that could mean? That it could stop using its litter box. What will you do then? You don't strike me as the kind of person who will put diapers on a cat. You'll have it euthanized. BTW, why did you declaw all four paws? Just for the hell of it? Your cat wasn't going to hurt your furniture with her rear claws. You know, you could have just used Soft Claws... not that you care.

stingermck

My 2 cats are fixed, and go outside to poop

Snowmaker

I brought up the fact that people scrutinize for declawing. I didn't judge those that DON'T declaw.

They're more my wife's cats. I really don't care, you're right. The cats are fun at times, but I like my dog MUCH better. I just hate when people judge for declawing them.

We did all 4 paws because it wasn't much more than having just the fronts done.

Isn't this fun? I'm stopping now. I never meant for this to turn ugly. I just wanted to point out how controlling these shelters can be if you don't have the same beliefs or intent as them as to what's best for the animal.

The Infidel

Mutts & Moms' website went down pretty quickly after Ellen aired her plea. Now, even though they didn't address Ellen's situation directly, they put a message out:

Mutts and Mom has chosen to temporarily inactivate their website on Petfinder.com because their email inbox and voice mail are overwhelmed. Petfinder has 11,000 shelters and rescue groups posting over 260,000 pets that need homes. We do not dictate the adoption policies of our members. We do work with them to educate their volunteers and hope to professionalize the industry as a whole, providing a positive experience for adopters. Petfinder advocates for all parties: the pets, the adopters, and the shelter and rescue group workers and volunteers.

Pet Return Policies
Many shelters and rescue groups insist, through their adoption agreements, that if a pet cannot stay with his adoptive family, the adopters must return him to the group. Why do they do this?

Between 500,000 and 1 million pets adopted from shelters and rescue groups find themselves homeless and in the shelter once again.

One foster mom said it best, "I found the dog on the street, starving. I nursed her back to health. She slept in my bed. I sang her back to sleep when she had nightmares when she first came to me. Then I adopted her to a wonderful family. A year later, I got a call from animal control because she was at the shelter and she was going to be euthanized. The family had gotten divorced and she ended up on death row!"

This too-common experience leads rescue groups and shelter to put strict policies in place governing what happens if the adoption doesn't work out. In effect, the rescue group and shelters are promising to always be there as a safety net for the pets. This can be very comforting to adopters.

Finding a New Home for Your Pet
Some pet parents, who have the best intentions for their pets, feel that they can do a better job of finding a new home for their beloved pet than a shelter or rescue group. Their rationale is that they know their pet best, they can keep it in their home until the perfect new home is found, and they can help ease the transition for the pet. Often times, this is a natural transition - a family member, trusted friend, or a colleague gets to know the pet, falls in love, and the ownership of the pet is unofficially transferred to them.

This is a controversial point of view, even amongst shelters and rescue groups who may feel that they have more experience identifying pitfalls and risk factors when identifying new families. Research, however, suggests that there is no difference in the success rates of the adoptions between organizations that screen heavily versus those that have more open adoption policies.

It also bears noting that shelters and rescue groups, understandably, want to keep in contact with new families to be able to lend their support and continue to get updates about the pets they cared for. So we have two groups, the shelter and the pet parents, who both want what is best for the pet, but who may have very different points of view. The silver lining is that everyone really wants the best home possible for the pet. If we could ensure that same future for all the pets available on Petfinder.com, our job would be accomplished.

Jimmy James

That reads like a message from petfinder, not the agency itself.

From what I have gathered, the dog has now been placed in another home. I don't see that as a good idea at all on the part of the agency because we're now clearly in a lose-lose-lose situation, particularly in light of what petfinder seems to have announced above about success rates of adoptions.

The shelter loses due to the bad PR and the really unfortunate way the minority of people are taking this (bomb/death threats are seriously uncalled for).

Ellen loses because she and her SO have been the cause of all of this drama in the first place.

The hairdresser's family loses because they don't have the dog.

At the very least, I certainly hope that the rush to place the dog hasn't led to the selection of a substandard home for it. If anybody is going to win, it's the dog because it has gone to a good home.

I think a little more common sense and a little less desire to turn this into a power struggle (on the part of the agency and Ellen) would have probably been best. It would have been great if the agency could have been more flexible about considering whether this family was suitable (and not just looking at age of children) and if Ellen could have kept this off the air and in the realm of just three parties trying to work something out because they were all concerned for the dog.

The Infidel

Mutts & Moms' website is part of petfinder.com, hence the first sentence of the statement.

das Monkey

I'm late to this party, because really -- this is news? -- but I'm with you here. This one seems really simple. They have these rules for good reasons. Everyone who dumps their responsibility on someone else will claim it's a good home. The agency can't just take all their words for it, or just take the word of the celebrities with TV shows. I love Ellen, but I hope she quickly realizes that her public crybabying about this is doing more harm than good. Sure, she could get the dog back to the hairdresser, but legions of angry fanatics with nothing better to do will likely cripple this adoption agency's ability to do its job for quite some time. And since people seem to enjoy anthropomorphizing their pets to support an argument, just imagine the judge's reaction if you gave your child to your hairdresser two weeks after adoption. "It's a good home, Your Honor. She has pets!"

das

thegame370

I just think it sucks that Ellen has to go public with this situation. We understand that your a celebrity, but can you handle these problems on your own, without crying on national television and inviting others to whats going on in your personal life.

Jimmy James

She's a celebrity because she hosts a soft little talk show based on her persona. It's not like she's the President, a celebrity actress on a show, or in some other profession where her personal life is off limits. She trades on her personal life just like Regis, Kelly, Rachael, Oprah, Dr. Phil, and all the rest of them do to one extent or another.