#taildock

In the veterinary field there are always moral questions that must be faced. Often this involves what an animal’s owner feels is necessary and what a veterinarian believes is in the best interest of the animal. A controversial topic in the animal care field is cosmetic (also known as elective) surgery in animals. While some deem it unnecessary or even animal cruelty, others feel such procedures are justified. There are various types of cosmetic surgeries and they are done for a multitude of reasons. Many are well known to the general public, such as declawing, while others, such as cow tail docking, are less familiar. Certain procedures have historical significance in regards to show animals.  Others surgeries arose with the increase in pet ownership and care. According to research done by Dana Atwood-Harvey, people have come to think of companion animals more as members of their family rather than just an animal. There is less social distancing between human beings and pets than there was several decades ago. Cats, for example, were once strictly outdoor animals kept on rural properties to deter rodent infestations. Once cats started to be considered companion animals and were brought into the home, certain natural behaviors became unwanted. Clawing and plucking being one of the main natural (yet destructive) behaviors which lead to the popularity in declawing.

Problem

The mindset of those who oppose cosmetic surgery for animals is that animals are living sentient beings that feel pain. Animals cannot give consent to surgery and are totally at the mercy of the owner. Therefore it is often or always a moral issue and the animal should not be changed for aesthetic reasons of any kind. According to Sandra Neumann, The World Small Animal Veterinary Association does not condone elective surgery and they themselves state that: “Surgical operations for the purpose of modifying the appearance of a companion animal for non‐therapeutic purposes should be actively discouraged. Where possible, legislation should be enacted to prohibit the performance of non‐therapeutic surgical procedures for purely cosmetic purposes.” (Neumann 2008). On the other hand, people who are for cosmetic surgery feel that animals should be used to enhance the lives of human beings. There is also the view that some cosmetic surgery is necessary for the animal’s well-being or holds historical significance.

Here I will outline the pros and cons of cosmetic and provide three examples of : declawing in cats, tail docking in cattle, and general cosmetic surgeries in dogs. The declawing of cats is an example of an elective surgery that is felt by most to be unnecessary and painful to the animal. Tail docking in cattle is also explored to show some positive health effects that can arise from elective surgery. Historical purposes of cosmetic surgery (particularly ear cropping and tail docking) in dogs will be discussed as well to help the reader understand some non-health related benefits of these practices.

Declawing in Cats

Most of the general public is familiar with the declawing of cats. Usually a cat owner will resort to this procedure because their pet is destructive to objects in the home environment. Sometimes the cat is aggressive and causes injury to people or other animals in the household. Many people however are not familiar with how this particular cosmetic surgery is performed and tend to think of it as simply trimming a cat’s claws. The surgery itself is actually more complex than that and can be very painful to the feline if not done properly.

The term used in veterinary medicine is called onychectomy and refers to the breaking or remove of the distal phalanx from its normal position (Atwood-Harvey 2005). If the reader were to look down at their own hand, the area from the tip of the finger to the third knuckle is the bone known as the distal phalanx. This is the bone that is removed during onychectomy. Either the entire bone is removed or, in some cases, the bone is broken in half and the portion containing the nail bed is removed. Figure 1 provides a visual of what this bone looks like in a cat and the specific portion that is removed.

Figure 1. Removal of Cat Distal Phalanx   

This procedure is deemed by many as unnecessary and is believed to cause much pain to the animal. Some alternatives have recently come on the market to replace this procedure without any surgery. Usually training and re-enforcing the cat to go to scratching posts or proper surfaces is advised. Many deterrent sprays are available to repel the cat from certain areas. Sometimes these are not helpful to frustrated owners and they simply want to impede the cat from being able to scratch at all. Soft, colored, plastic caps called nail caps have become a popular alternative to declawing. The nail caps are glued to the end of each of the cat’s claws, making them blunt. When the nails grow out, the nails are trimmed and new nail caps are put on. Declawing is a particular cosmetic surgery that could be eliminated considering that alternatives such as these are now available to pet owners.

Tail Docking

The term “tail docking” usually brings to mind images of dogs. However, tail docking is and was often used in agricultural animals such as sheep, horses and cattle. The animal that will be explored for this subject will be cattle.

In the dairy industry, tail docking is implemented for various reasons such as improved cleanliness of cows and dairy personnel, better udder cleanliness, reduced leptospirosis for personnel, reduced mastitis, and better milk quality (AVMA 2014). While in beef cattle it is mostly used to reduce injury, especially in slatted floor feedlot operations. In these feedlots the cattle can trap their tails in between the slated floors and cause the animal to injure itself (AVMA 2014). An open wound or injury from such an incident can easily become infected. Also if a beef cow becomes stuck due to a trapped tail, personnel can become injured while attempting to help the animal. Some of the concerns when it comes to theis procedure are similar to thoughs in any cosmetic surgery. There is always the worry that the animal will suffer pain during or after the procedure. Also there is a risk of infection if the docking is not accomplished properly.

Figure 2.

Source: Schreiner, D. (2002). Responses to Tail    Docking in Calves and Heifers. Journal    of Dairy Science, 85, 3287–3296

The procedure itself is performed in various ways; however the use of an elastic band (referred to as an elastrator band) is the usual method and is used in 92% of dairies (AVMA 2014). Surgically cutting, cauterizing irons, and emasculators are also used. The elastrator band method involves placing a thick rubber band around the cow’s tail. The position and length at which you leave the band varies depending on the particular facility and indented use of the animal. Some facilities may want to leave longer tail lengths than others. This cuts off the blood supply to the end of the animal’s tail and that tissue dies off. Research done to determine if any of the previously listed benefits of tail docking in cattle holds true does not appear to be conclusive. In other words, no one piece of evidence shows that there are more benefits than negative problems or vice versa when it comes to tail docking cattle (AVMA 2014).

Cosmetic Surgery in Dogs

Dogs have long been referred to as “man’s best friend” and were among the first of the domesticated animals to first appear living with ancient human settlements. They have been subject to a multitude of elective surgery since becoming companion animals. Tail docking, ear cropping, devocalization, implants, and even face lifts have all been performed on dogs. The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) stated in a 2009 DVM News article that it: “opposes ear cropping and tail docking of dogs when done solely for cosmetic purposes.” and disagrees with the American Kennel Club (DVM 2009). The AKC encourages the cosmetic surgeries in order to uphold breed standards. In fact, the AKC does not view ear cropping or tail docking as a purely cosmetic procedure. "Mislabeling these procedures as 'cosmetic' is a severe mischaracterization that connotes a lack of respect and knowledge of history and the function of purebred dogs," was a statement given by the AKC when their policies were put to question (DVM 2009). It is difficult to argue the AKC as wrong. Many breeds with traditionally docked tails were done so because they pulled carts and the docking prevented a tail injury. Eliminating the tradition and the historical value of a breed should not be taken lightly. Such breed standards help remind society of their long standing relationship with animals.

Facelifts for dogs may sound ridiculous at first. When the medical problems of certain breeds are considered it may not seem as rash. Breeds such as Blood Hounds and Shar-Peis  have many folds in their skin, especially around their face and eyes. If the skin folds are too loose then fur and dirt can enter and irritate the eyes (Castillo 2015). This causes infection and possible vision damage. A face lift, where some of the skin in tightened or removed would benefit the well-being of the animal.

On the other hand some cosmetic surgeries for dogs borderline on the ridiculous. According to a CBS news article, people can have testicular implants put into their do after neutering to make it appear that the dog is still intact. When removing the testicles, the scrotum is left intact and silicone implants are placed inside to make it appear that the testicles are still present (Castillo 2015). Devocalization is another very controversial surgery for dogs. For this procedure some or all of the dog’s vocal cords are surgically cut. This prevents the dog from making loud noises or barking excessively. Instead there is usually a rasping sound or all noise is eliminated. Such procedures are done solely based off of the desires of the owner. The question again arises: is this in the best welfare of the animal?

 My position on elective surgery for animals is this: Some procedures are clearly beneficial while others seem border-line immoral. I do not feel all cosmetic procedures should be eliminated however a select few are not necessary. Cosmetic surgery on animals that have a significant health need due to injury, birth defects, disease, or to prevent the endangerment of their own health or human well-being should continue to be practiced.  Cosmetic surgery in show animals in order to preserve historical information in regards to animal uses in human society should be preserved.

The devocalization and prosthetic testicles for dogs, along with similar aesthetic based procedures in other species does not have a clear moral standing and should not be practiced. The declawing of cats is clearly replaceable with training, nail caps, or other less drastic methods. Cosmetic surgery akin to the ones previously stated does not have a place in animal welfare. On the reverse side of the argument it cannot be overlooked that some elective surgery does have merit. Tail docking in cattle can improve health not only in the animals themselves but human handlers and consumers of cattle products. Facelifts and other similar procedures can correct or prevent health problems for certain breeds. And while tail cropping and ear cropping may not seem necessary there is a historical value to be learned when it is exhibited in certain breeds. Cosmetic surgery for animals is a double edged sword. The good and bad aspects of it should be carefully weighed and any legislation handling elective surgery should be specific to the species and its possible medical needs.

    Recommendations

If or when considering cosmetic surgery for you own pet, trust the advice of your veterinarian. They have performed elective surgeries before and will make you aware of the possible risks and benefits for each type of surgery. Remember to do your own research beforehand about the particular surgery in question. This way you will have an idea of whether or not it is appropriate for your pet and if any alternatives exist. Do not perform cosmetic surgery on a companion animal simply to improve their aesthetic appeal. When considering legislative actions on cosmetic surgery for animals, research both sides of the argument and stay informed. As show cased in the previous sections, a procedure might be unneeded for one species while helpful to another. For example tail cropping provided health benefits for cattle but no direct health benefits for dogs.

   References Cited

American Veterinary Medical Association. (2014). Literature Review on the Welfare         Implications of Tail Docking of Cattle. Retrieved from             https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/LiteratureReviews/Documents/tail_docking_cattle   _bgnd.pdf                                                                                                      

Atwood-Harvey, D. (2005). Death or Declaw: Dealing with Moral Ambiguity in a Veterinary       Hospital. Society & Animals, 13(4), 315-342. Retrieved from   http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=18&sid=ecfffdf4-a2ec-43b0-      aca5-670bbdd23d72%40sessionmgr4003&hid=4001

Castillo, M. (2015, January 27) Implants and facelifts for your pet? Inside the pet plastic surgery              industry, CBS News. Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com/news/implants-and-   facelifts-for-your-pet-inside-the-pet-plastic-surgery-industry/                    

Cosmetic surgery policy: a timeline. (2009). DVM: The Newsmagazine of Veterinary Medicine,   40(1), 30. Retrieved from            http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&sid=ecfffdf4-a2ec-43b0-            aca5-670bbdd23d72%40sessionmgr4003&hid=4001                                                            

Neumann, S. (2008). Cosmetic surgery: Customer service or professional misconduct. The            Canadian Veterinary Journal, 49(5), 501–504. Retrieved from  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2359499/