Dolittler

Related Blog Entries

Vaginal rejuvenation surgery in veterinary medicine (How’s this for salacious pet blogging?) (July 23, 2008)
Ophthalmic prosthetics in vet practice…useful tools or human vanity? (July 7, 2007)
Plastic surgery in the land of the beautiful—but this time it’s for pets (April 7, 2007)

Comments

Here's the way I see it, whether we are talking about declaws or lip reductions (LOL)- if it improves the relationship between pet and owner, it's worth the time, money, and pain (as long as the pain is medicated and treated).

Do I WANT to think of this dog going under for this surgery? Heck no. But in the end- if the household, including himself, is happier when this surgery is completed (as long as it does help out with the drooling)- then it's worth it.

I'm assuming that this guy wouldn't be rehomed if the surgery was not done- but ya know- dealing with water all over the house by my giant dogs, who do NOT drool, mind you, is a pain in the butt. Cannot imagine dealing with a drooly dog that drools moreso then normal! UGH!

# Posted By Katalyst | 1/27/07 2:25 PM

If an optional surgery allows an animal that would otherwise be rehomed, surrendered or euthanized to keep its home, then I'm for it if the owner has tried all other options and actually understands what the opertation entails. In this case, it seems like it might make for a more happy and stable home.

That being said, I'm not for ear-cropping or de-barking. I think dew-claw removal might have some merit for some dogs, but that it's overdone, same for tail-docking (assuming it's done properly). Mostly I have a problem with declawing cats. I have worked in rescue for 6 years and the declawed cats always have the biggest issues and are the hardest to place. They're nearly always surrendered because a) Inappropriate Urination and/or b) They've become what I'd call fear-aggressive if they were a dog.

# Posted By lindabcs | 1/27/07 7:26 PM

It seems like the issue is that the dog's drooling is causing strife at home, for pretty good reason. In the end, what happens with strife at home? Three possibilities: the Mrs. grows to love living in ankle-deep drool; the couple gets divorced over this and the thousand other frictions the inflammation from this reveals; or the dog (being an aggressive breed) is given up, which is to say, killed. De-droolification surgery will likely stop the ankle-deep-in-drool problem; the dog is not too old, so though surgery has risks, he should do ok.

No mention was made of the benefit to the dog. But, having drooling issues myself, I speculate that the constant wetness around the dogs muzzle and ears isn't a -good- thing, and that as the dog ages, his hearing and and respiratory health are going to be better if he loses the drooling problem.

Maybe the best course would have been to tack up the lips during the original cleft palate surgery?

I have had un-needed surgery-- removal of a broad lipoma on the chest-- done on a dog. I thought a lot about it, and decided that since I could not seem to get over the "ewwwwwwwwww" factor it was diminishing my dog's quality of life. Which would have been better, slowly eliminating belly-rub festivals from our joyful day-to-day interactions because of my concious and unconcious revulsion with this loose mass or subjecting a non-geriatric dog to surgery? I still think about this, even though it was years ago, but I think I made the right choice.

On the other hand, I am not convinced that non-emergency dental work is a good choice. What do you say? Is anaesthetizing a dog for a regular scaling a good call?

Got to say, I wish there was some real epidemiology behind the value of regular dentistry. Sure, one knows the arguments for it and the obvious impacts of an unhealthy mouth. But regular dentistry seems like an idea more driven by practice consultants than by health necessity.

# Posted By Thing One | 1/28/07 9:21 AM

I have three mastiffs, who are notorious for excessive drooling. My 3 year old only drools after she eats or drinks, so that is easily managed by having a towel handy. My younger two, one a female english mastiff, the other a neo mastiff boy, both drool excessively. We have a huge stock of "slobber towels" strategicly placed around the house. The younger female's favorite pasttime is sucking up an extra mouthful of water when she gets a drink, holding it in her mouth until she finds a suitably unsuspecting human to drench with it, and then releasing the entire mouthful into their lap. UGH! BUT... I accepted them the way they are when I got each, and would not go in for the "nip and tuck" cosmetic surgery for any of them. Mastiffs are notorious for the "slingers" they send flying to the walls and ceiling every time they shake their heads- it is part of owning a mastiff. We just deal with it, and clean... ALOT. If it became a health concern, maybe the moisture causing bacterial infections in the folds or something, thats a whole other question. As for debarking... well, can I get the hubby's snoring surgically altered??

# Posted By Margaret | 1/28/07 11:43 AM

I've mixed emotions on a lot of cosmetic surgeries. I have an Australian shepherd who was not docked as a baby. Her tail is beautiful, but its 7-inch long hair would cause serious problems for her if she were a working dog in the western US. I can see where a working rancher would want that grooming hassle removed from daily life. I do dislike the ultra-short docks that seem to be in vogue for show Aussies -- wish they would leave enough tail to ensure proper defecation.

Debarking and declawing would ideally only come after other methods like training and claw-covers were tried. Dewclaws -- I would evaluate the dewclaw. Is it tight to the leg or loose enough to easily catch and get torn? Tight ones I would tend to leave in place, loose ones are more easily & safely removed at 2-3 days than after they tear off. If one foreleg had a tight and the other a loose, I'd probably remove both for symmetry. Rear dewclaws I'd probably vote for removal since they tend to be loose if even present.

The lips thing. Hmm. I wouldn't want to live with the slobber (and choose my dogs accordingly), but most the time people should know what they're getting into. In your friend's situation, I'd probably be okay with the idea of the surgery, although I'd have mixed emotions if he decided he could get more Presas in the future because the surgery would solve his problems.

You didn't mention cosmetic surgery for show dogs, but I am definitely against anything that modifies appearances to help success in the show ring. It's illegal in the ring for one, and it trashes the purported purpose of dog shows -- helping one pick breeding stock -- if what you see is NOT what the dog "got" from its genes.

# Posted By kabbage | 1/28/07 12:57 PM

Show dog cosmetics is not something I espouse or would ever get into. Show people are "unique" enough (and you know who you are ;-) ). I prefer not to deal with the irresponsible eccentrics who might want to perfect their pets for the show ring (unethical!).

Dentistry is another matter. I'd never engage in this activity for cosmesis. But for periodontal disease sufferers I'd always go with the dental. I have some who need dentals every four to six months--and it's worth it, according to a huge volume of studies. Now basic dentals for prophylaxis gets touchy. If a dog is older or has any health issues...no way. Here's another example of where trusting your vet and sharing their values with respect to pet health becomes very important.

# Posted By Dr. Patty Khuly | 1/28/07 10:02 PM

Speaking of strange things owners do to their pets...what about Neuticals? Are those surgically implanted? For those that don't know what I'm writing about - they are fake testicles. Hilarious. Regarding dentals, what about when some plaque builds up on the rear teeth? I try to brush my dog's teeth but I"m not consistent enough. Eventually he should have a dental, right?

# Posted By Kelly | 1/28/07 10:34 PM

Kelly: Neuticles are fun to work with but not something I generally do unless an owner won't go in for a much-needed neuter without them. I posted something on this a few months ago: look it up in the search bar as I'm clueless abut how to link to it here (if anyone can give me a tip on that I'd appreciate it).

And, yep, lots of tartar on the back teeth generally means a dental will be necessary but swelling of the gumline is what you're really looking for. Usually they go together (scum and swelling) but sometimes you get lucky and the scum stays well beneath the gumline. Check it out and ask your vet.

# Posted By Dr. Patty Khuly | 1/29/07 7:39 AM

This reminds me of cases in humans such as the "pillow angel" in the past month or two, and the Chinese baby boy last year who was born with two left arms. In the former case, a girl with the mental age of 3 months was subjected to a procedure to make her remain in the body of a child for life, which will make caring for her easier. In the latter, the boy had one of the two semi-functional arms surgically removed simply so he'd "fit in" better.

I would prefer if doctors erred on the side of non-interference. The boy will eventually be old enough to make the decision on his own, and in the meantime what's to say that one semi-functional arm is better than two? I understand the reasonings in the "pillow angel" case, but I'm torn on what I think is best there.

As for the drooling dog, I would suspect that the dog is not *causing* the marital strife, but is a catalyst helping to reveal the underlying, preexisting, situation. Therefore, I feel it's inappropriate that they try to save their marriage through subjecting him to elective surgery.

# Posted By zandperl | 1/29/07 11:19 PM

I don't mind properly done dockings and dewclaws. I used to show a dog of mine, and couldn't have if he wasn't docked. His mom (who I also own) was never shown. When I had her pups docked and dewclaws removed I made sure that the vet used a nerve block and the puppies seemed to suffer no ill effects.
On the other hand we have two dogs, one is a shelter dog and the other is her brother (about four months after we got her someone came up and said he knew the lady who owned her father, and, long story short, we ended up with her brother too). Both are 1/2 olde english bulldog, quarter JR, quarter sheltie. Since the dad was a bully, this 'friend' of theirs (the guy we ran into) insisted that these mixed-breed pups were 'bullies' and nobody would want them unless they were docked. He said he knew just how to do it, consequently he placed tight rubber bands around the end of the two day old pup's tails and waited until they fell off.
Indeed, both Panzer and Mischa have very short nubbs with round bald ends (scar tissue??).
I can only wish they had removed their dewclaws at the same time. While they are not an issue during decent weather, we are religious about making sure our dogs get outdoor exercise, even in the winter. In fact my favorite winter memories are playing outdoors in deep snowdrifts at the dogpark with Mischa (this was pre-panzer)... throwing snowballs at DH while Mischa ran between us trying to catch them. The problem was that even in soft snow Mischa would bleed from under her dewclaws. We tried to use boots, but the dewclaws would chafe. We tried wrapping her legs, the wraps would fall off. Another dog owner that we know from the park had her dogs dewclaws removed at a year old because she had a similar issue.... and it took a long long time to heal. In fact, she says she wouldn't do it again if she could go back in time and do it over.
So this means Mischa and Panzer will go through life with poor nubby bald-ended tails and useless loose dewclaws...

Debarking is not, however, something I would do to one of my dogs. There are many behavioral techniques to try before considering this surgery.

# Posted By Jenn | 7/9/07 12:14 AM

I get my dog's moles, warts and bumps removed on an (unfortunately) regular basis (cauterized off), as long as they are appropriately located so that is safe. I don't see this as cosmetic. My take is that if she needs anesthesia for something else (dental or biopsy for instance), I'd rather get them removed now rather than wait and see if they start bothering her or otherwise make trouble. This latest round of teeth cleaning/mole removal I probably could have put off, but she had a sebaceous cyst under her collar and I decided to remove it now while I could plan for a collar free two weeks instead of deal with its regular bursting and risk of infection. Now the lypoma (spelling?) that grew back after removal for biopsy and doesn't bother her - it can stay.

# Posted By Juli | 11/27/07 1:36 AM

[Add Comment]