Peircing/tattooing your pet cruel?

[buttercup132]

I don't plan on doing it but a interesting debate came up the other night when my cousin came over and was joking around saying I should tattoo Milo or peirce him.
I said no that's cruel and he said why they get microchips put in them how is it different. It got me thinking and it's kind of true. Then my own thinking was breeders used to and some still do tattoo their dogs how is tattoo them any different?
Putting aside that it would be a stupid fashion statment what do you think?

[ramanth]

My neighbors grandson tried to pierce the ears of a stray cat. I ended up kicking his butt and he never tried it again. My family ended up taking in the stray and he was our first cat. He was the best kitty ever.

Back in the 80's, I heard of the piercing being done but never saw it personally.

I'd never do it.

[Alysser]

First of all, Micro-chipping is not a fashion statement, and it saves animals lives each an every day. I think the best thing about Micro-chipping is that it really doesn't have any disadvantages. Tattooing an animal, is not what I would consider cruel unless it is done in a bad way I guess. I don't like the branding crap they do to cattle. I can only imagine how badly hot iron on the skin hurts. I guess it would be okay with me as long as it wasn't for fashion and it doesn't hurt the animal in anyway. Piercing is another story. Now, first of all, I don't even have my ears pierced. I AM TERRIFIED of even getting that done, so what makes you think I would do something to my dog that I wouldn't even get done on myself? Secondly, I see it as a safety issue. What if you're not home and the stupid earring gets caught on something...OUCH! I can only imagine how much that would hurt a dog to get a needle through its skin.

Well that was my two cents for all it's worth..I don't have any problem with this on people but when it's on an animal as a fashion statement I get mad. ANIMALS ARE LIVING, BREATHING THINGS. NOT accessories.

[Catlady711]

I don't have any problem with this on people but when it's on an animal as a fashion statement I get mad. ANIMALS ARE LIVING, BREATHING THINGS. NOT accessories.

I agree.

[Twisterdog]

Tatooing a phone number/id number which may save your pet's life is one thing. As is microchipping.

However, tatooing or piercing for "cosmetic" reasons is, beyond a doubt, terribly cruel, IMO.

WHY would anyone ever even consider that??

[Jessika]

If they are being pierced or tattooed for any purpose other than identification or for some health reason... then I do not agree with it.

However, I have heard of tattooing used as a form of ID -- they will get an ID number tattooed on the inside of their ear (I believe) and it's used the same as a microchip. Obviously that isn't a popular method and I would much prefer a microchip

[Catty1]

Both my boys were tattooed while asleep for their neutering.

I found this about microchips:

What is Microchipping?

"Microchips" are small computer chips about the size of a rice grain. A veterinarian injects the chip under your cat's skin. Most cats tolerate this minor procedure with no problem.

The chip contains your cat's identifying information and can be read by a special scanner. If your cat gets lost and is taken to an animal shelter, most shelters can scan the information on the chip, identify your cat, and get her home to you.

Having your cat microchipped is a good way to help her get home if she ever becomes lost.

The article goes on to say to add a collar and ID tag.

As for tattooing and piercing pets for 'fashion' reasons, no. I can't see your post right now so I don't recall if your friend was joking - but if he wasn't, his ego is bigger than his heart. ("Hey, look at my pet!!! See what I had done! Isn't it COOL?" That's all about the owner, not the pet. JMO)

[Giselle]

If I'm not mistaken, dog ear tattoos are completely different from human tattoos. If I remember correctly, a special tool is pressed into the ears, creating tiny holes. A colored dye is then rubbed into the ears, staining the holes.

It's not like a human tattoo - which requires a needle repeatedly injecting color underneath the skin. Totally different. Non-comparable. Dogs should never get pierced or tattoo'd for purely cosmetic purposes.

[Lobodeb]

Brandee was tatood at the shelter once she was spayed. I thought it was kind of extreme to do to prove that she was altered, but I had no choice. I thought a certificate would suffice. They explained to me that it'll save her an "exporatory" surgery if she's ever lost and rehomed. And, it was done while she was under anesthesia. I can't imagine it being done while she was awake! So, in that instance, I guess I kind of see why it's necessary, but now days, who would even think to look for the stupid tatoo? It's burried under her fur! They probably wouldn't find it until they had her on the table and were getting ready to shave her for the surgery. The more I type, the more I see that I'm on the fence about tattoos as a means of alter notifications. I'm totally against it for fashion sake...piercing too. Stupid, stupid, stupid!

[Argranade]

I've thought about those too,

It's crewl in a way, but if I had to choose I'd go with pericing an ear instead a tattoo. But I'll never do it either unless I buy a pet that's already had a pericing done and it's too late. I seen a bunny (BIG Lion head) with a periced ear, this girl was holding him I never thought of the pain as I think getting your ears periced is a fast thing, altho I don't know as I've never gotten my ears periced lol. I know pet's are not accessories but just because someone has a tattoo or periced pet does not mean they don't love them just as anyone else, maybe they never thought of the pain when getting it done or maybe they got them that way.

[Pembroke_Corgi]

It seems unnecessarily cruel to put an animal through something like that just to make it "cute." Not to mention I can imagine dogs and cats ripping their ears off if they were forced to wear earrings.

I personally can't imagine why anyone would think such a thing would improve their pet's appearance, much less consider doing it!

[binka_nugget]

The needles are pretty much identical. The only difference is that the needle for microchipping is a slightly bigger gauge. However, microchipping has a very useful purpose. Tattoos as well, but they fade, get covered with fur, and are sometimes hard to find the owner's info through. A little pain comes with these procedures, however, it's over shortly. A little numbness for a day or two and the dog or cat is fine.

Piercings, however, would always be exposed. The piercing would get knocked around constantly which would risk it getting pulled out (additional, greater pain). If by some miracle it didn't get pulled out, it would take a long, long time to heal (if it ever healed at all). Dogs get in bizarre places, like to roll around in god knows what, thus exposing the wound to a plethora of bacteria and potential infections.

[buttercup132]

I said..

Putting aside that it would be a stupid fashion statment what do you think?

So I don't get why everyone is saying it would be a stupid fashion statment..

Stupid humans never cease to amaze me. They're always trying to turn their pets into people. Tattoos as a fashion statement? Are you kidding me? Animals are not accessories! If it's done for ID purposes, maybe. But piercings? C'mon! Is there any balance in the world any more? Are people's lives so pathetic that they have to resort to stuff like this? What animals need besides the basics for survival are love, compassion and good vet care. How about a big dose of that? Fashionable clothes and tattoos and piercings...that's stuff for humans!!!!

I really hope your not saying that directed at me. If you read my post you would see I said I WOULDN'T do it. I just though it was a interested deabate because if you were to say you periced your pet people would freak and say your cruel because it's painful. Yet microchips hurt just as much. And um clothes for pets is kind of a nessicary thing for my cats.

Piercings, however, would always be exposed. The piercing would get knocked around constantly which would risk it getting pulled out

I was thinking that too but then I remember that in the wild they tag tigers,lions etc ears which to me would have more of a chance of getting caught.

[IRescue452]

Piercings are no good for animals. When they itch they might rip it out. Or when they roll, play, ect... They have no idea that they have to be careful around this thing somebody stuck through them. It not a matter of pain when the peircing is done, its a matter of how easily they can damage themselves when they rip it out.

Tattoos I'm ok with for id purposes and to show information about them being altered. I live in an area where most places still don't check for microchips, so a visible option is great.

[Randi]

In Denmark, cats are earmarked/tatooed when they get spayed/neutered/vaccinated etc. Fister had it done when he was about a year old, and of course, it's done while under anesthesia, so it's not painful for them.

The cat I found in he backyard this summer, was earmarked too, that's why I found the owner. I started the search by ringing my vet to see if he knew the cat - he did (Charlie). So I got the telephone no. to the owners and they could come and get him. He lived 10 min. walk away.

Although I think it's a good idea to microchip pets, I would not have been able to find the owner that fast.

People having pets tatooed for other reasons than identification, I find really stupid!! Vets should not allow it!!