April 16, 2008

By Tinabeth Pina

NEW YORK – The most common form of animal abuse is neglect. But a recent case hitting the headlines shows how the fine line between animal neglect and animal cruelty is being blurred.

Now an allegedly innocent person has not only been taken by surprise, but is caught in the cross hair of criminal prosecution for not vetting his cat during its 15 -year life.

This unprecedented case has cat owners everywhere, wondering how often felines should be vetted.

In the Big Apple, a couple pet owners told Pet Pulse they only take their cat to the vet once every year or year and a half, while another said only once every two years.

But in a case that highlights vet check-ups as grounds for animal abuse, the official answer is more crucial than ever when it comes to pet care.

According to the American Veterinary Medical Association, pet owners should take their animals for a routine visit twice a year. Cats especially should be seen bi-annually due to their secretive nature, which lets them skillfully hide ailments.

“I think a cat should go to the vet twice a year for a couple of reasons,” said Dr. Arnold Plotnick, a feline specialist. “One reason is one year in a cat’s life especially -- when the cat gets older -- is equivalent to four years in human life. And so going every year is like going every four years, and that’s not enough.”

Martin Walsh might have learned this the hard way. After taking his beloved 15-year old cat to the ASPCA to be euthanized, he admitted it was the cat's first encounter with a vet. This later lead to Walsh being charged with animal cruelty.

The ASPCA warranted the misdemeanor charge on the grounds that Walsh allegedly should have sought treatment for his cat sooner.

“The way the law reads is that the animal has to be provided food, water and sustenance,” said Joseph Pentangelo, assistant director of Humane Law Enforcement of the ASPCA. “Sustenance – at least in NY is interpreted as proper veterinary care. Now proper -- that’s a subjective term and there’s a difference of opinion on what proper is.”

And that subjective term is exactly what landed Walsh in court today for a hearing on the misdemeanor charge. According to the judge, who previously charged Walsh, the allegations did not establish the cat was deprived of food or water, but of “proper veterinary care.”

“If charged and convicted of animal cruelty – the average sentence I’m seeing right now is time served or a few days in jail, and a fine,” said Pentangelo.

The million-dollar question this issue raises is: could owners who have not taken their pet to a vet in a couple years be charged with animal cruelty?

“You are not going to get in trouble for not taking your pet to the vet merely because you haven’t taken him for five or 10 years,” said Pentangelo. “You are much more likely to violate the law when you see a problem and ignore it.”

While Walsh loved the senior cat since it was a kitten, the cat suffered from a number of ailments. According to the judge, these included a swollen and bleeding right paw, which the ASPCA found was the result of an untreated tumor.

“Some people just really aren’t on the ball,” said Plotnick. “They don’t realize that they are neglecting their animal. I don’t know if they should be prosecuted necessarily.”

With Walsh expected to appear at a plea hearing, scheduled for today, he and his attorney declined to comment during the ongoing case. But as his side of the story unfolds, Pet Pulse will post a timely update.

Tell us what you think about “Man Charged with Cruelty for Not Vetting Cat” below, and be sure to watch the video of this story at the top of your page. Share your favorite videos by clicking on the ZootooTV tab. Send us your story ideas by e-mailing us at news@zootoo.com or by calling us at 877-777-4204.