Animal Cruelty Case: Truly Animal Abuse or an Abuse of Power?

Published July 18, 2012

Flickr User MowT

A cat was recently put down at the behest of a animal rights zealot. Was the cat wrongly euthanized? EDITOR'S NOTE: This is not the cat, Charmer, featured in this story.

According to a news item published recently on the Blue Dog State Blog, if your kitty happens to be F.I.V. positive and stops eating, and if you bring your kitty to a veterinarian who many consider an animal rights extremist, not only could you be arrested for cruelty to animals, your beloved furry family member could be euthanized without your consent.

This stunning set of events happened to Guilderland, New York residents Gerard Sagliocca and his sister, Carmella White. Ms. White adopted the cat named Charmer from a rescue, even though the kitty was born with Feline Immunodeficiency Virus (F.I.V.). When Charmer refused to eat, White and Sagliocca took him to Voorheesville practitioner, Dr. Holly Cheever.

But instead of recommending an appetite stimulant or other treatment options to help the cat eat, Dr. Cheever immediately recommended that the cat be euthanized.  Since, according to Sagliocca, Charmer was showing no other signs of illness, both he and White refused Cheever’s recommendation and took him back home to their duplex apartment.

After they left her office, Dr. Cheever immediately called the police, who subsequently went to their home, seized the cat and brought him back to the vet. Charmer was then summarily euthanized by Dr. Cheever.

At Dr. Cheever’s insistence, Sagliocca was charged with cruelty to animals. Cheever believes Sagliocca belongs in jail, even though Charmer lived with White, his primary caretaker, and he had little contact with him. Charmer was well fed, had plenty of toys, and most of all White adored him. If found guilty, Sagliocca faces a year in jail and/or a $1,000 fine, and his name listed for 10 years on  New York State’s mandatory Register of animal abusers.

What this writer finds troublesome is that in direct contrast to Dr. Cheever’s conclusion that euthanasia was the only medical intervention and act of kindness Charmer should receive, the North Shore Animal League of America  openly invites people to consider adopting FIV positive cats. If F.I.V. positive cats are cared for prudently, fed nutritious food, up-to-date on prescribed vaccinations, kept indoors apart from F.I.V. negative cats, these kitties make excellent pets who can expect long, healthy lives.

But, according to an item on Timesunion.com, Dr. Cheever claims Charmer was terminally ill, had developed liver cancer, and was suffering dreadfully.  But White and Sagliocca claimed the cat did not appear ill; it was only their concern about his refusal to eat that prompted them to seek prompt veterinary assistance, not to receive a death sentence.

So is this truly a case of cruelty to animals? The legal definition of animal cruelty as delineated by The Free Dictionary by Farlex is “the crime of inflicting physical pain, suffering or death on an animal, usually a tame one, beyond necessity for normal discipline. It can include neglect that is so monstrous (withholding food and water) that the animal has suffered, died or been put in imminent danger of death.”  Was Charmer neglected or made to suffer?

In this writer’s opinion, Charmer’s guardians were deprived of other legitimate treatment options such as a second opinion, hospice support or palliative care. Intentional animal abuse is a serious crime, but are we to permit animal rights zealots (whose personal agendas and beliefs are not consistent with the legal definition of cruelty to animals) to make decisions that prevent caring animal guardians from making well-informed end of life choices concerning their pets?

What do you think? Share your opinions in a comment.

Author's profile photo
Jo Singer

Shortly after retiring as a social worker and psychotherapist, I discovered my "writer's voice"…

Leave a Comment

Enter your information below or log in to skip these fields.
No account? Sign up here.
* indicates a required field.
(will appear with your comment)
For privacy reasons, do not use your full name or email address.
(will not be published)
For your protection, ensure that no personally identifiable information (like full name or email address) is submitted.

Your Privacy

Trust is a cornerstone of our corporate mission, and the success of our business depends on it. P&G is committed to maintaining your trust by protecting personal information we collect about you, our consumers.

Comments (33)

Anonymous (Unverified)
OMG, this must be Dr Death writing this herself, no proof of any condition, judge, jury and executioner, forget we have a system of law, she must feel she is above the law and with KING powers, BTW he did follow the law and did bring the animal in for care, just did not agree with the vet who seems to feel she is divine and righteous enough to circumvent due process, equal protection, her oath, and human rights in the name of her theories, its clearly a case where both legal and civil action is warranted, I hope they sue, illegal seizure without warrant, intentional affliction of emotional distress, coersion, 1983, etc, she should never get the power to do this to anyone again IMO.
Carol (Unverified)
Then why were the owners not given the option of a second opinion....by a veterinarian of THEIR choosing??? As someone who has worked in the veterinary field for many years, I find something very "fishy" about the way this was handled.
Anonymous (Unverified)
Because the cat was far past the point of a second opinion!!! If you truly were in the "veterinary field" as you claim (which is highly doubtful based on your response) the description of the cat, including the word moribund, should have made it crystal clear. mor·i·bund   [mawr-uh-buhnd] adjective 1.in a dying state; near death.
Anonymous (Unverified)
Because the cat was past the point of a second opinion. If you really were in the vet profession as you claim (which is highly doubtful based on your response) the description including the word moribund should have made it crystal clear. mor·i·bund   [mawr-uh-buhnd] adjective 1.in a dying state; near death.
Anonymous (Unverified)
I had a similar experience, and I will tell you that this is a bad thing, but also it's part of a much larger problem. My year-old kitty has long sharp canine teeth that protrude past the jaw, and I accidentally hooked one of them while playing with her and the single tooth cut my hand with considerable bleeding. It was not a bite! I am old and have very thin skin. Just to be safe, I decided to visit a clinic close by to get a tetenus booster, and showed the Doctor kitty's rabies tag and complete records with proof of all required and optional shots. The Dr. gave me the shot, and perscribed antibiotics (which nearly killed me). His clinic personnel filed a report to the local Sheriff that the cat had attacked and bitten me. A few days later, a threatening letter from the County Sheriff's office arrived requiring me to 1)call them and register before a specified date, 2)immediately board the cat for ten days for observation by the vet (over $1,000 cost), or be subject to arrest, fines, and loss of the cat. There is no legislation in our State, County, or city that supports this action unless the cat was not my cat, and had no rabies tag, and I filed a formal sworn complaint against the cat's unknown owner. I groveled properly to the "Doctor" Officer at "Animal Control" who "made a discretionary exception which only she could do" for me and agreed to allow me to keep the cat under "house arrest" and separated from other cats for ten days, then examined by the vet who gave the rabies shot, who would be required to report this to the Sheriff's office. I followed this to the letter, only having a clerk at the vet's office patronize me with "they're only trying to help you!". The vet was outraged, had never heard of such and charged no fee. I received a call later from the Sheriff that I had given her the wrong vet and "it's against the law to lie to an officer". Turns out she had dialed the wrong number, because the vet has more than one office. I had to call the "Doctor Sheriff" to verify I was no longer a person of interest, and this time she was very nice, wanting to discuss specific breeds of cats, etc. The county in which I live has many unsolved human murders, a very high rate of crime (a murder nearly every day), and the Sheriff is constantly complaining about lack of resources. But here is the bigger problem. Political Correctness, organized activist groups, power-hungry people who have little desire to do anything but control other people. This type of activity in all areas of life will eventually lead to George Orwell's "1984". He just got the date wrong. The answer is to return to the past. Marxist "fairness" politics and "victimization" activities the "green movement" or whatever the latest cause-of-the-day is leading to legal enforcement agencies writing regulations, over and above their authority to enforce legally legislated statutory law. "I got rights ya know!", and "There should be a law" is bad enough, but it has led to "I'm a law officer, I will just make up my own law and see if I can bully someone". You see, the do-gooder and the police officer can be the same person. It's even worse if she is a "Doctor Officer".
maudey (Unverified)
they put the wrong person in jail. It's apparent that the vet never even examined the cat. I had an FIV kitty for four years, and when he stopped eating it was because the FIV had attacked his jaw (a common side effect) and he could no longer eat because of the pain. At that stage we decided quality of life over quantity. It broke my heart, but it necessary. It really sounds as if this vet was totally unaware of the path FIV takes in cats. How sad, how sad.
Kitty Advocate (Unverified)
What nonsense. Petside has really become the internet version of a the National Inquirer. Do you seriously believe everything you read? Do you ever, ever look at both sides of an issue? Apparently not. I guess this is to be expected when you let just anyone write for you.