Crazed kitty attacks baby, forces family to call 911

OMG... I've entered the twilight zone here.

This was a 7 month old BABY ... not "some" kid or "the kid"... a BABY. That baby was most likely just sitting up and at the most scooting on the floor. NOT crawling and no where close to walking. It was harmed by that cat. NO way, NO how is that okay, in my world. NOT happening. I would have snatched that cat up by it's short hairs and put it in a crate and taken it to the first shelter near me. GONE. OUTTA my house. Nothing, no one harms a baby in my world.

Scratches on the baby's face: Cat scratch disease - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They stated the cat has a history of being aggressive. So the baby shouldnt have been left on the floor with the cat out.

Their fault.

If you put your baby in danger ,it will get hurt. They did an injustice to their baby and their cat, allowing both to be harmed.
 
Baby who pulled the cat's tail and cat reacted by swatting the baby. That's how they teach kittens of what not to do. If you are going to take the cat to a shelter for a normal reaction please don't get a pet to begin with. Owning a pet is a commitment and one shouldn't expect that pet will be perfectly behaved. If you are afraid of cat scratch disease then you certainly shouldn't have a cat.

BULL. That was a 7 month old baby ... barely mobile. The cat could have LEFT and the baby would have no way to catch it BUT it didn't. The cat attacked the baby instead of moving on and scratched it's head. That's not okay in my world.

http://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/baby-development-7-month-old

I have rescued many animals and given them furever homes. NOT once did I give a pet the benefit of the doubt over a human baby. NOT once. Won't ever, ever place an aggressive animal with anyone, ever. Being a cat is not an excuse to harm a baby. JMO.
 
They stated the cat has a history of being aggressive. So the baby shouldnt have been left on the floor with the cat out.

Their fault.

If you put your baby in danger ,it will get hurt. They did an injustice to their baby and their cat, allowing both to be harmed.

Hindsight is 20/20 isn't it?

My concern is always and will forever be for a human baby. Always. NOT a cat ... nor a dog ... nor a chicken ... nor any "pet", etc.

This wee thread here has just proved to me that I don't belong here anymore. :(
 
BULL. That was a 7 month old baby ... barely mobile. The cat could have LEFT and the baby would have no way to catch it BUT it didn't. The cat attacked the baby instead of moving on and scratched it's head. That's not okay in my world.

http://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/baby-development-7-month-old

I have rescued many animals and given them furever homes. NOT once did I give a pet the benefit of the doubt over a human baby. NOT once. Won't ever, ever place an aggressive animal with anyone, ever. Being a cat is not an excuse to harm a baby. JMO.

Being a cat is being a cat. It's not an excuse for anything. A cat is a cat.
When its tail is pulled, it will swat whoever is pulling the tail. Someone concerned for a human baby shouldn't leave that baby in a position where this baby can pull a tail on a cat.
 
I am MOST DEFINITELY siding with the cat.

Was hoping poor Lux would find a new home with unconditional love and no abuse. Rather sad to read the updates regarding "therapy". It is not the cat who needs therapy...the adults need to be more watchful of what contact their baby has with an animal and anger management therapy might be in order for them so as not to lash out at the animal when it acts instinctively to being harmed.

:(

MOO

I was also hoping they leave the cat in a shelter so it can be adopted by someone who knows how to deal with cats (and no small children). I can't believe this guy admitted to kicking a cat and shelter gave it back to him anyway.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
65
Guests online
3,914
Total visitors
3,979

Forum statistics

Threads
592,547
Messages
17,970,826
Members
228,807
Latest member
Buffalosleuther
Back
Top