New York Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo has been very vocal about his view of those who support pro-life policies: They were among those he declared to have “no place” in the state of New York. When he signed one of the nation’s most extreme abortion laws, one of the arguments put forth was that it kept the government out of a doctor’s office. Well, in New York, the nosy government is shifting to your veterinarian’s office.

Why? Well, it seems state legislators think they know more about what is good for your cat than you and your veterinarian. It’s passing a blanket, sweeping prohibition on onychectomy — commonly called “declawing” — for cats. For vets who carry out an onychectomy, there is a $1,000 fine.

Now, some of us in our humble shop serve as staff to these wonderful, loving creatures (cats don’t have owners, they are the shot-callers in that particular human-animal relationship). No matter how they come into your life, it quickly becomes very hard to imagine not having them. We want them to have long, healthy, and happy lives in a “furever” home with us.

We don’t need government to poke its nose into the relationship between us, the cat to whom we are wait staff, and the veterinarian whom we trust. The fact is, onychectomy is necessary in some circumstances.

The New York State Veterinary Medical Society outlines some of those circumstances where onychectomy may be necessary for the cat to avoid being re-homed or sent to a shelter for the sake of the human. These cases include chemotherapy patients, people on blood thinners, those with compromised immune systems, organ transplant recipients, and hemophiliacs. For older people, onychectomy may help reduce the risk that there will be a scratch that leads to infection.

Now, we don’t believe that people want to further overcrowd presently overcrowded shelters or see animals just abandoned and left to their own devices, and actively seek to make that happen. But at the same time, we can look at countless times where policies were enacted with the best of intentions only to lead to suboptimal, even tragic, results. Remember Michelle Obama’s school lunch “reforms” that led to food pitched into compost piles?

Well, the onychectomy ban could be along that path. According to the ASPCA, about 3.2 million cats end up in animal shelters in a given year. Of those, 860,000 are euthanized.

But let’s also be clear about this: If an intrusive government takes the option of onychectomy off the table for pet owners, then the chances have increased that the cat will be abandoned or surrendered by an owner who can’t deal with the situation. Onychectomy should be — to borrow a phrase — safe, legal, and as rare as possible.

The fact of the matter is that government ought to stay out of the relationship between a cat, the person taking care of it, and the vet they trust to provide the medical care. As we have seen all too often when government becomes involved, the problems aren’t solved — they’re just made worse.