# Ages kittens leave their mother



## tc.catz (May 19, 2010)

Can I just say that not everyone has the chance "not" to get a kitten with its mother from 10 weeks onwards. Ideal situation but it does not always happen that way

We got Tim at 7 weeks from a rescue. His mother was feral. She was an outside cat kept to live round stables. When she had her kittens and they could catch her, they brought her to the rescue to rear the kittens. She went back home when kittens were weaned.

We got a call from the rescue at the weekend - a little ginger boy approx 12 weeks living as a feral - how sad is that. He had been trapped and brought into the rescue last week. He was/is very frightened, shy and timid but he is coming round to being handled. All being well he will come to us beginning of October - yes Tim is getting a brother - I will post a photo later, in work at mo.

In ideal situations all baby animals would be with their mother much longer than most of them seem to be but we just have to make the best of the situaiton and yes I would agree that Tim has some behavourial issues not least the fact that he climbs up your trouser legs with his claws - I am working on that :thumbsup:

I have read on other threads folk giving off about kittens being homed too soon but in many situations especially at the height of the kitten season, rescues have to move kittens on so that they can take more in and they just dont have the time or facilities to keep the kittens with their mothers at the rescue [if indeed the mother is with them as many are orphans]

Tim is my first kitten and I have learned a lot from being on here and no doubt will continue to do so:thumbup:


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

tc.catz said:


> Can I just say that not everyone has the chance "not" to get a kitten with its mother from 10 weeks onwards. Ideal situation but it does not always happen that way
> 
> I have read on other threads folk giving off about kittens being homed too soon but in many situations especially at the height of the kitten season, rescues have to move kittens on so that they can take more in and they just dont have the time or facilities to keep the kittens with their mothers at the rescue [if indeed the mother is with them as many are orphans]


Well since I was probably one of the ones "giving off" let me respond

You (the buyer) always has a choice. No one forces you to do anything. If you deceide to take on a high maintenance pet, that's your choice.

I have no problem with someone taking a 6 or 7 week old kitten as long as they are prepared to do what's needed to socialize that kitten and to make sure it eats.

What I do have a problem with are people who knowingly take 7 week old kittens for the most flimsy of reasons…. Then when everything doesn't go smoothly they are on moaning "my 7 week old kitten won't eat and I don't have money to take it to a vet". Or that Bekki woman on the thread yesterday who took a 7 week old kitten, who she openly admitted was probably even younger than that… then when she had a baby come to visit and the kitten got slightly aggressive with baby (which is of course her fault for not doing the introduction properly) then she dumps the kitten on the CPL the very next day.

I hope that clarifies my stance on the matter. If every owner who found themselves with a poorly socialized kitten was like yourself or Buffie, who are prepared to do the work needed… you wouldn't hear me moaning. But with the fact that for every one Buffie on this forum we have 10 Bekki's….. I will continue to preach my message of not buying too young and/or poorly socialized kittens.

Now onto this bit... about the shelters/rescue orgs

The rescue organization maybe doesn't have a choice and feel they have to rehome early, that doesn't mean you (or anyone else) has to take a too young kitten. (and any rescue organization worth its salt never over commits anyway. Every good rescue organization must know where to draw the line, no organization can save every animal and it foolish of them if or when they think they can). As for orphan kittens... I have being hand rearing kittens for over 20 years now... and I still do not rehome them before 12 weeks of age. It's the rescue organisations job to find foster mothers like myself who are willing to keep these kittens that length of time.


----------



## Merenwenrago (Sep 5, 2010)

Ive had kittens from 4 - 8 weeks and they all turn out to be great cats . 

I always get them from SPCA


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

with all due respect.... we Brits could learn a thing or two from South Africa about good steaks or decent wines... but cat welfare.... I don't think we should be following the SA model.


----------



## suzy93074 (Sep 3, 2008)

Had my cat from 8weeks and never had any probs :thumbsup:


----------



## carolmanycats (May 18, 2009)

I agree that generally 12 or 13 weeks is ideal but not every situation is ideal and, as you say, providing the new owners are sensible, responsible and experienced enough it needn't be a problem.

We got our main show "mog", Raffles, from a rescue at 6 1/2 weeks! They only let us have him so early as he was weaned and we had tons of experience as we had done a fair amount of rescue work and had owned cats for many years. has it harmed him? Well, if he can get just one more Imperial Grand Master Cat certificate and one more UK Grand Master Cat certificate he will be the most highly titled show non-pedigree in the country with the top TICA title, including a Regional Winners one, and the two top GCCF titles too. He has also, to date, won Best in Show 30 times. I am not bragging, nor saying that the show world is everything but am just pointing out that if he was not well socialised, happy, friendly and outgoing he would have bombed in the show world immediately and would not have done as well as he has.

On the other hand, yes, too many people take on a first kitten at that age and are asking for trouble and just give up when things are difficult.

Carol


----------



## Sorcha (Oct 19, 2009)

I think it is very sad when rescues start homing kittens that are just not ready.
Of course there are times when it is impossible to delay homing and the kittens will be better of with someone who has the time for them.
I do however think this should be a very last resort and the kittens should be homed with someone who knows what he or she is doing.

Homing kittens too young and with people who just like the fact of having a tiny cuddly kitten is contributing to the ever growing number of very unhappy cats, that just have not had the proper upbringing. Let those babies have their time with mum and siblings, please.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

Carol, thats my whole point. If we as owners can do what takes then fine, by all means do it. But we do really need to be realistic, and realize its hard work and it takes time and patience. Weve had people on this forum with 7 week old kittens who havent eaten in days and when they have finally got around to weighing (after us constantly urging them to do so) they turn out to be 300grams but trying to get them to take that kitten to a vet well its like trying to get blood out of a stone. They dont have the money for a vetyada yada yada. Then theres people like that bekki woman yesterday takes on a kitten who is probably 5 or 6 weeks old and within (+-) 2 months its dumped at the CPL because she cant cope with its behaviour issues. When in actual fact she had been given tons of good advise but basically just couldnt be arsed taking any of it on board. 

Sorcha exactly. Rescue organizations wouldnt give dobermanns/rottweilers/pittbulls with behavior issues to totally inexperienced homes. And cat rescues should never give high maintenance kittens to people like the bekkis out there. No matter how crowded the shelters are.


----------



## Chez87 (Aug 11, 2010)

I got my kitten from a "friend of a friend" who was going to give him to a rescue centre if she couldn't get rid of him. I was told he was 8 weeks when I agreed to take him, by the time I got him home, I was told he was 6 1/2 weeks. He was the last one left in his litter so God knows what age the others were rehomed at! 

Before I did some proper research, I didn't even know about the problems with kittens leaving their mothers before 12 weeks, otherwise I would've probably not taken him (although if I didn't, the "breeder" wouldn't have waited another 6 weeks to home him, but would have got rid of him asap.) He is a bit bitey, which I'm sure wouldn't have happened if he was allowed to stay with his mother for 6 more weeks, but I'm trying my best to deal with it and research ways to reduce this behaviour, mainly using this forum. I have time to devote to him and would never ever get rid of him for his behaviour, as I realise I'm partly to blame. Apart from that though, he's so loving, and follows me everywhere. I love him to bits.


----------



## Taylorbaby (Jan 10, 2009)

I didnt realize 'rescues' let kittens go at 7 weeks?


----------



## tc.catz (May 19, 2010)

Tje said:


> Well since I was probably one of the ones giving off let me respond
> 
> You (the buyer) always has a choice. No one forces you to do anything. If you deceide to take on a high maintenance pet, thats your choice.
> 
> ...


hmm, can see where you are coming from. I too thought the OP in that post over reacted. My feeling is the kitten reacted from fear not aggression.

As for no one making the buyer "buy" a kitten, well i dont think of it that way. Tim came from a private rescue. People bring cats & kittens to this rescue & if they are told its full they threaten to "dump" them or get them put down etc. They just dont feel they can turn any of them away. They also take in feral cats & kittens. They dont feel they can turn them away & somehow always make space. Once kittens are weaned & litter trained they are homed

Now my view. If i set out to "buy" a kitten it would be to buy a pedigree cat. By going to a rescue & taking on a rescue i feel i am literally "rescuing". Ive never went to choose either kitten, both were agreed on unseen. Ive did that with dogs & pups. I give a"donation" but i dont consider that as "buying". I sign a adoption form & feel i have adopted this very precious baby anmal thats been entrusted into my care.

I initially got Tim for my mum, my dad died suddenly earlier this year, they'd been married 70 years. I thought it would help her (she now lives with me) as she always talks about cats she has owned in years gone by. She dotes on Tim & the dogs. Theyre all her "special" babies. As its turned out Tim is very much my cat.

You speak with passion & i can see how much you love cats both those you own & those you care for. Sadly its not always possible to get fosters like yourself in any aspect of pet rescue. I wish there were more like you.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

tc.catz said:


> As for no one making the buyer "buy" a kitten, well i dont think of it that way


I hope this doesn't sound off… It doesn't really matter how you think of it… in your first post you used words along the lines of "not everyone has the choice to get an older kitten at a good age". I am merely pointing out that yes they do have the choice. Just like with coffee or tuna or eggs or chicken, you can buy (and adopt) ethically or unethically.



tc.catz said:


> Tim came from a private rescue. People bring cats & kittens to this rescue & if they are told its full they threaten to "dump" them or get them put down etc. They just dont feel they can turn any of them away. They also take in feral cats & kittens. They dont feel they can turn them away & somehow always make space. Once kittens are weaned & litter trained they are homed


Because a rescue feels they can't turn them away does not mean they don't have a choice. Feeling that alone is already making a choice. You either turn them away, or you take them in, or you help with euthanasia, or you help to find a shelter that does have more spaces and more resources and point the people in that direction. I don't think this rescue is very good, purely for the reason they obviously have trouble saying no and also for the reason they rehome too young. But hey, obviously you're opinion differs and I am not denying the fact you are entitled to that opinion.

The buying/adopting bit I won't even bother responding to, it purely is just semantics. It all boils down to the same thing… people become the new owners of a cat or kitten. What they decide to call that process is really quite irrelevant.



tc.catz said:


> You speak with passion & i can see how much you love cats both those you own & those you care for. Sadly its not always possible to get fosters like yourself in any aspect of pet rescue. I wish there were more like you


See I disagree here again, and I hope you can understand I am not just being argumentative, I do genuinely get quit irked at the "not always possible" type of replies. Of course experienced rescuers don't grow on trees… but they also don't cost money to train up, just time and effort. If people hadn't spent time and effort helping me over the years, I wouldn't have the experience I have today. You reap what you sew. You invest time and effort in new blood, and years down the line that new blood becomes an old hand and they help and support the next batch of new blood.

If I ran a small home-style rescue, and I was doing it on my own… I simply wouldn't over stretch myself. Just for the record I have been in this situation when I have lived in countries where there were no shelters or cat rescue orgs, and I never overstretched myself, and I never rehomed before 12 weeks old. Yes I had to make some very harsh and difficult choices… but I still maintain I would rather rehome 10 well balanced healthy kittens than 100 Bekki/Eli type kittens. My personal limit (if I had my own home run rescue here) would be, as many kittens as I can responsibly and ethically rear until 12 weeks of age. But…. I would also spend time and effort training/mentoring/coaching other people so they too could become experienced foster mums too.

This past summer I have only had a few orphan kittens and one anorexic old lady cat… not because I can't be bothered anymore… it's because my shelter felt their resources would be put to better use if I was used in a coaching/mentoring role for new foster parents. Now that does mean my rescue has one foster mum less… but in return they get loads of new foster mums. Last night I was called at 2am to a family with a kitten who wasn't drinking…. I can spend time showing that lady how to syringe feed milk… I can't do that if I myself have 2 hourly feeding of my own kittens. It's either or, no one can do both. This foster lady is more likely to remain fostering as she got timely help and support when she had a middle-of-the-night crisis, the kitten is more likely to pull through too (for the same reasons). The net result for the shelter is better because another of their foster mums gains more experience and confidence and a year or two she'll be able to handle anything they throw at her. But this can only be achieved when a shelter/rescue works within their boundaries and knows when to say no.

Another thing I think is worth mentioning…. And again it's not a popular opinion on here and it is one I often get blasted for stating p). We see very many posts on this forum along the lines of "I had to take the 6 week old kitten home with me, because the house was so dirty/the breeder was so uncaring/it would have been put down otherwise". Of course I realize the way people are thinking when they react like this… they are literally thinking "I can save this kitten" and getting all warm and fuzzy about thinking of having a direct role in saving a life. Now that is an admirable thought. But, the flip side is…. it perpetrates the whole business of rehoming too early. Of course I am not giving irresponsible breeders a free reign, they ARE absolutely wrong to practice this… but so are the people who go out every year in their tens of thousands and buy/adopt/become the owners of these too young kittens.

If you look on it another way…. Take the sex trade, where prostitutes are smuggled illegally into the EU from Eastern Europe or Asia, and become nothing more than bonded slaves for their pimps in the UK (or any western Euro country). Of course the pimps are despicable… but so are the punters who use the services of these prostitutes, without the punters, the trade would die out. (and just for the record I have no problem whatsoever with men who use prostitutes, I just wish they would use the ones who are in it through choice, and not the bonded slaves types whose very life and freedom is controlled by gangs of criminal thugs).

And it's not really any different for kittens….. so many kittens ARE sold/adopted at 5, 6 and 7 weeks of age in the UK…. And it's not just the BYB who are to blame. It's also the misguided public. BYB are simply ar$eholes who will do anything to make a buck. On a personal level I can do nothing to change that as I know as long as they can still make money they will continue to churn out kittens. I can however try to educate people by explaining to them the risks and pitfalls of buying too young, and by pointing out to them how they are supporting an unethical trade, albeit inadvertently.

So for that reason…. Every time I see posts (like your OP) that tells me that not everyone has the luxury of buying/adopting/becoming the owner of a healthy well balanced 12 week old kitten…. I will dispute it. Of course they have the choice.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

Taylorbaby said:


> I didnt realize 'rescues' let kittens go at 7 weeks?


 *cat amongst the pigeons time*

*pulls on flame proof suit*

I dont think any good rescue would ever rehome at 7 weeks old.

But maybe that is what differentiates between a _*good*_ rescue and *a* rescue.

I have read other threads on here about small home-run rescues kittens getting shoved from piller to post continually from one foster family to another, adult cats going from home to home to without even being vaccinated, small home run rescues taking very ill cats from irresponsible breeders and letting the breeders get off scott-free from their financial responsibilities. I could go on but I wont as I will just open myself up to flaming.

IMO not all rescues are well run. And any rescue that rehomes 7 week old kittens would not get the title good from me -- and they really have to ask themselves if there are contributing to a problem instead of helping to solve one.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Tje said:


> *cat amongst the pigeons time*
> 
> *pulls on flame proof suit*
> 
> ...


Completely agree with your last couple of posts (been told I can't give any more rep tho!!)

Have to say there are too many 'rescue' homes that really don't deserve that name or appear to really know much about the animals they are supposedly rescuing.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

Cleo38 said:


> Completely agree with your last couple of posts (been told I can't give any more rep tho!!)
> 
> Have to say there are too many 'rescue' homes that really don't deserve that name or appear to really know much about the animals they are supposedly rescuing.


:thumbup: thank you!!!!!! It's nice to know I can temporarily take of my flame retardent suit, lol.

But I do agree.... there's a world of difference between a good cat rescue and a bad or mediocre one. Some rescues really are more "part of the problem" than "part of the solution". But on here when you air unpopular views like that you often get opinions thrown back at you along the lines of "oh you horrible old stick in the mud, people are trying to help animals and all you do is criticise them for not doing it good enough".... but the fact remains that to help animals you have to take a structured and controlled aproach to it and look at long term effects and not just the short term fluffy & feelgood effects of "saving a life". Animal rescue is not something you can do controlled by emotions and good intentions alone. (whats that saying about the road to hell being paved with good intentions?)

if I had rehomed all my kittens over the years at 6 week old instead of 12 weeks olf ... I could probably have "saved" double the amount of kittens. But of course any sensible person would know that many kittens rehomed at 6 weeks old would follow the bekki/eli pattern and a high percentage of those kittens would end up back in the recue circuit after a few months. So that's not _saving_ an animal.... it's actually doing the animal (and animals in general) a dis-service.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Exactly! That's why I only have a certain number of pets. My circumstances mean that I can only cope (both my time & financially) to really give proper care to a few animals.

I envy people that are able to give truly loving, caring homes to many dogs/cats/rabbits, etc. I wish I could but I have to be realistic for my sake & the animals I have already in my care.

I have been in arguements with people on here who (by reading their posts) seem to have small houses full of guinea pigs, ferrets, rabbits, dogs, etc - I think some people are more pet collectors than animal lover unfortunately.


----------



## tc.catz (May 19, 2010)

Tje said:


> I hope this doesnt sound off It doesnt really matter how you think of it in your first post you used words along the lines of not everyone has the choice to get an older kitten at a good age. I am merely pointing out that yes they do have the choice. Just like with coffee or tuna or eggs or chicken, you can buy (and adopt) ethically or unethically.
> 
> I think [I may be wrong and happy to be corrected] it may depend on where you live  where I live it took a very hard drive for quite a few years by organisations such as Dogs Trust and CPL to try and drum into people that its not cruel to spay and neuter, it is not kind to let them have just one litter. Ops were subsidised and thankfully a lot of pet owners took the opportunity to get their pets done. It worked this year for the first part of the year  kittens were scarce. However like everything else for every responsible cat/dog owner there will be 5 that are anything but. Over late Spring/Summer there was once again an abundance of kittens needing homes
> 
> ...


.............. .....


----------



## Gernella (Dec 14, 2008)

Very interesting this thread and it just goes to show that kittens are a bit like babies, any one can have them. Which is perhaps why an awful lot of people in this country are as thick as two planks. They are not fit to have babies or kittens or indeed any pet and the breeding continues. 

Quite frankly I can't see a Rescue centre letting a kitten go out before 12 weeks, even one under pressure. Sometimes you do get kittens younger than this purely through circumstances outside everybody's control. I just wish before people bought pets of any kind they took the trouble to read all about them first. 30 years ago my DHs nephews were given a lovely Labrador, which over a period of 2 years they ruined by tormenting it so it became a nasty dog, which we finished up with although I must admit we never had any trouble with her. 

Kittens are like babies and need a lot of attention (certainly bringing one into a family with really young children is a disaster to me), they don't want squeezing or treating like another little furry toy to keep the baby happy, which is sometimes what happens (a pet would complete the family etc.) The older they are the better to leave mum. Having home visits by reputable Rescue Centres should be applauded, at least they can see the circumstances the animal is going into and whether the adults are responsible.

Makes you wonder though, maybe some of these older cats that go into shelters have deliberately gone walkabout because they've decided their owners are not fit to have them.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

tc catz,

Irrespective to where you live or how many strays there are, the principles of cat rescue always stay the same.

The country I live in currently has very good (government subsidized) shelters, other countries I have lived are the pits of the earth regards animal welfare and paid for their care out of my own pocket and rehomed them myself. My personal opinions and standards dont change whether I live in Amsterdam or Mumbai or Manchester . I still have the same one pair of hands, and if whether I live in Mumbai or Amsterdam or Manchester doesnt have any effect on the amount of care and attention I can give to kittens. If I have 3 spare months I can keep 6 kittens for 12 weeks and responsibly and ethically rehome them at that age, or I can keep 2 litters of 6 kittens in that same time span and rehome them early and hope for the best. And rehoming 6 and 7 week old kittens is simply a case of hoping for the best. It OFTEN goes wrong.

*I chose quality over quantity every day of the week*. And any *good *rescue organization does the same.

Your post is making out like I am just pure lucky where I live and that the points I am making are based solely on where I live and my pure good luck set of circumstances, frankly thats totally inaccurate.

While I will agree that Holland has some of the best animal welfare facilities and structures that I have came across anywhere in the world, please dont forget I am British, have lived in the UK, have been involved in animal rescue in the UK, and have also lived in 3rd world countries where Ive also been involved in animal rescue. My opinions have nothing to do with where I live. Thay are just sane and solid opinions based on fact and experience.

So your point about circumstances simply doesnt wash with me. You look after as many animals as you responsibly and ethically can. No one can save the world. And the messiah complex is one of the biggest mistakes and pitfalls that anyone in animal rescue circles can make.

Also your point about these rescues not being able to find foster parents to train is also frankly rubbish too. Of course they can, but they cant do everything at once. That is why I will always preach a controlled and measured approach. Its pointless saving a kittens life, bottle feeding it every 2 or 3 hours for weeks and weeks (with all the time and money that costs), only to rehome it when it's weaned at 6 weeks old, so that its chances of a forever home are drastically reduced because it has behavioural problems.

I won't even start in on the whole point of what constitues a weaned kitten... I can see you are relatively inexpereinced and I wouldn't expect you to kno wthis anyway, but suffice to say that just because a 7 week old kitten who has been hand reared by me and is weaned with me, won't necessarily be able to eat when he is placed in a new environment with new owners. If you don't believe me just have a quick look around the forum, there are tons of posts on here about "the breeder/sheleter said my kitten was fully weaned, and I even saw him eat a big plate of food at their house, but I have had him for 3 days now and the kitten won't/can't eat".

TC Catz to sum up, you can continue all day long to tell me this rescue you are involved with is the best thing since sliced bread and that they are doing the right thing but rehoming kittens that are weaned. I will continue to dispute that fact.

I wont just "agree to disagree" and fade away on to another thread, lol  because I know that while your intentions are good and fine and admirable, and your heart is firmly in the right place, you are actually wrong, and some of the opinions you have stated on this thread are in fact detrimental to animal welfare in general. And I wont leave the ill-founded statements you make unchallenged. That however doesnt mean that I am pissed off or angry at you, or will speak down to you or insult you or swear at you  no, it just means when you state something that I think is wrong I will continue to point that out to you. Not just for your (possible) benefit, but for anyone else who happens to come across this thread in the future and thinks theyre doing a good thing by rehoming a 6 or 7 week old kitten.

Animal rescue isnt just fluffy feel good stuff you have to be ethical and responsible too.


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

tc.catz ~ whilst it's clear you have only good intentions with your opinions, can you not see that by condoning/excusing poor rescue practises, you're adding to the problem?

As responsible pet owners we should stick to our guns and only ever encourage good practice. That is the only way it will ever be fixed.

Example. If someone came to this thread via a search on Google, they would read a few posts perhaps and then decide rehoming a 7 week old kitten is acceptable. Had they come to the thread and read nothing but negativity for rehoming before 12-13 weeks, they might think twice before letting their moggie litter go at 7 weeks, or think again about getting one of their neighbours kittens, and instead go to a reputable rescue centre that does things right.

With those rescue centres who let kittens go too young, maybe one way to try and stop this is by perspective new owners going to a rescue, choosing a kitten, but asking if they can keep hold of the kittens with their mum/other cats to socialise. Maybe giving the rescue an extra £50 (or what ever) on top of the adoption fee to do this would help. Then the rescue centres would build up funds (instead of running at a loss) which might enable them to expand and take on more staff to train ... so eventually they would have no reason to rehome too early or turn away/pts healthy kittens/cats.

Fixing the problem has to start somewhere, so why not be part of that, instead of being part of the cycle that holds change back?


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

Hey Aurelia, thats how my shelter works. Providing the kittens are healthy and any mother cat is happy for people to see/handle her kittens (and that the foster family allow it) prospective new owners/adopters can come view the kittens in our homes from around 8 weeks of age. They can reserve a kitten either via the foster mum or the shelter (pending the home check), and it will be rehomed with them at 12 weeks old, after its 2nd set of vaccs. It also gives us foster mums a great opportunity to explain to people face to face that we are not just being bitchy know it alls when we dont allow our kittens to be rehomed too young, that we are actually doing it in the kittens best interests and you know people always understand when you explain it to them. They begin feeling a bit ticked off as theyd like to take the kitten off home with them now, but once you explain to them how that time with their mother and siblings is soooo important to kittens (or just siblings if there is no mother cat) then prospective new owners always understand. I am (and almost every foster mum I have ever heard of) always happy to send an email a few times a week with little updates and photos of their kitten, and my door is always open (within reason) to further visits.

And can I also just that I love your line about being a part of fixing a problem.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

Cleo38 said:


> Exactly! That's why I only have a certain number of pets. My circumstances mean that I can only cope (both my time & financially) to really give proper care to a few animals.
> 
> I envy people that are able to give truly loving, caring homes to many dogs/cats/rabbits, etc. I wish I could but I have to be realistic for my sake & the animals I have already in my care.
> 
> I have been in arguements with people on here who (by reading their posts) seem to have small houses full of guinea pigs, ferrets, rabbits, dogs, etc - I think some people are more pet collectors than animal lover unfortunately.


oh gawd, couldn't agree more.... again it's back to that old saying about the road to hell being paved with good intentions. Good intentions are fine and dandly but we all have to be responsible and know our own boundaries ... financial boundaries and time constraints. And not just mere pet owners like you and I have to know those boundaries... rescue organisations have to know theirs too.


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

Hey Tje, sorry I didn't come and reply before now. On reading it felt like you were fighting a one man/woman battle. It shouldn't be like that! 

The fact you let people come and view from 8 weeks is excellent. I know from raising our litter of 4 peds how valuable the lessons they teach each other and their mum teaches them can be. You only have to watch for a while to see it! So when perspective new owners do view at 8 weeks, you will likely only have to watch for a few minutes and you can say .. 

"See how the mum cat is battering the boisterous kitten now? It's not cruel of her, in fact she is teaching the kitten to calm down and behave. If the kitten had been rehomed at this age she/he would not be having these lessons and you could have got a kitten that is very boisterous and doesn't know when to stop. They may have gone on to have a biting and/or scratching problem. I'm sure you wouldn't have wanted that right?"

In fact, this is a brilliant way for people to learn! Wouldn't it be grand if shelters could have a dedicated viewing room where members of the public can come and watch a 7 week+ litter interact with each other? There could be an experienced member of staff on hand to explain what they are seeing. With a donation box by the viewing window for anyone that wants to donate to keep these good practices going 


You know, if I were ever lucky enough to win the lottery I would open the best rescue centre ever! It would be not only the most ethical centre out there, but it would also be an educational place for the general public to come and learn about animals/pets and what. A bit like petting farms, but aimed at pets instead of farm animals.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

Gernella said:


> Quite frankly I can't see a Rescue centre letting a kitten go out before 12 weeks, even one under pressure. Sometimes you do get kittens younger than this purely through circumstances outside everybody's control.


what a *good* rescue centres does when it gets kittens in under 12 weeks old is to send them to live temporarily with foster families. Someone like BillyBoysmammy for instance. Say her rescue oprgs finds itsself with a litter of 6 or 7 week old kittens, she will get a call to see if she can look after to them in her own home until they are 12 weeks old. Because she is an expereinced foster mum, she knows how to intervene with a syringe if and when they don't eat, she knows what signs to look out for reagrds sickness, she knows how to handle inapproriate biting and scratching behaviour, she knows how to make controlled introductions with other pets and children, and the kittens will be fully vaccinateded and socialized before they leave her care.

Although small differences will always exist in exact manners of rearing kittens... (like Billyboysmammy is more of quality cat food through the blender lady when she has to force feed, and I swear more by Hills AD, lol ) all good rescue orgs follow this basic principle of fostering and rehoming at 12 weeks.


----------



## tc.catz (May 19, 2010)

Aurelia said:


> tc.catz ~ whilst it's clear you have only good intentions with your opinions,
> As responsible pet owners we should stick to our guns and only ever encourage good practice. That is the only way it will ever be fixed.
> 
> Example. If someone came to this thread via a search on Google, they would read a few posts perhaps and then decide rehoming a 7 week old kitten is acceptable. Had they come to the thread and read nothing but negativity for rehoming before 12-13 weeks, they might think twice before letting their moggie litter go at 7 weeks, or think again about getting one of their neighbours kittens, and instead go to a reputable rescue centre that does things right.
> ...





> can you not see that by condoning/excusing poor rescue practises, you're adding to the problem?


I find the above comment totally uneccessary and offensive - I really thought this was a genuinely nice friendly forum


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

I would have been more worried if you didn't find it offensive. It means you care 

But it is not unnecessary, it's the truth. You just have to open your eyes a little more and use that 'hurt' feeling to encourage the good practices instead of the undesirable ones


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

tc.catz said:


> I find the above comment totally uneccessary and offensive - I really thought this was a genuinely nice friendly forum


TC Catz, Aurelia isn't being nasty…. She is being down to earth honest. It simply is true that often when we are not a part of the solution, we are a part of the problem. In the same way…. Say BillyBiysMammy hand fed orphaned kittens till they were 4weeks old, then she trained them to wean with her own hands, licking it off her own fingers till they got the knack of it themselves… I KNOW how much work she puts into those first 5 or 6 weeks… 2 hourly feeding day and night is not easy on anyone, you are a zombie after the first week… and that's before I go off on another rant about feeding actually being easier than keeping them clean… but if she rehomed those bottle fed, hand reared bundles of fluffiness at 7 weeks old she simply would be adding to a problem, and that would negate all the good work she had done hand rearing them.

I know you don't like to hear that…. but it is a fact.

This is a genuinely nice forum, and Aurelia is a genuinely nice lady.... but in the same way if someone said "hey you know what, my 6 week old kitten has the runs and it stinks of poo so I am going to bath it tomorrow", now that person isn't an animal hating bas*ard just wanting to harm a kitten, he is probably just a little misguided and doesn't know the possible dangers his actions could have... so we psoters in here have to make a choice of

a) the kitten getting sick because it got bathed and got a chill
b) offending the poster by telling him his idea wasn't the greatest

I personally will always opt for animal welfare against possibly hurting someones feelings... all of us should.

You will get over a hurt feeling TC Catz ... a malnourished young kitten could die from being bathed .... any kitten rehomed at 6 or 7 weeks old has increased risks and none of us should shy away from stating those facts just because we could bruise an ego.

oooops... can I just add for the record that i was using BBM and a hypothetical situation of irresponsible cat rearing PURELY as a hypothetical example of how one responsible act (hand rearing) doesnt cross out one irresponsible act (rehoming too young) .... BBM would NEVER EVER rehome 6 or 7 week old kittens. I don't even need to ask her that... the notion would simply NEVER EVER enter her head


----------



## buffie (May 31, 2010)

tc.catz said:


> I find the above comment totally uneccessary and offensive - I really thought this was a genuinely nice friendly forum


I am finding this thread so informative.Iam seeing rescue/rehoming from the inside and have only admiration for those like Tje,BBM, and all the other fosterers who dedicate their time and care to rear and turn out happy,healthy,well adjusted kittens.This will rarely be the case with 7/8 week old kittens ,as an ill informed person who bought a 9week old kitten and went to hell and back trying, and hopefully succeeding,to undo the problems this kitten had I feel Aurelia's comments are correct.If someone new to kittens googles for advice on kitten ages,how old to leave mum ect and come across a pet forum thread where rescues are frequently letting kittens be rehomed at 7/8weeks then it will look to be acceptable,when it is clearly not.


----------



## tc.catz (May 19, 2010)

Tje said:


> TC Catz, Aurelia isnt being nasty. She is being down to earth honest. It simply is true that often when we are not a part of the solution, we are a part of the problem. In the same way. Say BillyBiysMammy hand fed orphaned kittens till they were 4weeks old, then she trained them to wean with her own hands, licking it off her own fingers till they got the knack of it themselves I KNOW how much work she puts into those first 5 or 6 weeks 2 hourly feeding day and night is not easy on anyone, you are a zombie after the first week and thats before I go off on another rant about feeding actually being easier than keeping them clean but if she rehomed those bottle fed, hand reared bundles of fluffiness at 7 weeks old she simply would be adding to a problem, and that would negate all the good work she had done hand rearing them.
> 
> I know you dont like to hear that. but it is a fact.
> 
> ...


Check your inbox


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

tc.catz said:


> Check your inbox


TC catz… I checked my inbox. 

Can I please politely ask you that you when you have issues with other forum members that you please address those issues with those members, and not PM me about them. I can only speak for myself, I can't speak for other people. If you have an issue with something (anyone other than me) has said on this thread, then please don't draw me into that. It's uncomfortable for me:.

For what it's worth, In my opinion no one on this thread was trying to hurt your feelings, some people just did not agree with you. I think the general consensus right now, it's fair to say is… many of us think you are well intentioned but misguided.

As to the other claim you make … sorry sweetie, I don't believe you… if you are so sure of your facts then come on here and say it openly. I am sure of my facts, I don't want to hide in PM. I think you are having a bit of difficulty here dealing with the fact that your post is getting quite a bit of disagreement, and in an attempt to save face you're making things up and PMing me with "well I phoned XYZ and they said 6 weeks old is the best time to rehome" . Sorry TCCatz, that's lala land stuff and I am wayyy too long on the tooth to believe it.

Thank you.... Tje 

------

Can I just make a general point about rehoming to anyone that is willing to listen (yeah yeah then I'll shut up, lol ) ..... and point out that reputable organization like the CPL and RSPCA are working their butts off trying to set the minimal rehoming age of kittens at 8 weeks. This is NOT because they think that 8 weeks is the OPTIMAL age to rehome kittens…. No it's because they realize it's a REALISTIC goal that they can achieve. Change is made in small stages and to start with 8 weeks is as good as they can realistically hope to get. When the UK public as a whole, and people like we often see in the PF who rehome at 6 weeks, start to accept the 8 week old minimum rehoming policy, then you will find that the RSPCA and CPL and other leading organizations like them will change their policy to 9 or 10 weeks. Then when they Great British public accept that they will change their policy to 11 or 12 weeks. It's insane to think that a country where rehoming 6 week old kittens was the norm for years, will or can change over night, and luckily organizations like the CPL and RSPCA realize that and fit their policies around the fact that change is a slow process, that Rome wasn't built in a day, and that by slowing screwing the minimum rehoming age of kittens upwards is the way forward.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

buffie said:


> I am finding this thread so informative.Iam seeing rescue/rehoming from the inside


Thats good Buffie that youre getting a better 360 degree view of rescue and rehoming. In the same way of course you are THE very person who can testify to the problems that can arise when a kitten is rehomed too young and poorly socialized. Meeko is so lucky he landed in your lap. Most people would have turfed him in a shelter in a matter of weeks. None of us go on and on about these these things just to hear ourselves speak (see ourselves type?? lol) anyone who has been on the receiving end of a poorly socialized kitten that was rehomed too early, or anyone who has had to resort to force-feeding a 6 or 7 week old 300gram kitten. well, we know what its like. But theres always someone who has to point out heyyyy my cat came to me at 6 weeks old and he is the best cat ever, never had a problem , lol I just feel like saying heyyyy my grandpa smoked 40 Woodbine a day since he was 15 till he died at 83 when he got run over by a bus. In other words, there are always exceptions to the rules. Some smokers do live long a healthy lives, and some kittens rehomed at 6 weeks old are fine. Doesnt change the fact that smoking is dangerous and rehoming 6 & 7 week old kittens is not a good idea.

ohhhhh.... I think I just promised to shut up, lol..... off to bite my fingers off


----------



## Atlantys (Aug 24, 2010)

Tje said:


> ohhhhh.... I think I just promised to shut up, lol..... off to bite my fingers off


As long as it's you doing the biting and not a kitten, you probably won't get any arguments about your behaviour.


----------



## tc.catz (May 19, 2010)

Tje said:


> TC catz I checked my inbox.
> 
> Can I please politely ask you that you when you have issues with other forum members that you please address those issues with those members, and not PM me about them. I can only speak for myself, I cant speak for other people. If you have an issue with something (anyone other than me) has said on this thread, then please dont draw me into that. Its uncomfortable for me:.
> 
> ...


Lets hope admin lock this thread -


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

wow TC Catz, that was a really adult reply.


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

Oh my. How old are you tc. catz?


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

tc.catz said:


> Lets hope admin lock this thread -


why should the mods lock this thread TC Catz? Just because people don't agree with you?? You're the only person being rude and insulting here. You're the only one looking a bit of an uneducated, ill-tempered oaf... the rest of us have managed perfectly well to get our points over without resorting to childish insults.


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

I was going to say I've only had kittens (apart from Cotton's kittens) from 8 weeks or 10 weeks and then I see this


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

Out of interest Sequeena, what ages did you let Cottons kittens go at?


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

Aurelia said:


> Out of interest Sequeena, what ages did you let Cottons kittens go at?


11 weeks, why?


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

What all of them? For some reason I remember them going at different times. I was just curious


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

Yeah Casper went a little earlier than Lacey who went bang on 11 weeks. Leah84 was away on holiday (was going to have her at 10 weeks) and I said I'd hold onto her.

The rest are here with me, happy as larry.


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

sequeena said:


> Yeah Casper went a little earlier than Lacey who went bang on 11 weeks. Leah84 was away on holiday (was going to have her at 10 weeks) and I said I'd hold onto her.
> 
> The rest are here with me, happy as larry.


Ahhh right! Casper is the one that went at 8 1/2 weeks right?

How many did you keep in the end? Bet they are running you ragged like my little buggers!


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

Aurelia said:


> Ahhh right! Casper is the one that went at 8 1/2 weeks right?
> 
> How many did you keep in the end? Bet they are running you ragged like my little buggers!


I think he was 9 weeks when he went.

The 3 that were left. I had interest in Gwyn but nothing came of it (never heard from the person who then gave the lame excuse of no phone/internet despite walking past me several times and blanking me). My niece was interested in him then but I'd already formed too much of a bond and decided to keep him.

They're not too bad, they have their moments though. They were worse when they slept in the living room as they were running round the place banging stuff/going in the blinds etc. They have a bedroom to themselves now full of toys etc. so they're much happier.


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

Err why are you restricting them to one room?  They are what 13 weeks now right? Let the poor little buggers stretch their legs ... that's why we kitten proof our homes


----------



## suzy93074 (Sep 3, 2008)

From what I have read Kittens between the age of 7- 9 weeks are ready to go to prospective owners -??? pedigree breeders saying the age of 12 weeks 

Have also read that Kittens are fully weaned at 8 weeks old and can be ready for their first vaccinations?

I do understand that the longer a kitten is with its mother the more benefits with regards to optimising skills/behaviour/nuture etc and that anything below 6 weeks is obviously wrong so who is right ???


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

suzy93074 said:


> From what I have read Kittens between the age of 7- 9 weeks are ready to go to prospective owners -??? pedigree breeders saying the age of 12 weeks
> 
> Have also read that Kittens are fully weaned at 8 weeks old and can be ready for their first vaccinations?
> 
> *I do understand that the longer a kitten is with its mother the more benefits with regards to optimising skills/behaviour/nuture etc *and that anything below 6 weeks is obviously wrong so who is right ???


You kind of answered your own question


----------



## suzy93074 (Sep 3, 2008)

Aurelia said:


> You kind of answered your own question


But from what I have read on this thread its a definite NO NO to let kittens go until they are 12weeks old and any lower will be frowned upon by most people on here - but that is not strictly true is it? I can see the benefits yes but its not life threatening if they go at 8 weeks?


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

Aurelia said:


> Err why are you restricting them to one room?  They are what 13 weeks now right? Let the poor little buggers stretch their legs ... that's why we kitten proof our homes


Err I'm not. I said when they slept in the living room ie they now sleep in their bedroom.


----------



## Chez87 (Aug 11, 2010)

I think the point Aurelia is trying to make is that no, it's not life threatening if they go at 8 weeks, but it can cause difficult behaviour that some people (especially if they don't research) won't be able to deal with properly, and may end up eventually rehoming the cat/kitten if the behaviour doesn't improve. The longer the kitten stays with mum, the less likely these problems are and you won't get this knock on effect.


----------



## suzy93074 (Sep 3, 2008)

Chez87 said:


> I think the point Aurelia is trying to make is that no, it's not life threatening if they go at 8 weeks, but it can cause difficult behaviour that some people (especially if they don't research) won't be able to deal with properly, and may end up eventually rehoming the cat/kitten if the behaviour doesn't improve. The longer the kitten stays with mum, the less likely these problems are and you won't get this knock on effect.


But most kittens are fully weaned at 8 weeks old though ?? the only reason from what I know that pedigree cats go later is because they suckle for two weeks longer - correct? so all kittens that go to homes of 8 weeks are more prone to behaviour problems ?


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

Chez87 said:


> I think the point Aurelia is trying to make is that no, it's not life threatening if they go at 8 weeks, but it can cause difficult behaviour that some people (especially if they don't research) won't be able to deal with properly, and may end up eventually rehoming the cat/kitten if the behaviour doesn't improve. The longer the kitten stays with mum, the less likely these problems are and you won't get this knock on effect.


^^ This 

By keeping the little ones until they have reached 12-13 weeks minimum, you're giving them the best chance in life. I know it's not always going to be the case as some will still dump cats when they are no longer cute or whatever. But by cutting out the obvious reason for behavioural problems you're at least cutting out that reason for kittens being rehomed. Hope that makes sense.


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

suzy93074 said:


> But most kittens are fully weaned at 8 weeks old though ?? the only reason from what I know that pedigree cats go later is because they suckle for two weeks longer - correct?


Nooo, that's not the reason. Whilst there will be some benefit to the kittens still drinking from the milk bar past the age of 8 weeks, it's not the reason why. It's more to do with behavioural aspects. The age beyond 8 weeks is when mum really teaches them about the big bad world and how to have good manners (biting and scratching). Then they as litter mates also continue to learn from each other.



suzy93074 said:


> so all kittens that go to homes of 8 weeks are more prone to behaviour problems ?


Yes


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

Of course, and how could I forget ... It's also about being responsible and making sure that any kittens that leave you are healthy. SO by letting them go at 12-13 weeks you can insure they have been vaccinated, wormed and deflead too ... and in some case early neutered as well


----------



## suzy93074 (Sep 3, 2008)

Aurelia said:


> Nooo, that's not the reason. Whilst there will be some benefit to the kittens still drinking from the milk bar past the age of 8 weeks, it's not the reason why. It's more to do with behavioural aspects. The age beyond 8 weeks is when mum really teaches them about the big bad world and how to have good manners (biting and scratching). Then they as litter mates also continue to learn from each other.
> 
> Yes


Well mine must be the odd one out then LOL he has been fantastic from the day I got him - never had any accidents he has never sprayed never pead anywhere he shouldnt never bitten/scratched (unless in play) and never had any issues with regards to behaviour:thumbsup: I guess what im trying to say is that many new cat owners coming on here who have got kittens from 8 weeks etc may feel that they are doing the wrong thing because of others views - on here - now rightly or wrongly as a forum we should be allowed to post about our animals without the fear of being shot down or frowned upon.


----------



## buffie (May 31, 2010)

Aurelia said:


> Nooo, that's not the reason. Whilst there will be some benefit to the kittens still drinking from the milk bar past the age of 8 weeks, it's not the reason why. It's more to do with behavioural aspects. The age beyond 8 weeks is when mum really teaches them about the big bad world and how to have good manners (biting and scratching). Then they as litter mates also continue to learn from each other.
> 
> Yes


Please anyone out there who thinks this is all breeder hype it is not.All kittens crossbred or pedigree will benefit from being with their mum and siblings till 12 weeks+.I thought my kitten had been socialized as he was "bomb proof" very forward,frightened of nothing,but he had no manners,did not know how far was too far and to be honest was a complete little b*****d.I,like many thought 9weeks was not unreasonable ,but I know now ,and am willing to admit Iwas so wrong.I would never have a kitten before it was at least 12weeks.I would rather pay the person extra to keep the kitten than take it to early.Luckily Meeko is progressing well and I'm hopeful of a near normal adult cat but he is now 7months and I have had a hard 5months but I love the little bugger so nothing will stop me.


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

suzy93074 said:


> Well mine must be the odd one out then LOL he has been fantastic from the day I got him - never had any accidents he has never sprayed never pead anywhere he shouldnt never bitten/scratched (unless in play) and never had any issues with regards to behaviour:thumbsup: I guess what im trying to say is that many new cat owners coming on here who have got kittens from 8 weeks etc may feel that they are doing the wrong thing because of others views - on here - now rightly or wrongly as a forum we should be allowed to post about our animals without the fear of being shot down or frowned upon.


I knew you were fishing for this :lol:

Just because you have been lucky, it doesn't mean everyone else will be. Tje gave a good example of this earlier, did you read it?

Prevention is ALWAYS better than the cure (or having to deal with/implementing a cure). It's better to try and stop these problems, so eventually those people who rehome because their kitten scratches or bites will be no more, as people will become more responsible and start letting their kittens go around the 12-13 week old mark. It's a long way off yet though, mostly because of people who still don't understand why, even when the facts are laid out in front of them.

This will have a knock on effect with rescue centres ... It all adds to the bigger picture. If you want to contribute to the problem by telling people you got a kitten at 8 weeks old and it never had a problem, please do. But please remember your words may well mean the difference, and some little kitten barely old enough to eat a meal itself might get taken from it's mother too early because of your words.

Google is a very powerful tool when it comes to knowledge, it wont pick out the most morally correct answers in order, it will pick out the most popular answer (good and bad popularity). For someone who is just dying to go and buy a 6, 7, 8, 9 week old kitten, they may read some of this thread, think oh that's not such a good idea, no , no (reading down the posts till they get to yours) ... but Oh look, that lady got her kitten young, and she was fine ... it must be OK to do it then!

OK so I know the vast majority of people will have more brain cells than that, but an awful lot wont! And what happen when that kitten is purchased and she isn't as lucky as you? The best we can hope for is that they come and ask for advice on how to deal with the problem, but in reality they may well just abandon the kitten at a rescue centre ... or worse, the streets. Then they may well go out again and get another kitten, and keep doing this until they find a kitten that is cute and cuddly and doesn't bite or scratch ... or mess in quite little dark corners.

There is no way on this earth that any responsible breeder will encourage someone to buy a kitten aged -8 weeks. And certainly if someone comes to the forums with a problem -8 week old kitten, we as sure as hell will firstly tell them why, but then we will go on to offer a solution.


----------



## suzy93074 (Sep 3, 2008)

Aurelia said:


> I knew you were fishing for this :lol:
> 
> Just because you have been lucky, it doesn't mean everyone else will be. Tje gave a good example of this earlier, did you read it?
> 
> ...


didnt disappoint u then did I :lol::lol: Look Im not trying to pick a fight here I can see what you are saying and in an ideal world yes would be fab if it worked like this but unfortunately we dont - I made my choice to get at 8 weeks and I dont regret it and I dont see why others should be made to feel bad if they choose to as well

There is a lot of good advice given from yourself and a few others on here but at the sametime I do sometimes read and think god its like the gastappo -  Im not asking you or anyone to change your ethics and what you believe in I would never dream of doing that but I just feel that maybe a lot of newbies could be put off posting or afraid to because they dont meet certain peoples expectations -and dont want to be jumped on which is kind of defeating your object really of getting peeps to understand and learn - on the whole most of us on here are here because we love our pets so that can never be a bad thing


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

Can I just clarify things…. This post started out about someone more or less saying they were forced to get a 6 or 7 week old kitten and that rescues didn't have any choice but to rehome at this age or even earlier due to overcrowding and lack of resources. That's rubbish as I have already explained.

but for the record… my personal point of view is

*8 weeks is the absolute minimum *rehoming age… anything before that age is highly irresponsible and potentially very dangerous and detrimental to the kittens physical and mental health
10 weeks is better than 8 weeks
12 weeks is better than 10 weeks.

I am not saying people who rehome 8 week old kittens are wrong to do so… the only thing I would ask them to do is to pop thekitten on the scales before buying them (adopting them) and check they weigh at least 800 grams. (see the bit I said earlier about weaning… a kitten being weaned in the home the kitten was born in, and eating on its own surrounded by siblings and mother cat and foster mum the kitten knows and trusts is not the same as eating in a new home with nothing familiar around it, that's why we very often see problems in here with kittens at even 8 weeks old who don't eat for days after being rehomed… to stop this as much as possible check and double check the kitten is at least 800grams. Don't touch it with a bargepole if its 600grams, force feeding is not a doddle and its fraught with dangers)

I am not saying rescues who rehome at 8 weeks are wrong to do so. It's an _acceptable_ minimal age. It's not great or ideal or the best possible solution. But it's sufficient and it's a step in the right direction.

I would categorically state however that the longer you leave the kitten with its mother and siblings (up until around the 12-13 weeks) the happier, more balanced, better adjusted and behaved that cat will be.

So if someone asked me my advice on what is the best age to get a kitten at, or to rehome their own litter of kittens... I standby, the BEST age is after they reach 12 weeks.

But of course like smoking and lung cancer… it's a numbers game. Not all smokers get lung cancer… not all kittens rehomed at 5, 6 or 7 weeks have behavioural problems or can't eat unaided.

Buffie's kitten Meeko was 9 week old when she got him…. If he had been 12 or 13 weeks… I am not _guaranteeing_ he would have been flawless…. But I would bet my very last pound on the fact he would have been a damn site better and easier to deal with.

And I only bet on dead certs, lol

(Buffie ^ that is NOT a dig at you and I know you'd be the first to back me on this as I know you are the person in here who has done this, seen this, and wears the t-shirt daily, and you're also one of the very few cat owners who are (wo)man enough to see it through and do the best by your cat, while most would have dumped poor Meeko long ago into a shelter)


----------



## Aurelia (Apr 29, 2010)

suzy93074 said:


> didnt disappoint u then did I :lol::lol: *Look Im not trying to pick a fight here I can see what you are saying and in an ideal world yes would be fab if it worked like this but unfortunately we dont - I made my choice to get at 8 weeks and I dont regret it and I dont see why others should be made to feel bad if they choose to as well*
> 
> There is a lot of good advice given from yourself and a few others on here but at the sametime I do sometimes read and think god its like the gastappo -  Im not asking you or anyone to change your ethics and what you believe in I would never dream of doing that but I just feel that maybe a lot of newbies could be put off posting or afraid to because they dont meet certain peoples expectations -and dont want to be jumped on which is kind of defeating your object really of getting peeps to understand and learn - on the whole most of us on here are here because we love our pets so that can never be a bad thing


You're not getting it are you? lol.

By saying people *choose* to buy a kitten at 8 weeks old, your saying that even with all the advice and proof of things being better for a kittens health, mentally and physically being homed at 12-13+ folks will still choose to home a kitten at 5,6,7,8,9 weeks old?

What possible reason can a person have for doing that apart from a selfish one in wanting a smaller/younger kitten?

I have no qualms with people who make this choice without knowing the facts, it just one of those things people 'know' because someone told them. But if someone comes onto the forums with a problematic kitten aged -8 weeks, I'm going to say that why ... most of the time the question is asked anyway 'Why is my kitten scratching me so bad?' etc. But like I said also (I feel like I'm repeating myself here), I will also try and help solve the problem.

To solve a problem means getting to the root of it as well doesn't it?

Yes we all love our pets on the forums (well most of us), so surely doing our best for the ones we have and the ones we might get in the future is a sign that you really do love them?


----------



## tc.catz (May 19, 2010)

> Posted by: Tje
> On: 22-09-2010 11:52 PM
> 
> Can I just clarify things…. *This post started out about someone more or less saying they were forced to get a 6 or 7 week old kitten and that rescues didn't have any choice but to rehome at this age or even earlier due to overcrowding and lack of resources. **That's rubbish as I have already explained. *


Your interpretation! Ring the phone number i gave you....


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

tc.catz said:


> Your interpretation! Ring the phone number i gave you....


I did already  Lovely city Belfast


----------



## tc.catz (May 19, 2010)

Tje said:


> I did already  Lovely city Belfast


Prefer the country myself.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

suzy93074 said:


> From what I have read Kittens between the age of 7- 9 weeks are ready to go to prospective owners -??? pedigree breeders saying the age of 12 weeks


Missed this bit earlier... I am not a breeder and my kittens are never pedigree. I stand by 12 weeks as being the BEST age to rehome a kitten .... as .... well.... I have watched very many kittens grow up and I can see that even though most of them would be ok going at 8 weeks old... every other week spent with their mother and siblings (or with my own two adult cats who are great at training the young whipper snapper orphan kittens) is such a bonus to them that I see it more as a necessity than a luxury. Many other foster mums (and rescue orgs) share this feeling too... I know BBM does.... and it has nothing to do with pedigree or moggy.... all cats benefit from those extra weeks in the "nest". Though I won't condemn 8 week old rehoming, it's a reasonable minimal, just not optimal. It's a bit like whiskas, I won't knock it, but I won't recommend it either.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

another I missed earlier



suzy93074 said:


> But from what I have read on this thread its a definite NO NO to let kittens go until they are 12weeks old and any lower will be frowned upon by most people on here - but that is not strictly true is it? I can see the benefits yes but its not life threatening if they go at 8 weeks?


I never said its a definite NO NO to rehome at 8 weeks.

I don't frown upon it anymore than I frown upon feeding whiskas (lol, and I am the one who constantly comes to the rescue of the whiskas feeders, lol). But I do know what's a better cat food for the same price as whiskas, and I do know what an optimal age to rehome a kitten is.

As for life threatneing when they are rehomed at 8 weeks... providing they are a good healthy weight (800 grams or more) then no, generally it shouldn't be life threatening. But behavioural problems in cats does affect their quality of life and often their length of life as they often land up as an adult cat rehomed in an overcrowded shelter, or even earlier some kittens are dumped in shelters because of their poor socialisation. When shelters are full harsh choices are made and cats are euthanised. Bad tempered adult cats don't fare too well when it comes to choosing who dies and who lives.

But.... back to the life threatening bit.... life doesn't just mean they can eat unaided and their weight is ok, they have to be able to fight off diseases and illness and kittens don't have a developed immune system.

There is a lady right now on the health and nutrition forum, rehomed 2 kittens at 7 weeks old, the next week they got conjnctivitis, the week after that one of them (maybe/probably both of them) has ringworm. (this screams compromised immune system and a stressful period to me, anyhow... ). Ringworm in a big 5 kilo 4 year old cat isn't life threatening, no.... but in a tiny wee kitten weighing 750 grams .... bathing a kitten every second day for 6 weeks long (that's 21 individual baths) and leaving the shampoo on it for 10 minutes to let it kill the spores... I can tell you that's tricky and fraught with danger. It's September now and not that cold.... wait till the beginning of November and you are litterally having kittens yourself worrying if the next bath is going to be the one that kills your kitten. The medication they need has a list of contraindications a mile long. Kittens are more vulnerable to ringworm the younger they are AND all cats are more vulnerable to ringworm at times of stress...and rehoming is one of the most stressful times for a kitten. An 8 week old is more likely to get it than a 12 week old as the immune system is developed to a lesser extent. And I would rather start bathing at 12 weeks than at 8 weeks as they are more likely to survive it.

Then there are things like the 2 sets of vaccinations... because I foster both orphan kittens and kittens with mothers... I can assure anyone that those with mothers fair better after their jabs than those without. I have hardly ever had an orphan kitten without a sibling (those that have no sibs I find a sib for them) but I can tell you those wee kittens have a tough time getting a jab without the back up of mum and brothers and sisters to comfort them when they feel a wee bit poorly, and on the few occasions I have had a lone kitten at jab time... it's downright sad to see. They often become very withdrawn and depressed without cat comfort... depsite that fact that my own two cats are pretty good surrogate mums used to orphans.


----------



## Milly22 (Sep 15, 2008)

Wow don't you just detest people PMing rather than replying on the thread, it's well weird, childish and lots of other words.


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

Milly22 said:


> Wow don't you just detest people PMing rather than replying on the thread, it's well weird, childish and lots of other words.


yep, I wasn't that chuffed about it I can tell you. 

Ignored the PM completely, and only half replied here on the post. I refuse to get into off forum debates about one poster's personality just because some other poster doesn't have the bottle to come right out and say it on the forum.

Yeah childish, weird, and about 117 other adjectives I could use, lol. :thumbsup:


----------



## Tje (Jan 16, 2010)

Cats Protection National Cat Centre
Chelwood Gate
Sussex
RH17 7TT
tel: 08707 708 649

National Helpline Number: 03000 121212

TC Catz, I just got off the phone with the above (which I think is the national HQ of CP) after leaving my number with the Belfast branch and not getting the call back the answering machine said I would get. I explained someone said they had been told by the Belfast branch of CPL that the optimal age for rehoming kittens was between 6 and 8 weeks old. The person was frankly dumbfounded and like me simply didnt believe this was said apart from in extreme emergency situations. Ill try and explain what they said:

The person I spoke to assured me that they try as much possible to advocate keeping kittens till around 10 weeks of age. They said when needs must that kittens *can* be rehomed at 8 weeks and they had no real problem with that, but its not the *best* age and they always advise 10 weeks or older. They cant comment on any individual question that was asked of the Belfast branch, they can only comment on their own national guidelines (which also cover the Belfast branch) and that is *best* age to rehome is 10 weeks old.

The person I spoke did however say, that it is possible in highly unusual emergency like situation that a branch of CPL like the Belfast branch could have said to a caller that kittens could be rehomed as young as 6 or 7 weeks old, but that advise would be dependant on the individual set of circumstances that that caller presented them with.

The two examples the CPL member of staff gave me of circumstances where they would feel forced to accept rehoming at 6 or 7 weeks old would be for instance:

*if a tenant was threatened with eviction because of the kittens and had a choice of eviction or rehoming of the kittens at 6 weeks old, 
*or say where a cat owner died and there was a mother cat with 6 week old kittens and a family member of the deceased was willing to take on the mother cat but not the kittens then yes it is possible a CPL member of staff would in those emergency circumstances say it was okay to rehome at 6 or 7 weeks.

I also got a little speech about their foster mums and how they could step in to help in situations where owners felt it was impossible to keep the kittens till they were at least 8 weeks old, preferably 10 weeks old.

So TC, I have no idea who you spoke to in the Belfast branch, or what set of guidelines they are reading from, but their national centre seems to disagree.

I am not saying you are lying. I am just saying when I call up and ask a simple question what is the best age to rehome kittens I get told 10 weeks. You claim they told you 6 to 8 weeks. Big difference.

I do want to kind of emphasize (as did the person on the phone) the importance of knowing the exact question asked because we can all slant an answer to a question by loading that question in the first place

ie.

if the question is what the best age to rehome kittens, its a simple question that gets a simple answer10 weeks old

but maybe if someone phones up and says, I am getting evicted if I cant get rid of my kittens today, they are only 6 weeks old and if I cant rehome them tomorrow I will drown them o rdump them in a bus stop then yes I can well understand that a CPL staff member would say fine, go ahead and rehome them then add on, where possible, how the CPL can help with temporary fostering

Again, not saying you are lying.... I am just stating what I was told.


----------



## Sorcha (Oct 19, 2009)

I'm so glad you called Tje. I simply couldn't believe a rescue would, in normal circumstances advice kittens to be homed at such a young age.

You're right though, we don't know what the question was exactly. Our rescue homed 2 kittens at 8 weeks a short while ago. The mother had no milk and so the kittens had to be hand reared and after a few weeks, the mother wanted to have nothing to do with her kittens. They have been homed together, with someone who has lots of experience caring for kittens with a difficult start and so yes, I thought that was the best thing for them.


----------

