Depends on if we are talking front or rear. If dogs are born with rear dewclaws they are probably best removed but most dogs, who are not working dogs, seem to manage with the claws on the front legs. It is a big op. when they are older as it involves what is the equivalent of our thumb joint and far more complicated than tail docking in the older dog although that too is best avoided by being done, if necessary, in the first 48 hours of life before the nervous system develops and healing is at it’s optimum.

Its Dew Claws on the back legs I'm talking about
I did'nt have the option to get them removed at a few days old ,so it would be a full op now ,so far there has been no problems with either dog
I think unless it looks like a problem could happen I will just leave them there rather than put the dogs through a op they might not need

In some breeds to have dewclaws on the hind legs is part of the standard, other breeds are never born with them and others are but they are removed at birth or shortly after so they do not cause problems later in the dogs working life. However it is not likely that a pet dog will have problems although the odd catch or tear may happen the forced removal of the whole nail is not likely.

Did have a dog once who had a lot of trouble with his front dew claw as it grew out at an angle but as he got older the problems got less and although at one time I thought it may be necessary to have them removed in the end he made it through life with the odd period of having it bandaged.

Would never suggest that they were removed from an adult dog unless there was injury, but if it is likely that the dog will or may be worked (like gundogs or sheepdogs) the perhaps they are better removed at birth.