advocacy
Suffering in Silence In an ongoing, occasional series of articles on dogs and abuse, Beth Napolitano examines elements of animal cruelty syndrome and what current research can teach us about individuals who are more likely to engage in animal abuse
A
ccording to Payne et al. (2015), for the last 15,00030,000 years, humans and dogs have lived together. In fact, the evidence strongly suggests that the two have coevolved (Ollivier et al., 2018; Leathlobhair et al., 2018). Likely, our early ancestors kept the friendlier, tamer wolves around their settlements to help them with hunting and guarding and, in turn, those tamed animals stayed because of the food and shelter they shared with them (Coppinger & Coppinger, 2001). MacLachlan (2010) notes that the more modern tradition of keeping pets may be a “leftover” behavior from our ancestors’ days of working with animals. The tendency to share our homes with our pets, according to Brad shaw (2017), tends to run in particular cultures and families. Children often imitate their parents, and recent research has discovered that some people have a “petkeeping” gene (Jacobson et al., 2015). That same research shows that people who tend to love animals also tend to have a greater concern for nature in general (Jacobson et al., 2015). Ja cobson et al. (2015) have also documented that the pattern of how one interacts with their pets has a genetic link in that 37% of the various pet interaction “styles” are genetically influenced. Environmental factors, lifestyle and early experience account for 6371% of the variation in in teraction style. Canadians for Animal Welfare Reform (CFAWR) (2010) notes that, in homes where early experience and lifestyle include abuse and domestic violence, children raised in that environment are three times more likely to be cruel to animals than children living in nonviolent households. Thirtytwo percent of battered women report their children “had hurt or killed animals” and approximately “60% of college students who wit nessed or perpetrated animal cruelty as children also reported experi ences with child maltreatment or domestic violence.” (CFAWR, 2010). The New York Times (2010) documents, in letters from several con tributors, cases where the family dog is seen as “disposable property” and taken to the veterinarian for euthanasia, “not because they were aggressive or ill but because they ‘shed too much’ or ‘bark too much.’” Mersereau (2010) continues by noting that, “Until more people come to view themselves not as ‘owners’ of their pets but as ‘guardians’ of their animal companions’ wellbeing, the current cycle of violence, neglect, abuse and abandonment will continue to increase, passed on from one generation to the next.” Words matter.
Terminology and Motivations According U.S. Legal (2019): “Zoosadism is a term used to refer to the pleasure that an individual gains from the cruelty to animals. The pleas ure may be a kind of sexual pleasure. Zoosadism is getting sexually ex cited by causing harm to animals. It is different from zoophilia (sexual attraction of a human towards a nonhuman animal).” The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (2017) lists animal cruelty as a conduct disorder, “a repetitive and consistent pattern of behavior in which the basic rights of others...are violated.” Conduct disorder is a di agnosis that is also associated with those who abuse humans. CFAWR (2010) lists several motivations for animal abuse, including: • Enhance own sense of aggressiveness. 56
BARKS from the Guild/September 2020
© Can Stock Photo/chalabala
Animal cruelty typically starts to be seen at the age of 12+ years occurring along with other antisocial behaviors
• •
Shocking others for amusement. Sense of loss of control over own lifecontrol is gained by abusing animals. • Retaliation against someone by harming their pet. • Sadismjoy of inflicting pain on others. • Imitationsocial learning, child imitates parent. • Sexual gratification. • Boredomabuse of others enhances mood. • Venting of angeranimal is the scapegoat. • Animal hoarding. As for children who are cruel to animals, according to Johnston (2011), mental health professionals take a child’s age and level of matu rity into account when determining if and when professional help is needed. She outlines the following categories: • The Experimenter: (ages 16 or developmentally delayed). This is usually a preschool child who has not developed the cognitive maturity to understand that animals have feelings and are not to be treated as toys. This may be the child's first pet or s/he doesn't have a lot of experience or training on how to take care of a variety of animals. • The "CryforHelp" Abuser: (6/7 12). This is a child who intel lectually understands that it is not okay to hurt animals. This behavior is not due to a lack of education, instead, the animal abuse is more likely to be a symptom of a deeper psychologi cal problem. As previously noted, a number of studies have linked childhood animal abuse to domestic violence in the home as well as childhood physical or sexual abuse.
