If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Please Read
I think this is an important paper. "WHEN THE BOND FAILS: ABUSE, HOARDING, AND RELINQUISHMENT Lila T. Miller, BS, DVM North American Veterinary Conference January 18, 2008 The Association of Human-Animal Bond Veterinarians defines the human-animal bond as the relationship between people, animals, and their environment. In most cases, the term is perceived to refer to a situation that is a positive one. Veterinarians focus on providing education, resources, and support to clients, the public and other professionals to create, enhance and sustain an ethical and mutually satisfying relationship between animals and people. When a positive bond has formed, not only do we feel good emotionally, there is scientific evidence that there are physical benefits as well. Much attention has been given to medical research that reveals that pet ownership can lead to a reduction in stress, blood pressure and the number of visits to the doctor's office. There has been widespread publicity about the value of pets for troubled children, the elderly, and people suffering and recovering from major clinical illnesses such as heart disease and depression. We hear that pets are increasingly considered to be members of our families. We give them gifts, celebrate their birthdays, take them with us on vacations and to restaurants, and even share our beds with them. The American Pet Products Manufacturing Association (APPMA) estimates that 63% of US households own a pet, which equates to 69.1 millions homes. They also estimate the amount of money spent on pet food, toys, accessories, and veterinary care in the United States in 2006 was 38.5 billion dollars. This certainly paints an appealing picture of the human-animal bond and the life of pampered dogs and cats in the United States. But what happens to these family members if the bond never forms or fails? The consequences are usually tragic for the animals, resulting in abandonment, relinquishment or abuse. This is the part of the picture that still goes largely unnoticed by both the veterinary profession and the public, but that needs widespread attention. ANIMAL ABUSE Animal abandonment and abuse or cruelty can be the darkest consequences of a failed bond. Animal abandonment is defined as animal cruelty specifically in many states. Pets who are the victims of non-accidental trauma or deliberate abuse and cruelty may be presented to the veterinary practice, but the true cause of the problem may remain hidden if the veterinarian is unwilling to accept that possibility. One of the most common reasons that veterinarians fail to identify animal abuse is that they have not been trained to recognize the warning signs. Furthermore, many do not believe it is a problem that they will ever encounter in their practices so they fail to include it in their list of differentials. But DeViney (1983) found that in pet-owning households (in NJ) with a history of child abuse, utilization of veterinary services was consistent with the norms in the non-abusive population. Landau (1999) found that 87% of veterinarians who responded to a survey had treated abused patients; 50% saw one to three cases per year, 60% suspected they had treated animals that had been abused, and 20% had clients they suspected were being abused. An Ohio State University study (Sharpe, 1999) found the mean number of animal abuse cases seen per year was 5.6 per 1000 patients. So while it may be easy to hide abuse from veterinarians by not bringing the animal in for care, it is a mistake to believe abused animals will not be seen in the average practice. Definitions Many veterinarians fail to recognize animal abuse because of the various ways it may be defined. The terms abuse and cruelty are often used interchangeably. Even though cruelty is defined by state laws and not by the veterinarian, it can be useful to have a basic understanding of how the terms abuse, neglect and cruelty are commonly used in these cases. While the 1997 American Humane Association (AHA) publication: Recognizing and Reporting Animal Abuse: A Veterinarian's Guide defined abuse in one of the chapters as the "willful knowledge of failing to provide care, or awareness of doing something harmful," Vermeulen and Odendaal (1993) proposed a typology of physical abuse that included passive neglect or ignorance as well as active maltreatment that we so commonly think of such as beating, burning, drowning, and so forth. The typology included the lack of food, water, shelter, sanitation, necessary veterinary care to alleviate suffering, and general neglect, as well as categories for emotional abuse. Although neglect was defined in the AHA publication as "unintentional lack of care that comes from ignorance," some states include it in their legal definition of cruelty, which makes it prosecutable. Finally, cruelty was defined generically in the 2006 forensics text by Sinclair, Merck and Lockwood, Forensic Investigation of Animal Cruelty as "any act that, by intention or by neglect, causes unnecessary pain or suffering to an animal." By broadening the generic definition of cruelty, veterinarians will be more likely to at least consider the possibility that an animal has been cruelly treated, and to act upon those suspicions. Cruelty does not have to be egregious, deliberate, or intended for pleasure in most states to be prosecuted at least as a misdemeanor offense. But instead of focusing on one's preconceived ideas of what constitutes abuse, neglect and cruelty or the differences between the terms, the veterinarian should understand that cruelty is defined by statute and that the statutory language may encompass all the terms. The Role of the Veterinarian in Cruelty Cases Veterinarians are mandated in at least eight states to report cases of suspected abuse or animal fighting to the appropriate authorities, and may suffer penalties for failure to do so. State laws vary and may require veterinarians to have suspicions, reasonable or direct knowledge, or be a "known case" in order to mandate filing a report. The AVMA position statement on reporting animal abuse is that "veterinarians may observe cases of animal abuse or neglect as defined by federal or state laws or local ordinances. When these situations cannot be resolved through education, the AVMA considers it the responsibility of the veterinarian to report such cases to the appropriate authorities. Disclosures may be necessary to protect the health and welfare of animals and people. Veterinarians should be aware that accurate record keeping and documentation of these cases are invaluable." When deciding whether to file a report or educate, consideration should be given to the number, severity and duration of the problems. Good faith reports of suspicions of animal abuse should be filed on the basis of the physical exam and history. Veterinarians must use good judgment in considering how to handle these cases just as they put in considerable time determining the best treatment course for any client. The report only initiates the legal process that launches an investigation to uncover the facts. Veterinarians serve as the medical expert on a team that includes law enforcement, animal control officers, shelters, and prosecutors. As the medical expert, the veterinarian examines, documents, preserves and interprets the forensic evidence only. The prosecutor presents it to the court and it is important to remember that the final determination of cruelty is made by a judge and jury, not by the veterinarian. The "Link" Between Animal Abuse and Human Violence When discussing the failure of the human-animal bond, the link between human violence and animal abuse must be explored. Animal abuse usually does not occur in isolation or a vacuum. It is often violent and deadly, and when animals are at risk, humans are at risk and vice versa. It is often stated that animal abuse serves as a sentinel for the early detection of family violence. The recognition that an animal is being abused may provide the first point of intervention in breaking a continuum of violence that includes domestic, spousal and elder abuse as well as other violent crime. Many households with children also have pets, and aggressive acts against a family member, including the family pet, place all the family members at risk, and can spill over into the community. The studies that provide evidence that this link exists yield some very startling and sobering statistics. Studies by Kellert (1985), Felthous (1977) and Ressler (1988) have shown that 25% of aggressive male prison inmates, 30% of convicted child molesters, 36% of assaultive women offenders, 48% of convicted rapists, and 46% of incarcerated sexual homicide perpetrators had childhood and adolescent histories of animal cruelty. Ascione found in 1998 that 71% of women seeking shelter from an abusive situation reported that their partner had hurt, threatened or killed their pet; 32% of these women reported that one or more of their children had hurt or killed pets. DeViney found in a 1983 study that animals are abused in 88% of homes where physical child abuse occurred. An MSPCA study of men who were prosecuted for animal cruelty revealed that men who abused animals were five times more likely to have been arrested for crimes of violence against humans, four times more likely to have committed property crimes, and three times more likely to have committed drug and disorderly conduct offenses. Merz-Perez found in a 2001 study that violent offenders in a maximum security prison were significantly more likely to have a prior history of acts of animal cruelty than non-violent offenders. In the case of several highly publicized school yard shootings, prior to the shootings, Kip Kinkel decapitated cats and blew up cows, Andrew Golden shot dogs, Luke Woodham beat and torched his dog Sparkle, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold mutilated animals, and Michael Carneal threw a cat into a bonfire. Serial killers Jeffrey Dahmer, Albert DeSalvo, David Berkowitz, and Ted Bundy all committed earlier acts of animal cruelty. Kellert and Felthous conducted studies of the childhoods of men in prisons and psychiatric hospitals for criminal behavior and found that there was a significant association between acts of cruelty against animals in childhood and later serious, recurrent aggression against humans. In another study, HSUS estimated that approximately 12% of the reported acts of intentional animal cruelty involved some form of family violence. There is a strong association between early childhood animal cruelty and later juvenile delinquency, violent adult criminal behavior and conduct disorders. While not all children who commit acts of animal cruelty become criminals or become involved in illegal or violent activities in adulthood, they are more likely to do so than children who do not. In 1966, Hellman and Blackman determined there was a positive and predictive association between a triad of behaviors including bed-wetting, arson, and animal cruelty, and future criminal activity. The FBI has been known to refer to this as the "homicidal triad." Children exhibiting these three behaviors should receive serious counseling and intervention to prevent future acts of violence. A study by Tapia in 1971 also revealed that not all children "outgrow" performing acts of animal cruelty. That study indicated that 62% of the children who entered clinics for treatment for animal abuse and other disorders were still abusing animals 2 to 9 years later. Animal cruelty should not be viewed as just "boys will be boys." In 1964, anthropologist Margaret Mead warned that "the most dangerous thing that can happen to a child is to kill or torture an animal and get away with it." Veterinarians who encounter deliberate animal abuse by children should evaluate it very seriously and discuss it with their parents and encourage them to seek professional counseling. Many experts believe that early interventions can prevent future violence against both humans and animals Reasons for Animal Abuse The bond may be broken or never have been formed in cases of animal abuse. There is no single profile that describes the animal abuser. Just as with family violence, animal abuse crosses all socioeconomic lines. Animals may be abused by people for a variety of reasons. Kellert and Felthous provided some of the following reasons: "1) to control the animal, possibly to eliminate undesirable characteristics; 2) to retaliate against the animal for a presumed wrong; 3) to satisfy a prejudice against a breed or species; 4) to instill aggressive tendencies in the animal; 5) to enhance one's own aggression; 6) to shock people and gain attention; 7) to retaliate or get revenge against another person; 8) displaced hostility, 9) nonspecific sadism, including sexual assault." Animal abuse may be used to hurt or control family members. Abused children may perform acts of animal cruelty or even kill their pets to protect them from even worse abuse, to act out aggression against a more vulnerable household member, to act on aggressive feelings toward abusive adults, or because they are imitating the behavior they have observed. Warning Signs of Animal Abuse Veterinarians should be aware of the following warning signs that animals may be abused: 1) injuries that could not logically have occurred in the manner that the owner has described; 2) discrepancies or changes in the history; 3) lack of concern about the disposition of previous pets or their (in)ability to care for animals; 4) refusal to acknowledge the seriousness of a condition, provide treatment for or follow-up on treatment of painful conditions that cause suffering; 5) indifference about the cause of an injury; 6) constant parade of new animals; or 7) use of several veterinarians. A combination of the following physical signs of neglect in one animal or the presence of these signs in several animals may present cause for concern: 1) emaciation; 2) severely matted hair; 3) avulsed and ingrown nails; 4) multiple fractures or wounds in various stages of healing (characteristic of the "Battered Pet Syndrome"); 5) heavy parasite infestations with resultant anemia and skin lesions; 6) collars that are embedded in the neck; 7) overall filth; or 8) bite wounds that are characteristic of dog fighting. Animals who present with problem behaviors such as inappropriate elimination, aggression, noisiness, disobedience, or destructiveness or who are in need of constant supervision are also at greater risk of being abused. Bestiality/Zoophilia Bestiality is one of the oldest and rarest forms of animal abuse, yet Kinsey found as far back as 1953 that overall, 8% of the US male population surveyed admitted to having had sexual contact with animals. No one likes to talk about it, but bestiality is currently not illegal in all states. Historically, sexual contact with animals has been punished by society in a wide variety of ways, ranging from death to no punishment at all. In many cases, the animal is injured or dies as a result of the sexual encounter. Sexual assault of animals may occur in a variety of settings. It may be used to satisfy adolescent curiosity about sex, as a substitute for a human sexual partner, or to control more vulnerable family members or children. Zoophilia is a term that is used for situations in which the person claims to be in a loving sexual relationship with the animal. According to the American Psychiatric Association, zoophilia is defined as a disorder of sexual preference. There are many Internet sites devoted to zoophilia and reason to be believed it may be more widespread than reported. Veterinarians should be aware of this activity because they will be responsible for analyzing the forensic evidence for confirmation of actual sexual contact with and/or cruelty to the animal. (For more information the reader is referred to Helen Munro's article on sexual abuse of animals as part of the Battered Pet Syndrome [Munro, 2001] or the textbooks, Veterinary Forensics by Melinda Merck or Forensic Investigation of Animal Cruelty by Sinclair, Merck and Lockwood, 2006.) ANIMAL HOARDING Most veterinarians will eventually encounter an animal hoarder. On the surface, people who take in multiple animals may seem to epitomize the human-animal bond at its best, but animal hoarding is a multifaceted problem that often causes true and intense animal suffering. A case definition (taken from Illinois state law) of an animal hoarder is someone who 1) accumulated a large number of animals that overwhelmed their ability to provide minimal standards of nutrition, shelter, sanitation, and veterinary care; 2) denied the deteriorating conditions of the animals and environment; and 3) denied the negative impact of the collection on health and well-being of themselves or other household members. Some experts believe that many hoarders suffer from an obsessive-compulsive or other psychological disorder. Hoarding is not about good intentions gone awry; dead and severely ill animals were found in 80% of cases. Hoarders are not just the stereotypical well meaning "cat lady." It is true that nearly three quarters of them are women and live alone, but they are represented in every socioeconomic level and many professions, including shelter rescue and foster care groups. Some do have minors living with them. Almost half are over 60 years of age and cats are slightly more hoarded than dogs, although it can be other species as well. They can be very clever and use several veterinarians to escape detection. The Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium (http://www.tufts.edu/vet/cfa/hoarding/) that is studying this problem has provided some warning signs that a client may be a hoarder: 1) perfuming or bathing the pet to conceal odors; 2) using a surrogate pet to get medications for other unseen animals; 3) showing an unwillingness to say how many pets are owned; 4) claiming to have just found an animal in deplorable condition; 5) having a constantly changing parade of pets; 6) office visits for problems related to poor preventive health, filth, overcrowding and stress (fleas, ear mites, intestinal parasites, upper respiratory infections, urine scald); or 7) demonstrating an interest in acquiring more animals. Veterinarians who suspect their clients may be hoarders should resist the temptation to simply offer discounted and pro bono services because that only serves to enable their behavior and prolong animal suffering; instead they should file a report to get assistance for both the human and animal victims of this problem. Veterinarians cannot handle these cases alone, as treatment or simple removal of the animals from true hoarders never solves the problem. The recidivism rate is 100%. They will always obtain more animals unless there is constant follow up monitoring and counseling. A community inter-agency approach involving the department of health, social services, psychiatrists, law enforcement, animal shelters and veterinarians is necessary to find a resolution to the problem of animal hoarding. For more information go to http://www.tufts.edu/vet/cfa/hoarding/ RELINQUISHMENT Finally, animals who are victims of an unformed or broken bond often wind up as a "problem" for local humane societies and animal control shelters. The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) National Outreach Department estimates there are between four and six thousand animal shelters in the US. Because there are no federal regulations and few state guidelines governing the operation, definition of or record keeping in shelters, no one knows the exact number. It is known that millions of animals enter shelters and are euthanized every year. While some of these animals are surrendered by their owners for euthanasia (rather than going to their private practice) due to sickness and old age (Kass et al, 2001) shelter euthanasia numbers are still used to measure the magnitude of the pet population problem. While many communities are struggling to reduce the euthanasia of healthy, adoptable animals through the use of aggressive adoption, behavior counseling and spay-neuter programs, one of the highest risk factors for death for dogs and cats in this country remains ending up in an animal control shelter. The National Council on Pet Population and Study (NCPPS) is a coalition of animal welfare and animal control organizations, breed groups, industry and veterinary professionals, that was formed to conduct studies to determine the "number, origin and disposition of pets (dogs and cats) in the US, and to recommend programs to reduce the number of homeless pets in the US." The Council reached the conclusion that "many human companion animal relationships fail because people have inaccurate and inappropriate expectations of their pet's medical and behavioral needs, and their role and responsibility in providing for these needs." In addition, they determined the top ten reasons for dogs and cats being relinquished to shelters. The list for dogs included: 1) moving; 2) landlord issues; 3) cost of pet maintenance;, 4) no time for pet; 5) inadequate facilities; 6) too many pets in the home; 7) pet illness; 8) personal problems; 9) biting and 10) no homes for littermates. The top ten reasons for cats being relinquished to a shelter included: 1) too many in the house; 2) allergies; 3) moving; 4) cost of pet maintenance; 5) landlord issues; 6) no homes for littermates: 7) house soiling; 8) personal problems; 9) inadequate facilities, and 10) doesn't get along with other pets. Veterinarians should be familiar with the issues that increase the risk of relinquishment due to a broken bond and be prepared to intervene to keep animals in their homes. They can offer affordable behavior counseling and neutering services, work with the local shelter, encourage adoption of shelter animals and support pet friendly legislation that allows pets in housing, and opposes breed and insurance bans, etc. If all else fails, families that relinquish their pets to shelters should be encouraged to provide the shelter with honest information in order to successfully rehome the animal. Conversely, in shelters with high euthanasia rates where rehoming opportunities are scarce, relinquishers should be provided with a realistic assessment of the chance of their pet finding a new home so the shelter will not be blamed if the animal is ultimately euthanized. The reader is directed to the NCPPSP website at www.petpopulation.org and www.aspca.org for more information on these topics. CONCLUSION When the human-animal bond fails or is negative, the consequences for animals can be devastating, often resulting in relinquishment, hoarding or abuse. Whatever fate befalls the animals, the ultimate costs are too high for the profession to ignore. The veterinarian's oath calls for veterinarians to use their skills for the benefit of society through the relief of animal suffering and the promotion of public health; and to practice conscientiously and in keeping with the principles of veterinary medical ethics. Educating clients and the public about responsible pet ownership and care, providing affordable spay neuter, veterinary care and behavior counseling, and taking a leadership role protecting animals is surely as much a part of the professional's duties as practicing quality medicine. When deciding how to manage cruelty cases, veterinarians should always bear in mind that cruelty is defined by statute and the court, not by the veterinarian. In addition to promoting and preserving a positive human-animal bond, by investigating and reporting suspected animal cruelty, veterinarians can also enrich and save the lives of both humans and animals." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Please Read
Response to "Phil P." :
I think this is an important paper. I do too. "WHEN THE BOND FAILS: ABUSE, HOARDING, AND RELINQUISHMENT Lila T. Miller, BS, DVM North American Veterinary Conference January 18, 2008 BUT... this is a very scary read for someone who wants to help animals. For example. We came to know Gabby about a year ago. Phat Kat about 3-4 months ago. Lumkin about a month ago. (Lumkin found a home after we had him neutered -- that home dumped him back outside.) Does it not appear that I have a "parade of animals?" Animals that I may need to say, "Ummm... duuhhhh... I have no clue what happened. I'm just here to help." Sounds to me like the the "duh" may find me at the end of a criminal investigation. I think this article covers a very serious topic, but it's similar to throwing salt at your dinner plate. Everything gets salty. -- -Lost Remove the extra words to reply by e-mail. Don't e-mail me. I am kidding. No I am not. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Please Read
"hopitus" wrote in message ... Long but worthwhile, Phil. Years ago, one of the first docs I personally worked for was and still is a radiologist specializing in pediatrics. He is on record locally as an expert court witness who is regularly called to testify in child- abuse cases. He knows (and I learned from him) certain signs in bone injuries of abuse vs. "accidental" injury. I sure hope somewhere there is a similar expert witness vet who could testify re animal abuse, even though penalties far lesser than for child abuse. One of the biggest problems I've run into in abuse/neglect/cruelty cases is getting the vet to actually testify in court- unless its a highly publicized case- like the two dogs we rescued that were burned with acid. http://maxshouse.com/urgent_matters.htm (Snowy & Champ). They were on all the TV channels and in all the regional newspapers. 'Never caught the *******s who did it- even with a $16,000 reward. Its even harder to get a vet to turn in a client unless its a really horrific case-- then you still have to prove the owner did it- which can be very, very difficult- unless you have an eye witness or there's physical evidence that the animal was abused repeatedly. A lot of vets I know- other than a few- seem to think turning in a client would hurt their businesses. I think they would lose all credibility if their clients ever found out they didn't! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Please Read
"-Lost" wrote in message ... Response to "Phil P." : I think this is an important paper. I do too. "WHEN THE BOND FAILS: ABUSE, HOARDING, AND RELINQUISHMENT Lila T. Miller, BS, DVM North American Veterinary Conference January 18, 2008 BUT... this is a very scary read for someone who wants to help animals. It doesn't scare me. The only thing that should scare you is what happens to the animals. For example. We came to know Gabby about a year ago. Phat Kat about 3-4 months ago. Lumkin about a month ago. (Lumkin found a home after we had him neutered -- that home dumped him back outside.) Does it not appear that I have a "parade of animals?" Uh, no. How about me? At any given time I have 20-30 cats- sometimes more- in my house- not counting my 11. Animals that I may need to say, "Ummm... duuhhhh... I have no clue what happened. I'm just here to help." Sounds to me like the the "duh" may find me at the end of a criminal investigation. Wow! I think this article covers a very serious topic, but it's similar to throwing salt at your dinner plate. Everything gets salty. Actually, the article sprinkles salt only where its needed. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
do i even need to read | bartlet | Cat health & behaviour | 1 | October 19th 07 05:10 PM |
You've got to read this | Phil P. | Cat health & behaviour | 4 | May 18th 07 01:25 PM |
OT GOT TO READ THIS | Matthew | Cat anecdotes | 12 | August 25th 06 07:02 AM |
ALL PLEASE READ | Patty Jo | Cat health & behaviour | 19 | June 13th 05 02:06 PM |
TEST (But please read) | Sherry | Cat anecdotes | 13 | January 8th 05 09:45 PM |