The Relationship between Animal Abuse and Domestic Violence - Research Paper Example

?The Relationship between Animal Abuse and Domestic Violence The bond between humans and domesticated animals has been ingrained in the culture of mankind since the beginning of cultures and civilizations. It is a common fact that without the help of animals, humankind would not have evolved and survived until this day. As a consequence, the term “companion animals” came to be known, with the purpose of not just being beasts of burden, but also as members of the human family being able to give unconditional love (Wempen 1). However, despite the strong affinity of humans to their animals, the strength of the human-animal bond has initially been undermined by sociologists due to early ideas that only relationships among humans are sustainable in the long run, and are therefore much more important (Taylor). The strong bond of man to animals shows the capacity of the former to create meaningful bonds with other creatures not at the same step in the ladder of the intelligence hierarchy. Also, the positive effects of animals on human behavior became numerous as time progressed, which eventually lead to the creation of a new branch of sociology called environmental sociology, which deals with the relationship of the environment and the society (Zilney 1). Within the familial relationships that are abusive in nature, various kinds of cruelty are reported to exist. These would include emotional, physical, sexual, financial, and deliberate animal abuse (Taylor). Not only would one parent be suffering from either one of the abuses, but also the pain would resonate to other members of the household, including the children or pets. The perpetrator would most likely take down the weakest members of the household such as the pets in order to control the other victims (Brimer 654). However, because of the possible imprisonment that domestic violence could do to the abuser, the anger and aggression is instead turned to the animals instead, to further silence the other victims regarding the abuse. This makes it easier to detect animal abuse than domestic violence because even when the children or the abused parent are hidden from authorities, there are high chances that the neighbors would be witnessing such violence being done to the animals. Also, even without the presence of law enforcement officers, visiting veterinarians could assess if the animals are properly kept or not, thus further strengthening suspicions of domestic abuse (Ascione and Shapiro 571). It is also helpful to ask victims of abuse about their pets and how they interact with the abuser, because these victims may not be able to tell authorities right away about what they experience. By asking about their pets, law enforcement officers could identify if the abuse is not limited to the animal alone, which is more likely the case. Thus, by starting the interrogations from the treatment of animals, it can be expected that the victims would eventually confess to being abused themselves, thus implicating the abuser not just in hurting pets, but also other members in the family unit. With this in light, while the strength of the assumption that performing animal abuse itself causes domestic violence in the future, it is implicitly confirmed by researchers that animal abuse is highly correlated with domestic violence and therefore can be used to predict the abuser’s violent history as well as violence in the abuser’s future. Why the Study of Human-Animal Relationships went at a Slow Pace The relevance of understanding human relationships with non-humans were said to give additional insights to the need to study how the interactions of numerous creatures to men were able to help shape mankind’s behavior and culture (Zilney 6). Because of this notion, ethical lectures during the period of enlightenment by Immanuel Kant became ingrained sturdily in how men should treat animals. Kant was said to have mentioned that people who are cruel to animals are also cruel in dealing with other people (Linzey 1). Also, being abusive to weaker creatures become evidences of the hardening of the human heart as opposed to the natural feelings of humanity such as compassion and empathy (1). In recent times, this saying was held true when modern observations of people with abusive tendencies were recorded to treat creatures lower than them in the most cruel and ruthless fashion. The documented cases of people that hurt their animals repeatedly and even result to death were reported as early as the 18th century, around the time of the Industrial Revolution (Volant 1). In the U.S., the cases related to this disturbing historical fact had steadily increased every year for every state, despite laws that are meant to prevent animal abuse (Forell 54). What it also alarming is that aside from the violence inflicted on animals, the said abusers are also documented or reported to be abusing immediate family members or other members of the household (Volant 2). Such cases reflect how the interactions of persons to animals could be an effective gauge in assessing their interpersonal relationships with other humans. Due to the delays in understanding the complexities of human and animal interactions and relationships, it is only in the past few decades that the roots of violence towards other human beings can be traced to cruelties and aggressive behaviors inflicted on animals during childhood and adolescence (Lockwood and Ascione 1). While initially, the connection between animal abuse and domestic violence was not properly established due to small sample size, at some point the rise in other related studies turned it into a legitimate topic for further studies. The dynamics of criminal behavior in relation to animal interaction has been initiated by Kellert and Felthous in 1985, and has been one of the pioneering studies that established the connection of abusive behavior towards humans and animals (Merz-Perez 20). The initial results were that aggressive criminals committed cruelty with greater frequencies than the non-aggressive and non-criminals, and that these cruelties were only the beginning of a vicious and violent cycle that ends up with the criminal inflicting pain on other human beings without remorse (21). While the results were found to be startling and alarming at the beginning, there were doubts regarding the validity of the data due to possible errors committed in the interviews, which led to inconsistencies. Future studies regarding the relationship of animal cruelty to criminal behavior were needed to be studied on further not just to the lack of solid results but also due to the very few numbers of studies that try to establish the same link (Zilney 6). Abusers have Violent Tendencies toward Animals at Young Ages The eventual results of other similar studies identified correlations between aggression and abusive tendencies towards animals, and later with humans. It is a social phenomenon that has been given emphasis to not just by psychologists but also by sociologists as well, due to the possible psychiatric problems that the perpetrator has (Brimer 653). As mentioned by Flynn, the abuse being done by perpetrators were reported to not only involve physically abusing the human victims, but also threatening to or actually harming or killing their pets as a form of psychological abuse (A Sociological Analysis 155). This can be attributed to the abusers seeing the animals solely as property and not living creatures (Gilbreath 3). Also, once the initial shock of inflicting pain has gotten over with, the succeeding abuses would be easier to carry out. By doing the abuses repeatedly in a long span of time, these aggressive people could easily move on to hurting other people too, including their own family members. Numerous case histories over the last forty years have established the links between criminal behavior and animal abuse. Some statistics include: 23% of aggressive adult inpatient psychiatric admissions killed dogs and cats purposively, compared to 10% in non-aggressive ones; 36% of rape convicts committed cruel acts towards animals in childhood and adolescence; and between two groups of women, battered and control, the admission of perpetrating animal cruelty had a strong relationship with child abuse and violence (Linzey 2). Also, with regards to non-aggressive criminals and non-criminals, these two groups reported alcoholism and paternal violence with ruthlessness to animals, thus displaying the strong effect of domestic violence along with animal abuse in the upbringing of the children (Merz-Perez 23). What is also disturbing is that children that are witnesses to or victims of such abuses would also tend to develop psychiatric problems at a very young age, such as aggression or violent tendencies. Due to lack of proper socialization as well as early interventions, there are high probabilities of them perpetrating the cruelty to animals as they grow older (DeGue and DiLillio 1038). Also, aside from early exposure to violence, peers and peer pressure can also be a strong motivator in further abusing animals, and while itself not being significant enough to cause psychiatric problems in children and adolescents, when coupled with experiencing or witnessing domestic abuse, could create violent tendencies in said victims, according to Flynn (A Sociological Analysis 157). Based on criminal records, reported animal abusers would be within late adolescence to early thirties, with over half under the age of 30, further asserting the data that cruelty to animals is a trait developed at an early age (158). If not detected and intervened at an early age, these children might grow up to be adolescents or adults that believe animal abuse is something that is common and natural, and later on perpetuate another cycle of abuse to the next generation (Ascione 39). While domestic abuse is one strong factor in the development of aggressive and violent behavior in children, it was also reported that bullying is another factor in the perpetuation of violent behavior among the youth. Because the nature of bullying is directing violence towards someone or something weaker, using animals as targets of abuse becomes a better option (Ascione and Shapiro 574). Apart from victimization at home, it was reported that Italian children from ages 9-12 were reported to pass on the abuse to animals because they were themselves abused or bullied in school, and that was their only outlet of anger (574). In Flynn’s other work, it was also mentioned that children who were not able to adjust to distressing situations at school develop tendencies to display aggression in order to relieve themselves from distress, especially since it is the only thing that they learn at home (Social Creatures 183). Victims not only Report Domestic Violence, but also Animal Abuse Domestic violence usually happens at home, with one member of the household wielding power over the rest. It is usually reported as the male which proceeds in harming the female and younger members of the family, as well as the pets (Taylor). In most battered women shelters, it was found out by most law enforcers that aside from physical, verbal, sexual, and financial abuse, the victims also reported that their abusers also hurt their animals at least once (Taylor). A comprehensive study in 3,500 female participants that were victims of physical violence were compared with 800 women in the control group, and it was found out that of the 3,500 victims, one of the strongest risk factors for getting abused was their partners’ abuse of an animal at some point in their lives (Zilney 100). Thus, when the partners are reported to have been involved with animal cruelty in the distant or not so distant past, there is a high likelihood that they would have tendencies to inflict pain to their partners or children, apart from abusing their pets. Not only was animal abuse a risk factor for women, it was also one most reported in child abuse cases. It was also mentioned by Flynn that around 88% of families that display child abuse also showed the presence of animal abuse, in contrast to 34% in sexually abusing or neglecting families (Social Creatures 183). Also, among 60% of children that were reported to have been physically abused, aside from one parent being subject to domestic abuse, the abusers were known to have been showing animal cruelty as well (Linzey 4). Because of the strong effects of abuse on children, aside from aggressive and violent behaviors, cruelty to animals and sexual behaviors with animals were also listed as risk factors in identifying adult and juvenile sex offenders, aside from the lack of concern or sensitivity to animals (Social Creatures 184). Abusers not only Threaten their Victims but also Proceed in Hurting and Killing Their Pets In order to gain control over their victims, abusers not only perform different kinds of maltreatment directly to victims, but also to their pets. This is usually done in order to blackmail the victims from leaving or reporting the abuse to the police (Volant 3). Thus victims seem to get backed into a corner and eventually end up staying with the abuser to prevent their pets from getting seriously injured. It was reported by the Center for Prevention of Domestic Violence in Colorado Springs that 24% of women that were seeking refuge from domestic violence mentioned that their partners also abused their pets right in front of them to keep them silent (Zilney 99). Not only that, but in a battered women’s shelter in Utah reported that 71% of them received threats of harm to their pets by their partners, and out of the 71%, 57% of them did see their pets actually get harmed (100). Similarly, in children, aside from witnessing and experiencing abuse themselves, they were also threatened to follow or punished by the abuser through maltreatment of their pets (DeGue and DiLillio 1044). Out fear of getting hurt or their pets hurt, children end up taking in abuse in all forms. Trying to survive in such an environment would eventually cause them childhood trauma and a twisted sense of safety by abusing other people or animals (Brimer 654). Out of compassion for their animals, victims of domestic abuse tend not to leave the house for fearing that the abuser would then turn towards the children or pets in releasing their anger. Because the animals were able to provide emotional support for them, the most painful thing that they could do is to leave their animals behind, which for them is like a form of betrayal (Gilbreath 6). In a study conducted in 2004, 65% of battered women reported to have previously delayed their seeking of shelter due to worries of not being able to be with their pets and had no one to take care of them when they were gone (Forell 56). Also, because most shelters forbid bringing pets into their buildings or compounds the women or other abuse victims simply just delay or turn away the chances of freedom and instead remain with their abuser, rather than leave their animals to get hurt or killed (Zilney 99). Victims of Abuse may Develop Tendencies of Hurting their Pets Children or adolescents that were subject of abuse were also reported to have violent and aggressive tendencies towards animals, in order to relieve them of their pain. Parental reports of animal cruelty were 35% for abused boys and 27% for abused girls, and are regarded as highly significant results (Social Creatures 184). Also, in other studies, children in dysfunctional families tend to have compounded trauma whenever they see their own pets being abused, causing them to further disconnect with their parents and other family members, which could later increase their propensity to display abuse and violence in other animals (Taylor). Still, in other studies, it was mentioned that by abusing animals, maltreated children were able to vent out their frustrations by hurting something that is weaker than them, and may be possibly rehearsing their own suicides in the process (Wempen 4). It was also reported that abused women also had strong tendencies to feel numb when their pets got hurt, or even themselves hurting their own pets due to them not able to get help for their own abuses (Social Creatures 209). Also, due to their own pity for their pets, the women tend to develop feelings of abandoning, giving away, or wanting to kill their pets just to end their pain and suffering (Linzey 132). However, most women were reported to just stay with their abusive partner just to be able to take care of and be with their pets, instead of seeking help and refuge in shelters (Wemple 5). Victims of Domestic Abuse Delay Seeking Help Due to not wanting to Part with Their Pets Due to the controlling nature of abusers, the victims tend to succumb to threats, especially when their pets or children are concerned. While the laws are able to address the needs of abused women and children to be separated from the violent spouse, there were no laws for them to keep or bring their pets with them, mainly because the laws regarding the seeking of haven not just for the abused women but also for their pets have been struggling due to the high costs of pet maintenance (Gilbreath 10). Due to the lack of pet care facilities or prohibitions on keeping pets in shelters, there was an increase in the reports of women who have delayed seeking help or refuge from shelters, or even backing out from such help due to their worries in how to keep their pets (Brimer 655). However, while the court and the shelters were not able to address the needs of the victims to take along their pets in their recovery efforts, these victims may not have that much initiative in leaving their abusive lives, and would instead focus on trying to live together with their abusers. This is because as long as the pets are with them, they would still find ways to survive their everyday problems. Thus, it is also important that law enforcers, veterinarians, as well as lawmakers also acknowledge the importance of the pets in the lives of the abused women, and that by denying the pets their fair share of getting help from the abuse, the victims tend to not get any help, or delay seeking for help, which keeps them trapped in the cycle of violence in their homes (Taylor). Also, if the courts are able to seen animals beyond their status as property and more on their status as members of the family, they would also be much more holistic in their approach in dealing with domestic abuse, because all the maltreated members of the family would be taken care of, not just the human members (Gilbreath 11). Conclusions Human civilization had strong links with animals in its development and growth. In the course of history, men have been able to establish a positive relationship with some animals that were able to give them unconditional love as well as companionship. Thus, the idea of companion animals or pets has been established as part of man’s civilization and culture. However, there is also a dark side to this human-animal interaction, which is animal abuse. This happens when the owner expresses power and control over the animal. What is surprising about animal abuse is that not only does it occur singularly in families, but it is also reported to concur with domestic violence. In a family that is experiencing domestic violence, a parent gains control over all members of the household through all kinds of abuse, such as physical, verbal, sexual, psychological, and even financial abuse. But not only do the other family members experience these abuses, but also the pets as well. In order to control the other family members, the abuser also shows his control over the animals blatantly, with the abused members not having any choice but to follow the abuser’s instructions. Most of the time, it is the women and the children that suffer the consequences of the abuse greatly. Women tend to remain in the abused part of the spectrum due to their fears that if they leave the house and go seek help elsewhere, their partners might take out frustrations on the younger and weaker members of the family, which are the children or pets. This is because most shelters do not take in the pets of the domestic abuse victims. Thus, instead of leaving the abusive partner, the victims just choose to stay in the relationship to take care of their children and pets. In relation to that, because there is a correlation between the exposure to abuse and developing abusive and violent tendencies, it has been established that most of the time perpetrators of domestic violence had inflicted pain and cruelty to animals at least once in their lives. Thus it is even more essential that young children are shielded from displays of abuse as well as being abused themselves. Because children easily get affected by negative actions, the effects of the violence and animal abuse could go deeper, and is highly correlated to them developing psychiatric disorders, as well as growing up to be abusive as well. Thus it is much more important that children undergo early interventions to prevent the cycle of violence from perpetuating in their generation. Lastly, while the law enforcement, the veterinarians and the law makers are able to create sound laws to address the abuse being done to women and children, they must also be sensitive enough to include the relief for the victims’ pets as well. It is suggested that additional facilities that could accommodate pets must also be stationed in shelters so that instead of remaining in abusive homes, the victims would have greater strength in leaving the abuse altogether and starting a new life, knowing that their pets are with them. Works Cited Ascione, Frank. Children and Animals: Exploring the Roots of Kindness and Cruelty. West LaFayette: IN: Purdue University Press, 2005. Print. Ascione, Frank and Kenneth Shapiro. "People and Animals, Kindness and Cruelty: Research Directions and Policy Implications ." Journal of Social Issues (2009): 65(3): 569-587. Print. Brimer, Kirsten. "Justice for Dusty: Implementing Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Animal Abusers." Penn State Law Review (2008): 113(2):649-669. Print. DeGue, Sarah and David DiLillo. "Is Animal Cruelty a "Red Flag" for Family Violence? Investigating Co-Occurring Violence Towards Children, Partners, and Pets." Journal of Interpersonal Violence (2009): 24(6): 1036-1056. Print. Flynn, Clifton. "A Sociological Analysis of Animal Abuse." Ascione, Frank. The International Handbook of Animal Abuse and Cruelty: Theory, Research, and Application. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 2010. 155-174. Print. Flynn, Clifton. Social Creatures: A Human and Animal Studies Reader. Lantern Books: Brooklyn, NY, 2008. Print Forell, Caroline. "Using a Jury of Her Peers to Teach About the Connection between Domestic Violence and Animal Abuse." Animal Law (2008): 15: 53-67. Print. Gilbreath, Tara. "Where's Fido: Pets are Missing in Domestic Violence Shelters and Stalking Laws." Journal of Animal Law (2008): 14:1-18. Print. Linzey, Andrew. The Link Between Animal Abuse and Human Violence. Eastborne: Sussex Academic Press, 2009. Print. Lockwood, Randall and Frank Ascione. Cruelty to Animals and Interpersonal Violence: Readings in Research and Application. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1998. Print. Merz-Perez, Linda and Kathleen Heide. Animal Cruelty: Pathway to Violence Against People. Oxford: Rowman Altamira, 2004. Print. Taylor, Nik and Tania Signal. "Throwing the Baby out with the Bathwater: Towards a Sociology of the Human-Animal Abuse 'Link'?" Sociological Research Online (2008). Web. Volant, Anne, et al. "The Relationship between Domestic Violence and Animal Abuse - an Australian Study." Journal of Interpersonal Violence (2008): 20(20):1-19. Print. Wempen, Diana. "Four-Footed and Largely-Forgotten; Exploring the Connections between Animal Abuse and Domestic Violence." e-Newsletter of the Commission on Domestic Violence (2007): 1-10. Electronic. Zilney, Lisa Anne. Linking Animal Cruelty and Family Violence. New York: Cambria Press, 2007. Print. Read More