
|
What We Know About the Link Between Animal Abuse
And Human Violence
By Mary Lou Randour Ph.d
Reasons include:
Lack of family involvement as a child
Pets who are not part of the family and locked outside
Children who are exposed to spousal abuse – even spousal dating of
many
Children who are unfamiliar with proper disciplinary actions
Because of the success of many animal advocacy groups, including the
two that I represent —Psychologists for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals and the Doris Day Animal Foundation — many professionals
from a variety of disciplines as well as the general public have
become aware of the link between animal abuse and human violence.
The FBI’s investigation into the childhood of serial killers, and
their discovery of juvenile animal abuse in most of these cases,
drew the public’s attention to this link initially. When I make
presentations to various audiences — whether educators, mental
health professionals, police, prosecutors, domestic violence
advocates, child protection workers, or animal control officers —
most know that serials killers started their grisly careers by
torturing and killing animals.
Less well known is the fact that many of the recent school shooters
also engaged in animal cruelty before turning their aggression
against their classmates, teachers, and parents. Kip Kinkel was
reported to have blown up cows and decapitated cats; Luke Woodham
tortured Sparkle, his own dog, to death, describing her dying howls
as a "thing of beauty"; and Andrew Golden reputedly shot dogs with a
.22 caliber rifle. Golden’s own dog "mysteriously" suffered a wound
from a .22 just days before he assaulted his classmates.
Serial killers and
school shooters supply dramatic currency to the link between animal
abuse and human violence. Their lurid nature attracts the attention
of individuals and the media and, in this way, can furnish an
opening for a serious discussion of the many permutations and
implications of this important link. I think it is a tactical and
strategic mistake, however, for animal advocates to focus on this
part of the link; it is good for an opener, but we should quickly
move on to the more substantive evidence, which will have more
far-reaching implications. While many of us can be momentarily drawn
to the macabre very few, if any of us, think that our sons,
daughters, nieces and nephews, or next door neighbors are budding
serial killers or school shooters.
Let’s face it: The
odds of a child becoming a serial killer or school gunman are quite
remote. Very few people can identify with that prospect and, I
believe, that leads to the possibility of them dismissing, or
overlooking, evidence of animal cruelty that they might otherwise
notice. Sure, their nephew has been known to throw rocks at
neighborhood cats, but they know he is a "good kid" who goes to
church, does well at school, and has won badges in his Cub Scout
troop. What’s to worry about? He’s definitely not serial killer or
school shooter material. If we should emphasize the empirical basis
for the link instead of the more dramatic examples, what exactly do
we know? What does the research say about animal abuse? Who commits
it? How do they turn out?
What should we be
looking for? One body of well-established research links animal
abuse with criminal behavior. For example, one well-designed study
conducted by Arnold Arluke and Jack Levin, two sociologists, and
Carter Luke of the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals (MSPCA), examined the records of that agency for
the years 1975 to 1996. They identified 153 men who had been
prosecuted for animal cruelty and compared their criminal records to
a group of "next door neighbors" — men who were similar in age,
ethnic background, neighborhood, and economic status. Their findings
were convincing: men who abused animals were five times more likely
to have been arrested for violence against humans, four times more
likely to have committed property crimes, and three times more
likely to have records for drug and disorderly conduct offenses.
Another group of research studies explored the childhood of
individuals who were incarcerated or committed to psychiatric
hospitals for criminal offenses, comparing them to "normal" men.
Would the childhood of the men in prison and psychiatric hospitals
for criminal behavior reveal more juvenile animal cruelty when
compared to a group of "normal" men? After conducting a number of
their own studies, and reviewing the research of their colleagues,
Kellert and Felthous arrived at a definitive result. They
stated that there was a significant association between acts of
cruelty to animals in childhood and serious, recurrent aggression
against people as an adult. As further corroboration, in one study
these researchers determined that the most aggressive criminals had
committed the most severe acts of animal cruelty in childhood. One
could conclude from these studies that animal abuse is associated
with other types of criminal and anti-social behavior and that
childhood animal abuse is an important warning sign; not all
children who abuse animals become juvenile offenders or adult
criminals, but they are more likely than their counterparts who do
not abuse animals to do so. Being physically cruel to animals as one
of the criterion for a diagnosis of conduct disorder in childhood
was added to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders in 1987. Substantial proportions of children diagnosed
with conduct disorder continue to show behaviors in adulthood that
meet criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder. The earlier the
diagnosis of conduct disorder the greater the risk for being
diagnosed with Antisocial Personality Disorder and Substance-Related
in adulthood.
We also know that animal abuse is closely associated with family
violence, and knowledge of this link has assisted professionals in
offering more effective services to people and animals. In a number
of studies — one national and the others statewide — 71 to 83% of
the women entering domestic violence shelters reported that their
partners also abused or killed the family pet. This stems heavily
from a difference in how they were raised as children. Those who had
inside pets learned much quicker and a much more compassionate means
of caring for their pets as well as family members and friends. Just
as animal abuse is related to domestic violence, so it is also
related to child abuse, another form of family violence. A New
Jersey study of 53 families under the jurisdiction of the child
welfare agency looked at the co-occurrence of child abuse and animal
abuse.
Researchers observed
animal abuse in 88% of those families in which there was physical
abuse of children. Another study arrived at similar findings.
Awareness of the link between animal abuse and family violence has
produced a number of innovative programs and procedural changes. For
example, intake questions for women seeking shelter now include one
about the need for a safe place for the family pets. Cooperative
arrangements between domestic violence shelters and animal shelters,
humane societies, and sometimes veterinary associations provide
"safe pet" programs. Animal control officers are being trained to
look for signs of child abuse and domestic violence when making
their investigations, and to report their suspicions to the proper
agencies.
While animal abuse often appears in the context of family violence,
and is associated with juvenile delinquency and adult criminality,
it is important to remember that many other times the animal abuse
offender does not have a juvenile or adult criminal record, does not
come from a dysfunctional, violent family; and may appear to be
"normal" or "typical." The sad truth is that animal abuse is all too
common; the prevalence rates for childhood animal cruelty are
shockingly high. There are now three studies of prevalence: one is
from a military sample and the other two used college students as
subjects. In the military sample 10% of the males acknowledged
committing juvenile animal cruelty and 16% reported that they had
witnessed it. In the two college samples, 34.5% of the males
admitted to animal abuse in childhood and 48% said they had
witnessed it.
We don’t know, of
course, whether any of the subjects in these three samples had
criminal records, although it is doubtful that many had very serious
records since they were either in the military or in college. And we
don’t know how many came from situations of family violence, but it
is doubtful that all could have. Good portions of animal abusers
enter adulthood without any marks on their record, although they do
appear to have psychological marks. In one of the studies, the
researcher asked his college subjects if they thought it was o.k. to
"slap your wife" or to "physically punish your children." Those
students who had abused animals as children were much more likely to
endorse these forms of interpersonal violence.
We need a lot more information about the extent of animal abuse, the
motivation for it, and how to intervene effectively. And we need to
accurately convey what the research tells us to date and not to
emphasize one category of animal abuse findings over another. We
need to continue to warn students, parents, teachers, counselors,
and other community groups that childhood animal abuse is a definite
danger sign that should be heeded with a thorough assessment and
effective intervention. We also need to alert these same groups that
animal abuse often is associated with child abuse and domestic
violence, and to enlarge our investigations to include all members
of the family — human and non-human. Finally, we need to acknowledge
that some childhood animal abusers appear to be "typical kids," so
no parent, or teacher, or other professional should be complacent.
Mary Lou Randour is the Program Director of Psychologists for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals.
RESOURCES
Beyond Violence: The Human-Animal Connection is a kit that contains
both a video and a Discussion Guide. Available from Pscyhologists
for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
Cruelty to Animals and Interpersonal Violence: Readings in Research
and Application by Randall Lockwood (Editor), Frank R. Ascione
(Editor); paperback, 424 pages, Purdue Univ Press; ISBN: 1557531064
Child Abuse, Domestic Violence, and Animal Abuse: Linking the
Circles of Compassion for Prevention and Intervention by Frank
Ascione (Editor), Phil Arkow (Editor), paperback, 480 pages, 1999,
Purdue University Press, ISBN: 1557531439. [TOP]
For a thorough search of the subject on the Internet, visit Google
and use the keywords "animal abuse and human violence."
|