Showing posts with label animal abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label animal abuse. Show all posts

Monday, November 9, 2009

Animal Cruelty and Family Violence: Making the Connection

Pets are part of the family in the majority of American households, where nearly three-quarters of families with school-age children have at least one companion animal. These animals are often treated like members of the family, but if the family is experiencing violence they can become targets as well. Pets are often an important source of comfort and stability to the victims of abuse, particularly children. But abusive family members may threaten, injure, or kill pets, often as a way of threatening or controlling others in the family.

A 1997 survey of 50 of the largest shelters for battered women in the United States found that 85% of women and 63% of children entering shelters discussed incidents of pet abuse in the family. Children who have witnessed domestic violence or who have been the victims of physical or sexual abuse may also become animal abusers themselves, imitating the violence they have seen or experienced. A study conducted in 1995 noted that 32% of the pet-owning victims of domestic abuse reported that one or more of their children had hurt or killed a pet. Similarly, a 1983 study noted that children were reported to be abusive to animals in more than a third of a sample of pet-owning families referred to New Jersey's Division of Youth and Family Services for suspected child abuse.

It is essential for those who respond to family violence to be alert to this connection. Professionals in domestic violence intervention, law enforcement, child protection, human and veterinary medicine, education, and animal care and control should get to know their counterparts in other professions and work together to establish strategies for a coordinated response to these needs.

In fact, professionals who help families in crisis are increasingly recognizing the role that animals play in the dynamics of family violence. Many law enforcement agencies are training officers who respond to domestic violence calls to be alert for signs that a situation is life-threatening. These include situations where the batterer has threatened suicide, is displaying a firearm, or has hurt or killed a family pet.

In addition, local domestic violence shelters and animal protection organizations have begun partnering to develop "safe havens" for the pets of domestic violence victims because many victims delay leaving the abusive batterer out of fear for their pets' safety. All too often, batterers punish victims for leaving by abusing or killing the pets. Yet, with the help of over 100 safe haven programs currently operating around the United States, many domestic violence victims no longer have to choose between their safety and their pets.

The First Strike® campaign can help in the process of bringing professionals together from a variety of agencies. We facilitate workshops and provide educational materials specifically for various professionals working to prevent family violence. For more information, please call our First Strike toll free line at 1-888-213-0956.

References

Ascione, F. R. 1995. Domestic violence and cruelty to animals. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Family Violence, Durham, NH, July 24, 1995.

Ascione, F. R. 1997. The abuse of animals and domestic violence: a national survey of shelters for women who are battered. Society and Animals, 5(3): 205–218.

DeViney, L., J. Dickert and R. Lockwood. 1983. The care of pets within child abusing families. International Journal for the Study of Animal Problems, 4(4): 321–336.

Original Article

Battered Women's Reports of Their Partners' and Their Children's Cruelty to Animals

By Frank R. Ascione, Ph.D,
Utah State University, Logan, Utah
Originally published in Journal of Emotional Abuse, Vol. 1(1) 1998

ABSTRACT. Anecdotal reports of cruelty to pet animals in families where partner battering occurs are common but there exist few empirical data on this issue. Determining the forms and prevalence of such cruelty is important since abuse of pets may be a method batterers use to control their partners, may be related to batterers' lethality, and may result in children in such families being exposed to multiple forms of violence, a significant risk for mental health problems. Thirty-eight women seeking shelter at a safe house for battered partners voluntarily completed surveys about pet ownership and violence to pets. Of the women reporting current or past pet ownership, 71% reported that their partner had threatened and/or actually hurt or killed one or more of their pets. Actual (as distinct from threatened) harm to pets represented the majority (57%) of reports. Fifty-eight percent of the full sample of women had children and 32% of these women reported that one or more of their children had hurt or killed pet animals; in 71% of these cases, the women had also reported animal abuse (threatened or actual) by their partner. This study represents one of the first empirical analyses of the prevalence of animal maltreatment in a sample of battered women. The high prevalence rate of batterers' threatened or actual harm of animals and the relatively high rate of animal abuse reported for the children in this sample are relevant for future research and policy analyses. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mail address: getinfo@haworth.com]

Pets were terribly important to her; they were her only source of comfort and affection. One afternoon, Billy said he had had it with her damn cats and started screaming that he was going to kill them. Kim didn't take it too seriously. (Browne, 1987, p. 154)

. . . Aubrey got angry with the family dog for straying outside their yard. He loaded one of his nine guns, then shot and killed it. The kids began to sob, devastated. He grabbed (one child's) hair . . . slapped another of the kids, then began crying himself. Joyce tried to comfort them all. But her feelings of anger were mixed with genuine terror: in a moment of rage, she knew, Aubrey could kill any one of them and cry about it afterward. (Walker, 1989, pp. 20-21)

These examples associating partner abuse with cruelty to animals and, in one case, child maltreatment are but two of the many anecdotal references to the abuse of animals in the literature on domestic violence (Adams, 1994). Following an analysis of existing research and policy issues relevant for understanding the relation between domestic violence and animal maltreatment, the results of a small-scale descriptive study of the prevalence of animal cruelty experiences in a shelter sample of battered women are reported. Implications for future research and for the well-being of women and children experiencing family violence are then discussed.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

In an earlier paper (Ascione, 1993), existing research on childhood cruelty to animals, its relation to various forms of family and community violence, and its significance as a symptom of Conduct Disorder are reviewed. The clearest evidence of this relationship is found in studies of the effects of physical and sexual abuse on children. Relatively less information is available on the effects of exposure to domestic violence on children's relations with pets and other animals. Adult partner cruelty to animals has been described anecdotally (e.g., Dutton, 1992; Gelles & Straus, 1988; Walker, 1979), and includes references to partners torturing or killing animals and forcing women to engage in bestiality. In one of the rare empirical studies including examination of the domestic violence/animal maltreatment relation, Renzetti (1992) found that 38% of women with pets in abusive lesbian relationships reported maltreatment of pets by their partners. The effects of partner animal abuse on the women whose animals are hurt or killed and the effects of witnessing both parent and pet abuse on children's mental health warrant more focused research attention.

Partners' Abuse of Animals

Information about the forms and prevalence of cruelty to animals in families experiencing domestic violence is not easily culled from existing research One reason is the inconsistency, across studies, in whether questions about animal maltreatment are included in assessments. In some cases, data about animal abuse may be incorporated, explicitly or implicitly, under more general categories of abuse. For example, in Walker's (1984) interviews with battered women, bestiality was mentioned as an example of "unusual sex acts" the women were asked to perform by their partners. In the group of women who had experienced relationships with battering and non-battering partners, this experience was reported by 41% and 5%, respectively. Walker also reported that, when with a batterer, 16% of the women reported directing their own anger at their "children or pets"; when with a non-batterer, the figure was 3%. In a similar vein, cruelty to animals may be implicit in measures of psychological maltreatment. Brassard, Hart, and Hardy's (1993) categories of "Terrorizing" (including ". . . threats directed toward loved ones or objects . . .") and "Exploiting / Corrupting" (including ". . modeling antisocial acts . . . ") are examples.

Occasionally, specific items related to animal maltreatment appear in domestic violence questionnaires or checklists. Renzetti's (1992) study is one example. Another is Dutton's (1992) "Abusive Behavior Observation Checklist" in which being "required to be involved with an animal in a sexual way" is an item under the "unwanted sexual behavior" category (p. 160) and "abused your/his/her family pets" is listed under "Psychological Abuse-Intimidation" (p. 161).

Domestic violence and cruelty to animals are, at times, examined together in discussions of assessing partner dangerousness or lethality (Campbell, 1995). One assessment, proposed by Straus (1993) to facilitate identification of "high risk violence," includes the item, "threats or actual killing or injuring a pet." However, another dangerousness assessment inventory does not mention animal maltreatment in any form (Stuart & Campbell, 1989).

Children's Abuse of Animals

The literature on the effects of exposure to domestic violence on children's mental health has been recently reviewed by Jaffe and Sudermann (1995) who note the complexity and variability of such effects from one study to another. Cruelty to animals as a childhood reaction to exposure to domestic violence has not been directly explored. Suggestive information, however, can be derived from studies of children of battered women in which externalizing problems and/or conduct disorder symptoms are examined [since the 1987 revision, both the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd edition revised) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edition) (American Psychiatric Association 1987, 1994) include physical cruelty to animals as a symptom of Conduct Disorder].

One recent study that included a sample of both sheltered and community battered women and their 6-12 year old children found that domestic violence was related to ". . . children's general psychopathology . . ." (McCloskey, Figueredo, & Koss, 1995). The authors report that women's partners' hurting or killing pets did load (albeit, at a low level) on a factor labeled, "escalated aggression," a factor that included other severe forms of threatened or actual interpersonal aggression. Other studies have also found a relationship between observing domestic violence and externalizing psychological symptoms both in preschool-age children at a shelter or residing at home (Fantuzzo et al., 1991) and in an older (8-12 year old) sample of Israeli children living at home (Sternberg et al., 1993). However, it is unclear how often externalizing symptomatology manifests itself in the form of cruelty to animals since reports rarely describe, understandably, results for individual items on assessment inventories. It should also be noted that in Sternberg et al.'s study, and in a similar study with a shelter sample (O'Keefe, 1995), child outcomes may vary depending on whether the child was physically abused in addition to being exposed to partner abuse.

Given the recent upsurge in concern with the deleterious effects of community or neighborhood violence on children (e.g. Taylor, Zuckerman, Harik, and Groves, 1994), it is appropriate that greater attention be given to violence that is perhaps even less escapable for children: violence among family members in one's home. This issue is receiving cross-cultural and international attention (Levinson, 1989; Patrignani & Belle, 1995). However, examination of the confluence of partner abuse, child abuse, and the maltreatment of animals is in its infancy. Greater attention is being given, at a national policy level, to the overlap between partner abuse of women and child maltreatment (Ascione, 1995; Dykstra, 1995; Koss et al., 1994; Schecter & Edelson, 1995), and between the abuse of children and violence toward animals (American Humane Association, 1995; Deviney, Dickert, & Lockwood, 1983). The associations among all three types of domestic violence (which may also include sibling abuse: Suh & Abel, 1990; Wiehe, 1990; and elder abuse: Rosen, 1995) are only beginning to be explored (e.g., Arkow, 1995). For example, physical, emotional, and sexual abuse have been noted by Wiehe and Herring (19913 as components of sibling abuse. In the area of emotional abuse, these authors explicitly include the torture or destruction of a pet as one form of psychological maltreatment. One can only speculate if siblings, in some cases, may abuse animals as a result of observing similar abuse performed by batterers.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the present study included determining: (1) the prevalence of pet ownership in a sample of women entering a shelter for battered partners in northern Utah, (2) the prevalence of threatened and/or actual harm to pets by the women's partners, and (3) evidence for animal maltreatment by the women's children. In addition to quantitative information, qualitative information on the types of animal maltreatment described were examined. Ways that information about cruelty to animals could assist professionals who serve families experiencing domestic violence and who address animal welfare are also examined.

METHOD

Sample

Thirty-eight women seeking in-house services (as distinct from crisis telephone services) at a shelter for battered partners in northern Utah agreed to be interviewed by shelter staff about their experiences with maltreatment of pets (in a 1990 report, Rollins and Oheneba-Sakyi found Utah spouse abuse prevalence to be comparable to national estimates). The women ranged in age from 20 to 51 years (mean age = 30.2) and reported the following marital status: married-57%, separated-3%, divorced-8% and single-32%. This was the first visit to the shelter for 54% of the women; the remaining women reported an average of 1.9 prior visits (range 1-6). For the 58% of women with children, the mean number of children was 2.8 (range 1-8) and their ages ranged from 8 months to 20 years.

Procedures

Women were interviewed by shelter personnel within a few days of their entry into the shelter and after the initial crisis circumstances had subsided. It was stressed that participation was confidential (only shelter staff would know participants' identities) and voluntary, and that decisions to agree to or refuse participation would not affect shelter services. None of the women approached declined participation.

The interview used an early version of the Battered Partner Shelter Survey (BPSS - Pet Maltreatment Assessment (Ascione & Weber, 1995). Given the stress associated with entering a shelter, the number of questions was kept to a minimum. Interviewers did report, however, that many of the women were appreciative that someone had finally asked them about concerns they had for their pets.

The BPSS included the following questions:

  • Do you now have a pet animal or animals? If yes, what kinds?
  • Have you had a pet animal or animals in the past 12 months? If yes, what kinds?
  • Has your partner ever hurt or killed one of your pets? If yes, describe.
  • Has your partner ever threatened to hurt or kill one of your pets? If yes, describe.
  • Have you ever hurt or killed one of your pets? If yes, describe.
  • Have any of your children ever hurt or killed one of your pets (if client has children)? If yes, describe.
  • Did concern over your pet's welfare keep you from coming to this shelter sooner than now? If yes, explain.

Completed BPSS forms were coded by shelter staff and then provided to the author for tabulation and analysis. Shelter staff also provided aggregate information on participants' marital status, presence and number of children, and women's reports of prior visits to the shelter.

RESULTS

Seventy-four percent of the women reported current pet ownership or pet ownership in the 12 months prior to the women's entry into the shelter. Of these women, 68% owned more than one pet. Dogs and cats were most common; one woman reported horses as pets, and fish, birds, chickens, rabbits, and a goat were also mentioned.

Nearly three-quarters (71%) of the women with pets reported that their male partner had threatened to hurt or kill and/or had actually hurt or killed one or more of their pets. Examples of the former included threats to put a kitten in a blender, bury a cat up to its head and "mow" it, starve a dog, and shoot and kill a cat. Actual harm or killing of animals was reported by 57% of the women with pets and included acts of omission (e.g., neglecting to feed or allow veterinary care) but most often acts of violence. Examples reported included slapping, shaking, throwing, or shooting dogs and cats, drowning a cat in a bathtub, and pouring lighter fluid on a kitten and igniting it.

Of the women with pets, two (7%) reported that they had hurt or killed one of their own pets. Both incidents were described as accidental (stepping on a kitten and running over a dog chasing the woman's car). In one case, there was also partner cruelty to animals, in the other there was none.

Twenty-two women had children and 32% (N = 7) of these women reported that one of their children (three girls and four boys) had hurt or killed a pet or pets. Behaviors ranged from sitting on a kitten and throwing a kitten against the wall to cutting a dog's fur and tail, pulling a kitten's head out of its socket, and sodomizing a cat. For 5 of these 7 cases (71%), the mother had also reported that her partner had threatened to or actually hurt or killed pets.

Eighteen percent of the women with pets reported that concern for their animals' welfare had prevented them from coming to the shelter sooner. Their concerns included worries for the animals' safety, fear of relinquishing pets to find affordable housing, placing pets with neighbors, and abandoning a pet to keep it away from the partner.

DISCUSSION

Although this study did not include comparison samples of non-battered women or battered women who are not currently in shelters, the substantial rate of partner cruelty to animals is clearly a cause for concern. Caution must be exercised in generalizing from this study's small sample to state and national samples; however, extrapolation of this study's findings may help estimate the scope of the potential problem. For example, 3 million is a conservative estimate of the number of U.S. women assaulted by their male partners each year (see Browne, 1993). If half of these women have pets (again, a conservative estimate [Ascione, 1992]), 71% partner cruelty to animals represents hundreds of thousands of families where pet victimization, actual or threatened, is part of the landscape of terror to which some women are exposed. Using the most recent Utah state statistics, over a thousand women in Utah alone may experience partner abuse of their pets. Abuse may include either threats or actual harm or both. Threats may be considered a less significant problem; however, Edleson and Brygger (1986) note that interventions for male batterers may reduce the frequency of abusive acts to a greater degree than threats of abuse. The latter may be more disturbing to some women.

There is some evidence that the results obtained in the present study are not unique to this particular sample of women. Arkow (1996) recently noted two surveys, one conducted in Colorado and the other in Wisconsin, in which 24% and 80%, respectively, of women seeking domestic violence assistance reported animal abuse by their partner.

Two women in the present sample admitted to hurting or killing their own pets, both described as accidental incidents. As noted earlier, Walker (1984) reported that some battered women admit to directing their anger at their children or pets and the fact that some batterers may hold women's pets hostage (Walker, 1989) may lead women to abandon their animals rather than leave them home as prey for batterers. These abandonments are understandable since shelters for battered women may not accept pets and alternative animal care may be financially difficult for a woman to arrange if she is seeking shelter for herself and her children. Programs to address this need are beginning to emerge, such as a collaborative effort in Loudoun County, Virginia among Loudoun Abused Women's Shelter, Loudoun County Animal Care and Control, the Humane Society of Loudoun County, and privately owned boarding kennels. In cases where an animal has already been hurt or killed, women (and their children) may be experiencing unresolved grief about pet loss that may need to be acknowledged and addressed by shelter staff or counselors.

A number of practical and policy issues are raised when implementing programs to board animals of women who enter shelters (health, space, and animal / child management issues usually preclude allowing pets in such facilities). First, domestic violence shelter staff need to be trained about the potential significance of separation from pets and animal cruelty as additional emotional stressors for their clients, both women and children. Intake forms should include items related to women's experience of animal abuse and these items should also be added to the list of questions asked by crisis telephone line workers. Second, information about animal abuse may be valuable in developing safety plans for women who remain at home with their abusers and for those women planning to return home after a shelter stay. Third, if a woman places her pet for boarding, animal shelters need to develop policies ensuring the confidentiality of such placements and methods to deal with a batterer who attempts to claim a pet (in some cases, as a method of further coercing or intimidating his partner).

The reported prevalence of cruelty to animals by children in this sample is further cause for concern and is comparable to levels reported for mental health clinic samples of children, assessed with the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and its variants (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1981; Achenbach, Howell, Quay, & Conners, 1991), and to data from a sample of children who had been sexually abused (William Friedrich, April, 1992, personal communication). Friedrich noted that in a sample of 2-12 year olds who were substantiated victims of sexual abuse, 35% of the boys and 27% of the girls were reported to be cruel to animals on the CBCL (figures for a comparison group of nonabused boys and girls were 5% and 3%, respectively). In another report (Deviney et al., 1983), 26% of children who were physically or sexually abused and/or neglected displayed animal maltreatment. Although causal relations cannot be determined given the present study's descriptive strategy, children observing their parents' abuse of animals (along with other forms of violent and destructive behavior) may foster imitative cruelty. Educating battered women about the significance of children's cruelty to animals as a potential symptom of psychological distress may be warranted since some women may believe such behavior is cathartic. As one of our participants said, "We were all concerned about the cat and the dog but I figured it was better that the animals were dealing with his hostility instead of the kids or myself, the spouse."

IMPLICATIONS

Information about children's cruelty to animals may be relevant for interventions for children exposed to domestic violence. In some cases (e.g., Peled & Davis, 1995), therapy may involve asking children to identify with an animal to assist children in expressing emotions. Some children may also identify with animals as symbols of vengeance against a battering parent (e.g., Silvern & Kaersvang, 1989). Children may also identify themselves or their battered parent with a pet the children themselves have harmed. Therapists may be advised to routinely obtain information about cruelty to animals prior to using animal-related exercises. Furthermore, information about children's positive relations with and concern for their pets and other animals was not assessed in the present study but could also serve therapeutic ends (see Figure 1 where a 9 year old child has drawn himself cowering behind a couch as his mother and beloved pet bird are threatened by an abusive stepfather).

Figure 1: drawing by 9-year old boy. (Courtesy of the Center for Women and Children in Crisis, Inc., Provo, Utah)

Legal Implications

The potential for cruelty to animals to be an indicator of the capacity for interpersonal violence has, in part, led to some states increasing their criminal penalties for severe animal maltreatment (one recent example is the State of Washington's 1994 revised cruelty-to-animals law). Increased penalties, including incarceration, for such cruelty can help remove violent individuals from the family and community and place them in settings where there is the potential for receiving therapy. In 1995, an Everett, Washington man received a one-year sentence (in addition to four years for intimidating a witness) after pleading guilty to first-degree animal cruelty for burning his partner's kitten in a kitchen oven ("Man gets 5 years in cat-torture case," 1995). He had also been charged with raping his partner (the witness he intimidated) but these charges were dropped in a plea bargain (the rape charge was dropped because the woman refused to press charges). As noted by one prosecutor, "We must, as prosecutors, recognize that it is unacceptable to excuse and ignore acts of cruelty toward animals. Anyone who can commit such cruelty is in desperate need of incarceration, counseling or other immediate attention. We cannot afford to accept such violence, nor will the public let us" (Ritter, 1996, p. 33).

Case Example

A vivid example of the confluence of spouse battering, child abuse (emotional and physical), and cruelty to animals is provided in recent reports of a murder trial in Salt Lake City. "Peggy Sue Brown was acquitted Thursday of fatally shooting her husband—the first time a defendant has used battered women's syndrome as a defense in a Utah murder case" (Hunt, 1996b, p. B1). "Brown testified she killed her husband after he beat, raped and locked her in a closet for days without food or water during their seven-year marriage. She said Bradley Brown, 23, had made her a virtual prisoner in their home. He also beat and terrorized their young children" (p. B8). One of Ms. Brown's children testified that Mr. Brown had on one occasion kicked her one year old brother into a wall.

The level of terror Mr. Brown apparently instilled in his family members is illustrated by another incident noted during the trial. "(He) hung a pet rabbit in the garage and summoned his wife. When she came with the baby on her shoulder, her husband began skinning the animal alive. Then he held the boy next to the screaming rabbit. 'See how easy it would be?' Bradley said" (Hunt, 1996a, p. B3).

Recommendations

In addition to the relatively small and volunteer sample, this study has a number of limitations that should be addressed in future research. First, we relied solely on women's reports of their partners', own, and children's behavior regarding the treatment of animals. Sternberg et al. (1993) have cautioned that interreporter agreement about child problems, for example, between family members experiencing domestic violence, may be low. Edleson and Brygger (1986) found that partners in battering relationships may not agree on levels of different forms of violence a batterer perpetrates. In their sample of battered men who had undergone intervention, women's and men's exact agreement, at intake, on the men's actions or threats against pets was 24%. Clearly, multisource assessments are needed in this area.

Second, sample size precluded examination of differential effects based on children's gender and age, issues Jaffe and Sudermann (1995) urged more thorough study. The present study also did not assess the levels of violence these women experienced and to which their children may have been exposed.

Third, there was no attempt to rate severity of partner cruelty to animals. More empirical information is needed about the forms, severity, and chronicity of partner cruelty to animals and its value for risk assessment (Straus, 1993), and the development of topologies of batterers (Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994). We have developed a protocol for assessing the animal cruelty performed by children and adolescents (Ascione, Thompson, & Black, in press) which may be applicable to adults who abuse animals.

Finally, we do not yet understand how the dimensions of partner and/or child cruelty to animals differ for families where the mother seeks shelter or decides to remain at home. Do children's relations with pets differ in these circumstances? For example, Fantuzzo et al. (1991) note how the shelter experience often entails separating children from buffers in their home environment (e.g., toys, peers). Separation from beloved pets, who may be significant sources of psychological support and attachment, may be an unaddressed issue for both the child and the battered parent.

NOTES

  1. In 1992, Utah state agencies provided shelter for 1,634 women and 2,047 children (Utah Domestic Violence Advisory Council, 1994). In 1995, the figures were 1,974 and 2,722, respectively (Diane Stuart, personal communication, January 25, 1996).
  2. For information on this program, contact the Director, Loudoun County Department of Animal Care and Control, Rt. 1, Box 985, Waterford, VA 221901TEL 703 777-0406.

 

Are battered women in domestic violence shelters forced to chose between their personal safety and that of the pets they left behind when they fled? What policies and procedures do enlightened shelters employ to deal with the issue of pet abuse by batterers as a means of manipulation? What assistance can be provided? What are the psychological ramifications of pet abuse in a domestic violence context? Dr. Frank Ascione provides the answers in Safe Havens for Pets: Guidelines for Programs Sheltering Pets for Women Who Are Battered. This vital work is available FREE thanks to funding from the Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation. Click here for all the details. This book is must reading for every domestic violence worker, advocate, student, and supporter.

You can get more information on this subject from our Resources section Animal Abuse and Domestic Violence.

 

REFERENCES

Achenbach, T. M., & Edelbrock, C. S. (1981). Behavioral problems and competencies reported by parents of normal and disturbed children aged four through sixteen. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 46(1, SerialNo. 188).

Achenbach, T. M., Howell, C. T., Quay, H. C., & Conners, C. K. (1991). National survey of problems and competencies among four to sixteen-year-olds. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 56 (Serial No. 225).

Adams, C. (1994). Bringing peace home: A feminist philosophical perspective on the abuse of women, children, and pet animals. Hypatia, 9(2), 63-84.

American Humane Association. (1995). Children's Division Policy StatementsViolence toward children and animals. Protecting Children, 11(1), 14d.

American Psychiatric Association. (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed. rev.). Washington, DC: Author.

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Arkow, P. (1995). Breaking the cycles of violence. Alameda, CA: The Latham Foundation.

Arkow, P. (1996). The relationships between animal abuse and other forms of family violence. Family Violence and Sexual Assault Bulletin, 12, 29-34.

Ascione, F. R. (1992). Enhancing children's attitudes about the humane treatment of aiumals: Generalization to human-directed empathy. Anthrozoos, 5, 176-191.

Ascione, F. R. (1993). Children who are cruel to animals: A review of research and implications for developmental psychopathology. Anthrozoos, 6(4), 226-246.

Ascione, F. R. (1995, October). A call for collaboration between child abuse and domestic violence advocates. Child Protection Leader. Englewood, CO: American Humane Association.

Ascione, F. R., Thompson, T. M., & Black, T. (in press). Childhood cruelty to animals: Assessing cruelty dimensions and motivations. Anthrozoos.

Ascione, F. R., & Weber, C. (1995). Battered partner shelter survey (BPSS). Logan: Utah State University.

Brassard, M. R., Hart, S. N., & Hardy, D. B. (1993). The Psychological Maltreatment Rating Scales. Child Abuse & Neglect, 17, 715-729.

Browne, A. (1987). When battered women kill. New York: Free Press.

Browne, A. (1993). Violence against women by male partners: Prevalence, outcomes, and policy implications. American Psychologist, 48, 1077-1087.

Campbell, J. C. (1995). Prediction of homicide of and by battered women. In J. C. Campbell (Ed.), Assessing dangerousness: Violence by sexual offenders, batterers, and child abusers (pp. 96- 113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Deviney, E., Dickert, J., & Lockwood, R. (1983). The care of pets within child abusing families. International Journal for the Study of Animal Problems, 4, 321 -329.

Dutton, M. A. (1992). Empowering and healing the battered woman. New York: Springer.

Dykstra, C. (1995). Domestic violence and child abuse: Related links in the chain of violence. Protecting Children, 11(3), 3-5.

Edleson, J. L., & Brygger, M. P. (1986). Gender differences in reporting of battering incidents. Family Relations, 35, 377-382.

Fantuzzo, J. W., DePaola, L. M., Labert, L., Martino, T., Anderson, G., & Sutton, S. (1991). Effects of interparental violence on the psychological adjustment and competencies of young children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59(2), 258-265.

Gelles, R. J., & Straus, M. A. (1988). Intimate violence. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Holtzworth-Munroe, A., & Stuart, G. L. (1994). Typologies of male batterers: Three subtypes and the differences among them. Psychological Bulletin 116(1), 476497.

Hunt, S. (1996a, November 13). Battered women's syndrome? Salt Lake Tribune, p. B3.

Hunt, S. (1996b, November 15). Battered wife is acquitted of murder. Salt Lake Tribune, p. Bl.

Jade, P. G., & Sudemlann, M. (1995). Child witnesses of woman abuse: Research and community responses. In S. M. Stith & M. A. Straus (Eds.), Understanding partner violence (p. 213-222). Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.

Koss, M. P., Goodman, L. A., Browne, A., Fitzgerald, L. F., Keita, G. P., & Russo, N. F. (1994). No safe haven: Male violence against women at home, at work, and in the community. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Levinson, D. (1989). Family violence in cross-cultural perspective. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Man gets five years in cat-torture case. (1995, April 20). The Seattle Times, p. B2.

McCloskey, L. A., Figueredo, A. J., & Koss, M. R (1995). The effects of systemic family violence on children's mental health. Child Development, 66, 1239-1261.

O'Keefe, M. (1995). Predictors of child abuse in maritally violent families. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, lO(1) 3-25.

Patrignani, A., & Ville, R. (1995). violence in the family: An international bibliography with literature review. Rome, Italy: United Nation's Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute.

Peled, E., & Davis, D. (1995). Groupwork with children of battered woman. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Renzetti, C. M. (1992). Violent betrayal: Partner abuse in lesbian relationships. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Ritter, A. W., Jr. (1996). The cycle of violence often begins with violence toward animals. The Prosecutor, 30, 31-33.

Rollins, B. C., & Oheneba-Sakyi, Y. (1990). Physical violence in Utah households. Journal of Family Violence, 5, 301-309.

Rosen, B. (1995). Watch for pet abuse—it might save your client's life. Shepard s Elder Care/Law Newsletter, 5(No. 5), 1-7.

Schecter, S., & Edleson, J. L. (1995). In the best interest of women and children: A call for collaboration between child welfare and domestic violence constituencies. Protecting Children, 11(3), 6-11.

Silvern, L., & Kaersvang, L., (1989). The traumatized children of violent marriages. Child Welfare, 68, 421-436.

Sternberg, K J., Lamb, M. E., Greenbaum, C., Cicchetti, D., Dawud, S., Cortes, R. M., Krispin, O., & Lorey, F. (1993). Effects of domestic violence on children's behavior problems and depression. Developmental Psychology, 29(1), 44-52.

Straus, M. A. (1993). Identifying offenders in criminal justice research on domestic assault. American Behavioral Scientist, 36, 587-600.

Stuart, E. P., & Campbell, J. C. (1989). Assessment of patterns of dangerousness with battered women. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, l O. 245-260.

Sub, E. K., & Abel, E. M. (l990). The impact of spousal violence on the children of the abused. Journal of Independent Social Work, 4, 27-34.

Taylor, L., Zuckerman, B., Harik, V., & Groves. B. M. (1994). Witnessing violence by young children and their mothers. Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 15(2), 120-123.

Utah Domestic Violence Advisory Council. (1994). Five year state master plan for the prevention of and services for domestic violence. Salt Lake City: Utah State Department of Human Services.

Walker, L. E. (1979). The battered woman. New York: Harper and Row.

Walker, L. E. (1984). The battered woman syndrome. New York: Springer Publishing.

Walker, L. E. (1989). Terrifying love. New York: Harper and Row.

Wiche, V. R. (1990). Sibling abuse. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Wiche, V. R., & Herring, T. (1991). Perilous rivalry: When siblings become abusive. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

SUBMITTED: 07/12/96 ACCEPTED: 12/16/96

 

Andrew Vachss and The Zero would like to congratulate Frank R. Ascione, Ph.D., on his receipt of the 2001 Distinguished Scholar Award from the International Association of Human-Animal Interaction Organizations and the International Society for Anthrozoology. We have been honored to feature Dr. Ascione's work regarding the links between personal violence and animal cruelty on the website, and add our respect to that of the Society's.

Original Article

Children and Animals: Exploring the Roots of Kindness and Cruelty

by Frank R. Ascione, Ph.D.

FOREWORD BY ANDREW VACHSS

For those of us who have spent our lives on its front lines, the protection of children is the only "holy war" worthy of the name. To us, the great mystery of life is not why some abused children grow up to become abusive adults, but why so many don't.


Purdue University Press; ISBN 1557533776
for online purchase

A cop's world view might vary radically from a caseworker's; a prosecutor's "solution" could be distinctly different than a therapist's; the academic's data might be contradicted by the anecdotal experience of the field investigator. But we all share this core belief: abusiveness is not genetically encoded. It has a genesis, a discoverable taproot. And we all agree that if "prevention" is ever to exist as anything more than a grant writer's buzzword, we have to keep digging.

But, while it is universally agreed that interpersonal violence is the greatest single threat to human civilization, there is nothing resembling a consensus on its etiology. Part of the problem is that people tend to superimpose their personal belief systems over any information presented to them. For example, announcement of a decline in the number of reports of child sexual abuse cases guarantees an instant onslaught of dueling interpretations.

Depending on the expert being consulted, such data "proves" that:

  1. the "tidal wave of false allegations" is finally ebbing; or
  2. "prevention" efforts are finally bearing fruit; or
  3. viewing child abuse as a crime (rather than a "family dysfunction") and prosecuting it accordingly has deterred some perpetrators; or
  4. reduced funding for child protective services has resulted in fewer existing cases being discovered; or
  5. something else.

For the abused child, none of this agenda-driven interpretation matters. And, for the society into which that abused child will eventually be absorbed—or, in some cases, disgorged—none of it helps. But every few decades, a seminal work emerges. A dispatch from the front lines that combines innovative research, critical thought, and penetrating analysis so compellingly that it causes a cultural shift. C. Henry Kempe's The Battered Child Syndrome is a classic example.

A legitimate descendant of that groundbreaking line is Frank Ascione's Children and Animals: Exploring the Roots of Kindness and Cruelty. Its message will reverberate through politics, policy, and practice for generations to come.

To understand the significance of Ascione's work, we need to take a look—a hard look—at the predators who walk among us. Whom do we fear the most? The serial killer? The sadistic rapist? The arsonist who giggles at the flames he created? The pedophile who tortures children for pleasure, and markets the memorialization of his unspeakable acts for profit? Their crimes may vary radically, but the perpetrators are all members of the same tribe, one we now call "sociopaths." And what is the foundational characteristic of every sociopath? A profound, pervasive, fundamental lack of empathy. The sociopath attends to only his own needs, and feels only his own pain. If the pain of others interferes with his needs, it is casually ignored. And if the pain of others becomes his need, it is relentlessly pursued.

Despite enormous (and sometimes almost worshipful) media attention, we know very little about such creatures. We "profile" them endlessly, but we have never been able to predict them.

Few believe we can "treat" such predators. All agree we must incapacitate them. But what if we were granted the opportunity to interdict them? To actually alter the course of their development so that, when they reach full bloom, they are not toxic to others?

This stunning new work—the crown jewel in a career Frank Ascione has devoted to demonstrating the importance of understanding animal abuse in a developmental context—now offers us just such an unprecedented opportunity.

This book reveals what interactions between children and animals tell us about ourselves. Its premise is brilliantly direct: we have a window of opportunity—childhood—within which to redirect the production of sociopaths. The antidote is the development of empathy. And observation and analysis of children's interaction with animals is the key to that door.

Ascione persuasively argues that a society which carefully records acts of vandalism by youth—and considers such to have both symptomatic probity and predictive value—should do no less with acts of cruelty to animals. The correlations between animal abuse in the household and domestic violence are inescapable. And the link between animal abuse by children and the concurrent abuse of those same children by their "caretakers" is indisputable. Ascione's evidence is so overwhelming that I believe this book conclusively makes the case for sharing of reports between child protective and animal protective agencies.

As a lawyer, I am confident I now have the evidence to argue successfully that any report of animal abuse is sufficient probable cause to trigger a child protective investigation of the home in which it occurred. As a citizen, I intend to lobby for such changes in the law to be enacted.

But while those changes would enable detection of ongoing cases of child abuse, they would not prevent any child from initially being abused. Ascione's work is unique in that it does offer the opportunity to engage in true "primary prevention."

He points out that empathy isn't administered as an injection; it is learned over time. The young child who throws a rock at a flock of pigeons isn't so much endangering a bird as he is giving us the chance to intervene at the crossroads: We can teach empathy, or we can encourage cruelty. The classic "triad" known to all criminal investigators—enuresis, fire-setting, and animal abuse—has never been especially convincing to me. My own experience is that it is the caregiver's reaction to the bed-wetting that determines the outcome. A loving, supportive environment takes the child right out of the "triad." But a punitive, humiliating response impels him toward the other path.

The abuse of animals, especially chronic, escalating abuse, is a "gateway" indicator. Whether committed in the home environment of a child, or committed directly by the child, it never occurs in a vacuum. It never fails to tell us it is time to act. But, first, we must to learn to listen.

The sociopath may lack empathy, but he (or she) is an expert at exploiting it in others. Any domestic violence professional knows of women who remained with abusers because of threats to harm a beloved pet. Any CPS caseworker can tell you about cases in which a child abuser also hurt—or killed—the victim's pet. Any sex crimes detective can tell you that child molesters know a puppy or a kitten is a far more effective lure than candy.

I've had protection dogs all my adult life. This doesn't mean vicious dogs, it means trained dogs. Professional trainers have a disparaging term for so-called "guard dogs" that mindlessly attack anything that approaches: "fear-biters." Typically, such animals have been "trained" by repeated beatings and other forms of maltreatment. It's time that we reached that same understanding about children.

Animal abuse is now one of the diagnostic criteria for Conduct Disorder in children. That's a beginning, but it barely scratches the surface. Pets reside in the households of the overwhelming majority of Americans. As Ascione so clearly illustrates, they offer not only the opportunity to teach empathy, they serve as early warning systems for the child protective profession, if only we learn to recognize the signposts.

The abuse of animals should be a mandatory portion of all interviewing and data-collection concerning "at-risk" children, because, as this book demonstrates with such striking clarity, it has the potential to tell us so much.

Animal abuse and children—as perpetrators or as witnesses—may be the Rosetta stone to predatory psychopathology. All of us concerned with public safety have been sailors on a vast, uncharted sea. Now, Frank Ascione has given us a new, and extraordinarily promising, navigational instrument.

Children and Animals: Exploring the Roots of Kindness and Cruelty should be required reading for everyone involved in child protection and law enforcement. It should be part of the training curriculum in schools of social work and in police academies. And it will be appreciated by every citizen who is willing to invest the time and trouble it takes to make our policymakers do the right thing.

I don't write well enough to adequately express the importance of this book. Fortunately, I don't have to: it speaks for itself. And it will inform and empower everyone who gives it the chance to do so.

© 2004 Andrew Vachss. All rights reserved.

To purchase Children and Animals: Exploring the Roots of Kindness and Cruelty by Frank R. Ascione, Ph.D., click here.

Original Article

Children and Animal Cruelty: What Parents Should Know

As natural "explorers," don't all children sometimes harm animals?

Absolutely not. While some children kill insects, few torture pets or other small creatures. If allowed to harm animals, children are more likely to be violent later in life. Animal cruelty, like any other violence, should never be attributed to a stage of development.

What kind of children are cruel to animals?

Serious or repeated animal cruelty is seen more often in boys than in girls. Children as young as four may harm animals, but such behavior is most common during adolescence. Cruelty is often associated with children who do poorly in school and have low self-esteem and few friends. Children who are cruel to animals are often characterized as bullies and may have a history of truancy, vandalism, and other antisocial behaviors.

What does animal cruelty indicate about family dynamics?

Researchers say that a child's violence against animals often represents displaced hostility and aggression stemming from neglect or abuse of the child or of another family member. Animal cruelty committed by any member of a family, whether parent or child, often means child abuse occurs in that family.

What should I do if my child or a neighbor's child has harmed an animal?

If you suspect your child has deliberately harmed an animal, talk to your child. Try to discover what caused the cruelty. Communicate with your child, your child's teachers, and your child's friends. The more you know about your child's activities, the better able you will be to guide your child in making compassionate and humane choices.

Something as serious as animal cruelty, however, should not be handled alone. Seek help from a family counselor, school counselor, pediatrician, or clergy member. If you know another child who has harmed an animal, report what you know immediately to your local animal-welfare organization or police department. Alert the child's school principal or guidance counselor.

What should I tell my child about the other child's behavior?

Explain that animal abuse is often a sign of other serious problems and should be addressed by the proper authorities. Knowing that a friend has serious problems can be quite troubling for a child, as can witnessing animal cruelty. Your child may need to sort out the feelings the incident raises.

What should I do if an otherwise "good" child harms an animal one time?

Though innocent exploration may be corrected simply by talking with the child, any time a child causes an animal pain or suffering you should be concerned.

What is the difference between innocent exploration and calculated animal cruelty?

Innocent exploration may come of simple curiosity, but calculated animal cruelty is motivated by a desire to harm. While even innocent acts of cruelty should be addressed, it is particularly important to intervene when a child is insensitive to the obvious distress of an animal, repeats a harmful behavior, or derives pleasure from causing an animal pain.

How can I teach my child to respect animals?

Teach by example; use real-life situations to instill a sense of respect for all life. Invite your child to help you feed the birds or rescue a bug. With older children, discuss animal-cruelty cases publicized in the news. Encourage children to speak up for animals.

How can my child's school incorporate humane education?

Humane education should be part of every school curriculum. The Youth Education Division of The HSUS publishes materials that help teachers establish a classroom theme of kindness, respect, and tolerance. For subscription information, contact The HSUS's Youth Education Division, the National Association for Humane and Environmental Education (NAHEE), at

67 Norwich Essex Turnpike
East Haddam, CT 06423-1736

Original Article

Children found living among filth and dead dogs Winston-Salem, NC (US)

Incident Date: Wednesday, May 30, 2007
County: Forsyth
Charges: Misdemeanor
Disposition: Alleged
Alleged: Lyvette Renee Keller

Winston-Salem police arrested a woman yesterday after they found her children living in her apartment among feces, moldy food and a dead dog.

Lyvette Renee Keller, 35, of 335 Crafton St., Apt. 5, was charged with two counts of misdemeanor child abuse, two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile, and one count of cruelty to animals, a misdemeanor.

Child Protective Services summoned police her apartment Tuesday, Sgt. Jeff Broome said.

A neighbor, Shardel Beecher, said she had been feeding the children, who are 7 and 9. She said she called Child Protective Services after the apartment’s electricity was disconnected.

“The other night, we had gone out to eat, and I hadn’t fed them,” Beecher said, “and when I got back the kids came to my door and asked, ‘Do you have anything to eat?’

“And that’s at 11 o’clock at night,” she said.

The two-story apartment was filthy last night. Insects buzzed over plates of rotten food in the kitchen. The second floor of the apartment had become so dirty that the children refused to use the bathroom there and were instead going outdoors, Beecher and police said.

A spot on the carpet marked where a pit-bull puppy had died two days ago.

Neighbors were told that Shadow, another dog owned by the family, had run away. Neighbors found the remains of that dog in a garage behind the apartment. The garage floor was covered with excrement yesterday, and an outline of the dog’s body was visible.

The children were with Child Protective Services when police left, but police would not say who had custody of them.

Joe Raymond, the director of social services, was out of the office yesterday and could not be reached.

Keller was being held last night at the Forsyth County Jail, with bond set at $10,000.

Original Article

DAs Link Pet Abuse, Domestic Violence (New York Daily News)

By Roberto Santiago, Daily News Staff Writer
Originally published in the New York Daily News, November 5, 2000

Thirty-five New Yorkers who were never punished for beating their lovers are now in jail—or in therapy—because they abused the family pet.

And it's all due to a little-known partnership that the Brooklyn and Staten Island district attorneys have forged with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals' family vision unit, an anti-violence program that, since 1998, has been educating city agencies about the link between animal abuse and domestic violence.

"A person who tortures or kills an animal is often violent toward people," said Brooklyn Deputy District Attorney Carol Moran, who has prosecuted domestic-violence cases for the last 16 years.

"As a result, animal-abuse convictions are becoming a new means of putting abusive individuals in jail—or in therapy."

National surveys conducted by various universities and the Humane Society of the United States in the past five years found, among other things, that "74% of pet-owning women [in women's shelters] reported that a pet had been threatened, injured or killed" by their abuser.

Moran relates the case of a man who beat his girlfriend for months.

As she was ready to leave him for good, he wrestled her pet bird from her hands, snapped its neck and threw its writhing body at her feet.

"He sneered, 'If you are leaving, take this with you!'" Moran said.

The man was charged with animal cruelty, a class A misdemeanor that is punishable by up to a year in jail—but is usually bargained down to three to 45 days.

"She then moved in with her parents, had the bird cremated, and kept its ashes in her bedroom. All pet owners have strong emotional ties with their pets, but none more so than victims of domestic violence," Moran said. "Well, this guy broke into her parents' house—and stole the bird's ashes."

The parents pressed charges. The ex-boyfriend was indicted for breaking and entering and burglary.

He is now doing five to 15 years.

Heidi Tannenbaum-Newman, an assistant district attorney in Staten Island, said most cases don't result in prison time but in much-needed therapy for the abusers.

As part of their probation, the abusers are required to spend 12 sessions with psychologist Dr. Stephanie LaFarge, senior director of counseling services at the ASPCA.

"All of them are reluctant to undergo therapy," said LaFarge. "They deny or minimize the crime, but after a few sessions the truth comes out—and that is that they killed their lover's pet in order to cause the deepest emotional pain to their lover. And they did that because they felt that they could no longer control their lover the way they once did."

In the past two years, LaFarge said, she has treated 31 men and four women age 16 to 61, but therapy did little good when the abusers were teenagers.

"Twelve sessions, 50, 300 sessions wouldn't be enough," said LaFarge, who points out killing animals is often a "rehearsal crime" for young people. They become immune to torturing or killing animals before they move on to humans.

Family vision coordinator Susan Urban and LaFarge are trying to put together a 26-week intervention program that will teach those convicted of animal abuse or domestic violence to take responsibility for their actions.

"It would take over where therapy ends," said Urban, whose referrals will come from district attorneys' offices, Family Court and other city agencies.

"It will recognize their violence and look for ways to end it."

© 2000 Daily News, L.P.

Original Article

Elder Abuse and Animal Cruelty

On January 20, 2001, an anonymous caller to the Washington, D.C. Humane Society reported that her neighbor's daughter had thrown a dead dog into the trash dumpster. Animal control officers arrived at the scene to discover that the dead dog was only the tip of the iceberg. They also found an emaciated and disoriented 90-year-old woman. The floor of the house was covered with trash and dog feces, parts of the ceiling had caved in, and mildew covered the walls.

Reports indicated that the daughter often left her elderly mother alone for several weeks at a time. The animal control officers rescued the remaining dogs and contacted adult protective services, which arranged to have the woman transported to a hospital. The two agencies coordinated their actions to meet the needs of victims of two different types of abuse—yet all of whom required emergency care. If it hadn't been for the report of a dead dog, the suffering of both human and animal victims would have continued unnoticed.

Animal cruelty or neglect can often be a warning sign of other forms of abuse, including elder abuse. That's why The HSUS has joined forces with the Department of Health and Human Services' Administration on Aging to share information on the animal cruelty/elder abuse connection. We're coordinating our efforts around Older Americans Month, the period set aside each May to honor the country's senior citizens.

The informational campaign is clearly needed. According to the National Elder Abuse Incidence Study*, "approximately 450,000 elderly persons in domestic settings were abused and/or neglected during 1996." When the cases of elderly self-neglect were added, the numbers rose to more than 550,000.

What's more, according to the study, "data show that family members were the perpetrators in nine out of ten (89.7 percent) substantiated incidents of domestic elder abuse and neglect. Adult children of elder abuse victims were the most likely perpetrators of substantiated maltreatment (47.3 percent). Spouses represented the second largest group of perpetrators (19.3 percent)."

When a family member abuses an elderly relative's pet, the motivations may be complex. The perpetrator may neglect or abuse an elder's pet as a form of control or retaliation, out of frustration over their caretaking responsibilities, or as a way to extract financial assets.

Many older adults are particularly attached to their pets. Companion animals not only play a vital role in the lives of older adults, they also represent important links to the past. Pets provide comfort and stress relief, humor, attention, protection, and they foster social interaction between older adults and others. This special relationship, however, also makes pets vulnerable to abuse by those who want to exert power and control over an elderly person.

Cases of extreme animal neglect may also reflect an older adult's inability to provide adequate care for him or herself, and thus indicate the need for assistance.

The good news is that domestic elder abuse and animal cruelty can be investigated and stopped—if these actions are brought to the attention of authorities such as adult protective services, animal care and control, the local humane society, or law enforcement. All of these agencies can also help prevent violence by working together cooperatively and forming inter-agency collaborations or partnerships.

Cross-reporting suspected abuse of animals or elders is crucial, too. Two states have already made cross-reporting a requirement: A California law requires animal control officers to report suspected elder abuse, and Illinois requires the same of veterinarians.

The information below was included in our promotional packet for Older Americans Month, which reached hundreds of people who provide services to the elderly.

There are ways that all of us can help prevent animal cruelty and elder abuse. They include:

  • Become familiar with the signs of elder abuse. These include physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, neglect, abandonment, and financial or material exploitation.
  • Check the physical condition of pets. Ask about any recent health problems or injuries. Pets are often malnourished in abusive homes; their ribs may be visible, and their food bowls may be empty.
  • Examine the animals' behavior. Pets in abusive homes are often frightened, withdrawn, aggressive, or overly protective.
  • Ask questions. If a pet is suddenly missing or has been moved outside, ask why. Responses to these questions may lead you to discover animal cruelty, and give the older person a chance to share concerns or report abuse.
  • Find out who to call in your community if you suspect animal cruelty or elder abuse. The blue pages in your phone book will include numbers for local social service and animal protection agencies.
  • Support legislation to improve animal cruelty and elder abuse laws.

The First Strike® campaign can help in the process of bringing professionals together from a variety of agencies. We facilitate workshops and provide educational materials specifically for various professionals working to prevent family violence. For more information, please call our First Strike toll free line at 1-888-213-0956. For a free brochure on the connection between elder abuse and animal cruelty, please e-mail firststrike@hsus.org.

*The study was conducted by the National Center on Elder Abuse at the American Public Human Services Association (formally known as the American Public Welfare Association) and the Maryland-based social science and survey research firm, Westat.

Original Article

Factors in the Assessment of Dangerousness in Perpetrators of Animal Cruelty

by Randall Lockwood, Ph.D.

We are frequently called upon to assist cruelty investigators, law-enforcement officers, court officials or mental health professionals in evaluating the significance of an individual's involvement in a particular act of animal cruelty as an indicator of dangerousness or possible risk for involvement of future acts of violence against others. The relatively low level of attention given to even the most serious acts of animal abuse has made it difficult to systematically or quantitatively assess the various factors that should be considered in evaluating the potential significance of various violent acts against animals. However, the following factors are suggested as relevant criteria in such evaluations. They are based on several sources including:

  1. Retrospective studies of acts of cruelty against animals reported by violent offenders
  2. Studies and reports of acts of animal cruelty committed prior to or in association with child abuse and/or domestic violence
  3. Extrapolation from criteria used in threat assessment by the National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime
  4. Extrapolation from numerous studies on general characteristics of habitual violent offenders

There is, as yet, no absolute scale that determines when a particular collection of factors reaches critical levels. It is suggested, conservatively, that more than five of these aggravating factors should be cause for serious concern, and that more than ten can indicate a high potential that the offender has been or will be involved in serious acts of violence against people.

1. Victim vulnerability
Acts of violence against victims that are particularly small, harmless or nonthreatening by virtue of species, size, age, injury or disability are indicative of perpetrators particularly willing to gain a sense of power and control through violence against those least likely to retaliate, and thus should be considered at higher risk of aggression to children, the elderly, the disabled and other vulnerable victims.

2.Number of victims
The selection of multiple victims killed or injured in the same instance suggests a greater potential for uncontrolled violence.

3. Number of instances within a limited time frame
Several separate instances (e.g. attacks on animals at two or more locations) within a 24 hour period reflects a predatory style of attack that is suggestive of organized and premeditated violence against others.

4.Severity of injury inflicted
(on continuum from minor injury to death of victim)

5. Repetition of injuries on individual victim(s)
In general, perpetrators who have inflicted multiple blows, stab wounds, etc. on one or more victims should be considered a higher risk.

6. Multiple forms of injury to individual victim(s)
Perpetrators who inflict two or more forms of injury (e.g. burn and bludgeon) should be considered a higher risk

7. Intimacy of infliction of injury
Abuse that involves direct physical contact or restraint and obvious opportunity to witness the victims? response (e.g. beating, strangling, crushing, hanging, stabbing) may be a more serious indicator than actions that are more remote (e.g. shooting, poisoning, vehicular injury).

8. Victim(s) is bound or otherwise physically incapacitated
Abuse that includes binding, tying, securing with duct tape, confining in a box or bag or otherwise rendering the animal incapable of escape (e.g. crippling) is suggestive of a higher degree of intentional, premeditated violence.

9. Use of fire
A large body of criminological and psychological literature points out the connection between animal cruelty and arson as significant predictors of violent and even homicidal behavior. The combination of these factors, i.e. the intentional burning of a live animal should be considered particularly significant as an indicator of the potential for other violent acts.

10. Duration of abuse
Acts of prolonged maltreatment (e.g. torture) rather than sudden or instantaneous death are more indicative of potential for repeated violence against others

11. Degree of pre-planning or premeditation
Acts that were premeditated rather than reactive or opportunistic and which involved assembling tools or instruments of injury are more suggestive of high risk. Very long term planning (e.g. several days or weeks) suggests possibility of psychopathic thought processes as contributing factor.

12. Act involved overcoming obstacles to initiate or complete the abuse
Abuse that involves risk or effort (e.g. climbing barrier, breaking and entering, etc.) or pursuit of a victim that escapes initial attack, is indicative of highly motivated violent behavior and thus should be considered an indicator of greater risk for future violence.

13. Act was committed with high risk of detection or observation
Animal cruelty that is perpetrated in public or with high probability of detection should be considered indicative of low concern for consequences of the perpetrator? s acts, and thus an indicator of risk for other violence.

14. Other illegal acts were committed at the scene of the animal cruelty
Personal and property crimes occurring in conjunction with the commission of animal cruelty, (e.g. vandalism, theft, threats to assault on owner or witness) should be considered indicative of higher risk for other violent and/or criminal acts.

15. Individual was the instigator of an act involving multiple perpetrators
Although the perpetration of many acts of violence may be more likely in a group setting, particular attention should be paid to instigators of such group violence against animals.

16. Animal cruelty was used to threaten, intimidate or coerce a human victim
Killing or injuring animals to exercise control or threats over others, especially those emotionally attached to those animals, should already be considered a form of emotional abuse and a behavior that, by definition, already involves violence against people.

17. Act of animal cruelty was indicative of hypersensitivity to real or perceived threats or slights
Violent perpetrators often misread cues and intentions of others as indicative of threats, taunts, etc. Acts of violence against animals conducted with this motivation can be considered indicative of a high-risk response to social problems.

18. Absence of economic motive
While an economic motive (e.g. killing and stealing animal for food) does not excuse animal cruelty, the presence of an economic motive, in the absence of other aggravating factors, may suggest a mitigating factor that could decrease the assessment of risk for future violence. Conversely, the lack of such a motive suggests the act was rewarding to the perpetrator by itself.

19. Past history of positive interactions with victim
Instances of animal abuse in which the perpetrator has previously interacted positively or affectionately with the victim ( e.g. acts against one? s own pet) suggest an instability in relationships that can be predictive of other types of cyclic violence such as domestic abuse.

20. Animal victim was subjected to mutilation or postmortem dismemberment
Mutilation is usually associated with disorganized motives of power and control which are often associated with interpersonal violence.

21. Animal victim was sexually assaulted or mutilated in genital areas or perpetrator indicated sexual arousal as a consequence of the abuse
The eroticization of violence should always be considered a potential warning sign for more generalized violence. A past history of sexual arousal through violent dominance of animals has been characteristic of many serial rapists and sexual homicide perpetrators.

22. Act of cruelty was accompanied by indicators of sexual symbolism associated with the victim
Written or spoken comments indicating that the perpetrator viewed the animal as representative of a substitute human victim (e.g. ? that pussy had to die? , ? the bitch deserved it? ) should constitute a serious warning sign of the potential for escalation of violence to a human target.

23. Perpetrator projected human characteristics onto victim
If other evidence suggests perpetrator viewed the animal victim as a specific human individual or class of individuals, this may indicate that the violence could be a rehearsal for related acts against human victims.

24. Perpetrator documented the act of animal abuse through photographs, video or audio recording, or diary entries
The memorialization or documentation of cruelty indicates that acts of violence are a continuing source of pleasure for the perpetrator, a serious indicator that such violence is strongly rewarding and very likely to be repeated and/or escalated.

25. Perpetrator returned at least once to scene of the abuse, to relive the experience
As above, the continuation of the emotional arousal experienced during the perpetration of cruelty is an indicator of significant likelihood of reenactment, repetition or escalation of the violence to reach the same rewarding emotional state.

26. Perpetrator left messages or threats in association with the act of cruelty
Using violence against an animal as a form of threat or intimidation is often symptomatic of more generalized violence. The additional intimidation of written or verbal threats (e.g. notes left with an animal body or letters sent to someone who cared about the animal), are strongly indicative of potential for escalated violence.

27. Animal victim was posed or otherwise displayed
Positioning or displaying the body of a victim (e.g. on front steps, in mailbox), or wearing or displaying parts of the remains (e.g. skins, paws) can be indicative of the use of such violence to gain feelings of power, control and domination - or to alarm or intimidate others. This should be considered a serious warning sign of potential for escalated or repeated violence.

28. Animal cruelty was accompanied by ritualistic or "satanic" actions
Animal cruelty accompanied by "satanic" or other ritualistic trappings suggests an active effort to reject societal norms or attempts to seek power and control through magical? thought processes, which may escalate to fascination with the application of such ritual to human victims.

29. Act of abuse involved staging or reenactment of themes from media or fantasy sources
The reenactment of cruelty to animals in ways the perpetrator has been exposed to through media or fantasy sources (including video games) can be indicative of weak reality testing and a greater likelihood of copying other media portrayals of violent acts against human victims.

30. Perpetrator reportedly experienced altered consciousness during the violent act
Acts that are accompanied by blackouts, blanking, de-realization or depersonalization should be considered indicative of thought disorders that could contribute to acts of violence against human victims.

31. Perpetrator reportedly experienced strong positive affective changes during the violent act
Violent or destructive acts that are reportedly accompanied by strong positive affect (laughter, descriptions of a “rush”, exclamations of generalized or sexual excitement) indicate that such violence is being strongly reinforced and is likely to be repeated and/or escalate.

32. Perpetrator lacks insight into cause or motivation of the animal abuse
Repeat violent offenders often display little or no insight into the motivation of their violent acts.

33. Perpetrator sees himself as the victim in this event and/or projects blame onto others including the animal victim
Repeat offenders and those resistant to intervention are less likely to take responsibility for their actions and often offer self-serving, fanciful or bizarre justifications for their actions.

Last revision November 17, 2003. Reproduced with permission.

Original Article

Hobe Sound Man Battered Girlfriend, Killed Puppies, Police Say

By Gabriel Margasak
Originally published in The Stuart News, July 3, 2002

HOBE SOUND — A Hobe Sound man was charged with animal cruelty and domestic violence after he suffocated two puppies and battered his girlfriend, authorities said on Tuesday.

Martin County sheriff's deputies said Justin James Harding, 23, wrapped two, 2-week-old pit-bull mix puppies in wet towels, sealed them in plastic bags and threw them in a closet because they were crying.

His 19-year-old girlfriend told detectives she "pleaded with Justin not to do it, but he said he would do the same to her," a sheriff's report states. "She said that she could hear the puppies whimpering and the bag moving as they gasped for air until they were dead."

She was afraid to call for help, detectives said.

Deputies seized 12 other puppies and their mother from the couple's mobile home and turned them over to the Humane Society of the Treasure Coast.

Harding told a deputy he suffocated the puppies "because they were crying all the time and making too much noise, as if there was nothing wrong with it because they were his puppies," a sheriff's report says.

In court papers released on Tuesday, detectives allege Harding subjected his girlfriend to violent treatment.

Deputies said the girl went to Martin Memorial Hospital South on June 30 vomiting blood. At the hospital, she told a nurse her live-in boyfriend of four years had killed the puppies and shoved her in front of her children, deputies stated. The hospital called authorities.

Deputies' reports state that Harding did not allow his girlfriend to use the phone and had "brainwashed her into believing if she is bad, she deserves to be beaten," the report stated.

She told a deputy that Harding had suffocated the two puppies, one June 27 and one June 28.

Harding was being held Tuesday evening at the Martin County Jail without bail.

Original Article

Man Kills Dog By Throwing It Against Wall

Originally published at ChannelOklahoma.com (KOCO-TV Eyewitness News 5), May 2, 2001

A Norman man is facing felony charges for allegedly killing his girlfriend's 5-month-old Chihuahua puppy by throwing it against the wall.

Because of the sensitive nature of the case, police asked that the parties involved in the dispute remain anonymous, but Lori Miksell of the Second Chance animal sanctuary in Norman called the dog's death an "atrocity."

"It's really hard to believe that anyone could ever do this to any kind of animal, especially a small Chihuahua," she said.

The suspect is also facing a misdemeanor charge of kicking his girlfriend in the ribs after she obtained a victim's protective order in April, police said.

Miksell says that there is a direct link between domestic violence and animal cruelty.

"Here at Second Chance, we spend $21,000 investigating cruelty cases like these, and we get these reports each day," she said.

Next year, Second Chance is planning to build a women's shelter on its property so that women leaving abusive relationships can bring their pets with them.

Meanwhile, police are also trying to determine whether the suspect may have also killed three other pets his girlfriend owned.

Original Article

Man Sentenced to Six Months For Domestic Violence, Animal Cruelty

By Kathleen R. Merrill, Journal Reporter
Originally published in the South County Journal, June 1, 2002

KENT — A King County judge issued a six-month jail sentence and a stern warning to an Auburn man for beating a cat and being violent with his girlfriend in front of their children.

George Coleman Patterson pleaded guilty May 20 to a misdemeanor charge of harassment and a felony charge of animal cruelty for the Dec. 10 incident. His age was unavailable.

Patterson's attorney, Jeff MacNichols, said in court yesterday that his client has had 15-17 charges of domestic violence assault and similar charges filed and dismissed, most of the time because Patterson's' girlfriend, Tamra Cabuco, failed to appear as a witness.

MacNichols asked that those offenses, some of which he said Cabuco admitted making up to get back at Patterson, not be considered when Superior Court Judge Laura Gene Middaugh decided the sentence.

And Cabuco asked Middaugh not to issue an order prohibiting Patterson from having contact with her and their two daughters, 6 and 9. Middaugh asked why she didn't want the no-contact order.

"I just don't think I need it," Cabuco said. "Ultimately, I'd like to work things out with George."

But Middaugh said she wanted to stop the violence in the home and ordered Patterson to only professionally supervised visits with the children until he makes headway in several treatment programs.

"I'm very concerned, Mr. Patterson, about the violence you are committing in front of your children," Middaugh said. "You're teaching them that violence is acceptable."

In addition to jail, which Patterson can serve through work release, Middaugh sentenced him to a domestic violence batterer's treatment program, ordered him to get a drug and alcohol evaluation, follow any treatment recommendations and complete a parenting class.

According to a police account of the incident for which Patterson was sentenced:

Patterson came home drunk and threw or kicked the cat repeatedly. He then woke up the children and told them they didn't have fleas anymore because he had broken the cat's neck.

Patterson proceeded to terrorize and threaten the family until police arrived. Patterson threatened the officers and tried to get them to shoot him before he was taken into custody.

MacNichols said yesterday that the cat had no permanent injuries.

Copyright © 2002 Horvitz Newspapers, Inc.

Original Article

Pet Protective Orders

Animals need protection at home as well as in the community, and The HSUS' Dr. Mary Lou Randour writes and speaks on their behalf. A Ph.D. psychologist and author of three books, Randour has also written two handbooks on animal abuse in juveniles and adults.

Randour teamed up with the American Bar Association's Center on Children and the Law to produce a new handbook called "The Common Bond," which explores the link between violence toward animals and violence toward humans.

More than 64 million households in the United States have one or more companion animals, and pets are often part of the family. Most of the time this is for the best, but not all families function well all of the time. When family violence erupts, right beside the threatened spouse and any children are the family pets, cowering under tables, locked in closets or perhaps temporarily rescued by the quick thinking of a family member.

In a national survey of battered women's shelters, 85 percent of shelters indicated that women seeking shelter reported incidents of pet abuse. Up to 48 percent of women delay leaving a dangerous domestic situation because of their fear that their partners will harm or kill the family pet—and they often do.

Legislation To Protect The Whole Family

Once extricated from the danger at home, however, domestic violence victims may continue to be stalked by their estranged partners. To prevent this, protection orders are the legal tool used to extend protection to a woman and her family, which now includes the family pet in three states. Maine, Vermont and New York passed laws that recognize that family pets are important members of the family, permitting pets to be listed on protection orders for domestic violence victims.

More states plan to follow. As of March, 2007, legislatures in 11 states (Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, New JerseyRhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington) and the District of Columbia were considering "pet protection" legislation.

Original Article

Police Say Dog is Killed by Owner's Ex-Boyfriend

By Terence J. Downing, Enterprise staff writer
Originally published in The Enterprise, February 10, 2002

BROCKTON — A small poodle was beaten to death in what authorities are calling one of worst cases of animal abuse they have seen in years.

Police said the dog's owner and her daughter watched in horror as Christopher L. Chamberlain, 23, of Court Street smashed the dog against a house and deck during a domestic dispute with his ex-girlfriend late Friday night.

The couple have a 2 1/2-year-old child.

Police said he also struck his girlfriend's mother in the head with the dog, which died of multiple injuries, including a broken neck.

The dog, Falcor, a 9-year-old mini poodle, was dead when they arrived on the scene at 320 Court St.

Chamberlain had fled the scene and was caught by officers following a high speed pursuit in which he went through two stop signs, police said.

Scott Giacoppo, manager of the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals office in Brockton, said that although the case seems extreme, animals are often abused in homes where there is domestic violence.

"It's very common to see animals abused in domestic violence. They are used as control devices,'' said Giacoppo.

"Usually if there is domestic violence, very often you will see animal abuse as well,'' he said.

Jamie Davidson, 22, Chamberlain's ex-girlfriend, told police he was at her house with some underage friends drinking in the garage when she arrived home Friday night.

Davidson and her mother, Sharon demanded that they leave.

Davidson told police that Chamberlain went into a rage and began yelling obscenities.

As he left the house, he grabbed Sharon Davidson's dog by the cable leash and began whipping it against the house and the deck.

Chamberlain then swung the dog at Sharon Davidson, hitting her on the left side of the face, police said.

Witnesses told police Chamber then threw the dog over the deck railing and fled in a red Camaro.

Animal Control Officer Darren Hand and Patrolman George Almeida arrived on the scene and found Falcor at the base of the deck stairs at the rear of the house.

"I can't believe he did it,'' Sharon Davidson said Saturday. "You had to see it. I just can't believe he did that.''

Patrolman Darvin Anderson stopped Chamberlain at 18 Washburn St., as he pulled into a driveway.

Chamberlain was released on $500 cash bail early Saturday morning and will be arraigned in Brockton District Court.

He has been charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, domestic assault and battery, cruelty to animals resulting in death, failure to stop for a police officer, operating to endanger, speeding and having an open container of alcohol.

Sharon Davidson said Chamberlain had lived in the house with her and her daughter for about five years.

She told police the couple broke up but Chamberlain "refuses to let her go.''

© 2002 The Enterprise.

Original Article

Safe Havens for Pets: Guidelines for Programs Sheltering Pets for Women Who Are Battered

by Frank R. Ascione, Ph.D.

Anyone who has worked in the Domestic Violence field knows of cases where a victim chose to remain with a batterer rather than abandon a beloved pet, because so many DV Shelters will not allow those fleeing a violent situation to bring their pets with them. Dr. Frank Ascione, the world's leading authority on the connections between animal abuse, child abuse, and domestic violence, has provided a real solution in his ground-breaking Safe Havens for Pets. The production and dissemination of the book was made possible by funding from the Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation. The entire print run has been distributed, but you can still get it FREE, via a downloadable PDF, right here at The Zero. Just click here.

Read Andrew Vachss' foreward to Children and Animals: Exploring the Roots of Kindness and Cruelty the latest book by Frank R. Ascione, Ph.D.


download Safe Havens for Pets: Guidelines for Programs Sheltering Pets for Women Who Are BatteredSafe Havens for Pets (9.8M)

 

Frank R. Ascione received his bachelors degree in psychology from Georgetown University in 1969 and his doctoral degree in developmental psychology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 1973. He is a professor in the Department of Psychology and adjunct professor in Family and Human Development at Utah State University (USU). Dr. Ascione has published numerous articles on the development of antisocial and prosocial behavior in children, coedited two books Cruelty to Animals and Interpersonal Violence: Readings in Research and Application (1998), Child Abuse, Domestic Violence, and Animal Abuse: Linking the Circles of Compassion for Prevention and Intervention (1998), both published by Purdue University Press, and authored Safe Havens for Pets: Guidelines for Programs Sheltering Pets for Women who are Battered. In the fall of 2001, the U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention published Ascione's review of animal abuse and youth violence as a Research Bulletin. Children and Animals, Kindness and Cruelty is Dr. Ascione's latest book and is scheduled to be published in 2004 by Purdue University Press. The International Handbook of Theory and Research on Animal Abuse and Cruelty will be edited by Dr. Ascione with an anticipated publication date in late 2005 or early 2006. Development of this handbook is sponsored by the Scott Charitable Trust. Dr. Ascione was selected to receive the 2001 Distinguished Scholar Award from the International Association of Human-Animal Interaction Organizations and the International Society for Anthrozoology and in 2002, was selected as USU's College of Education Scholar/Researcher of the Year.

Dr. Ascione has conducted research related to humane education and children's attitudes toward animals. More recently, he has focused his attention on child and adolescent animal abuse.This research examines the common roots of violence toward people and animals and is directed at identifying an early indicator of at-risk status in children. An invited speaker at local, national, and international conferences (including recent conferences in Tel Aviv, Geneva, Dublin, Prague, Florence, Rome, Brussels, Gothenburg, Cambridge, Toronto, Vancouver (BC), London (Ontario), Rio de Janeiro, Kobe, Tokyo, and Amsterdam), Dr. Ascione has collaborated with human services, social work, and child development staff working with abused children, with youth corrections personnel, and with state shelters for women who are battered. His work has been supported by the Humane Society of the United States, the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the American Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the American Humane Association, the Scott Charitable Trust, and the Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation. Dr. Ascione has provided information or testimony for the state legislatures of Utah, Ohio, Colorado, and Washington, regarding cruelty to animals legislation. He has appeared on CNN's "Live from the Headlines", the Oprah Winfrey Show, and has been a guest on numerous local and national TV and radio programs.

A member of the American Psychological Association and the Society for Research on Child Development, Dr. Ascione served on the Scientific Advisory Council of the Humane Society of the United States and serves on the Child and Animal Abuse Prevention Advisory Council of the Latham Foundation. He is past president of the Southwestern Society for Research in Human Development and is a member of the cadre of experts for The American Psychological Association's Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family.

Born and raised in New York City, Frank and his wife Deborah have three adult children, Matthew, Catherine, and David, and reside in Logan, Utah.

 

Andrew Vachss and The Zero would like to congratulate Frank R. Ascione, Ph.D., on his receipt of the 2001 Distinguished Scholar Award from the International Association of Human-Animal Interaction Organizations and the International Society for Anthrozoology. We have been honored to feature Dr. Ascione's work regarding the links between personal violence and animal cruelty on The Zero, and add our respect to that of the Society's.

Original Article

UAADV DV Awareness Shop