everything about your dogs

Showing posts with label children. Show all posts
Showing posts with label children. Show all posts

People Mistakenly Think Anxious Dogs Are Relaxed Around Baby

Dog owners are even worse than non-dog owners at interpreting canine body language in interactions with children, according to research.

A toddler and his dog look out of the window


Young children, in particular, are at risk of getting bitten by dogs. According to the AVMA, between 2010 and 2012 359,223 children in the US were bitten by dogs. Younger children are most often bitten in the home by a dog they live with (Reisner et al 2011). To prevent dog bites, it's best not to let a child approach a dog that is lying down or sitting still, and to closely supervise all interactions between children and dogs. But what if people don't know what to look for?

A recent study by Dr. Yasemin Salgirli Demirbas (Ankara University) et al asked people to observe three videos of interactions between a young child and a medium or large dog.

In one video, a baby crawls towards a Dalmatian who is lying down next to a ball; in another, a toddler walks around and touches a Doberman; and finally, a Boxer follows and licks the face of a crawling baby.

In all three cases, the interactions were risky, as the dogs were obviously showing anxious or fearful body language.

But that’s not how most people rated the dogs. Most people said the dogs were relaxed (68%) and confident (65%).


It made no difference whether or not people had children, but there were differences between the people who owned dogs and those who did not. Far from being better at reading dog body language, the dog owners were more likely to say the dog was relaxed, and it was the non-dog owners who were more likely to recognize the dog had an anxious emotional state.

The authors suggest several possible reasons for this, including that dog owners may be more likely to assume a dog is friendly, non-dog owners may be more cautious and dog owners more confident in their assessments, or dog owners may have less knowledge about aggression in dogs in this context.

The study also found that people (dog owners or not) tend to give overall assessments of the dog’s emotional state, rather than pointing to particular aspects of body language. They gave examples such as “the dog is happy” or “the dog knows that it is just a small child.” This kind of overall assessment was more common in people without children.

Every participant referred to tail wagging as a sign of positive emotions. This is worrying because in fact only some tail wags are a sign of happiness. Tail position and wagging speed, breadth and direction can all vary. Look for a lovely wide wag with a nice loose body in a happy dog; a narrow, rapid wag with the tail held high is a sign of a threat.

Other behaviours people often commented on were moving the ears back (recognized more by dog owners) and avoiding eye contact.


A father and toddler interact with the family dog
Photo: debasige; top, brickrena. Both Shutterstock.


The researchers say that even when people were able to recognize the dog’s emotional state, this would not necessarily have been enough to prevent a dog bite. People were still likely to describe the interactions between dog and child as playful or friendly.

The authors say, “This finding shows the importance of bite prevention programs aimed at teaching both the correct description of canine body language and the early signals of aggression, to equip adults with the necessary knowledge to safely supervise child–dog interactions”

The online survey had 71 participants and took place in Turkey. The small size of the survey is a drawback, but the findings suggest more research into how people interpret (or fail to interpret) interactions between dogs and children would be very helpful. Sometimes social media seems to be full of videos of very risky interactions followed by many comments describing them as cute.

And that’s one of the nice things about this study: the dogs in the videos did not show more obvious signs such as growls or air snaps that more people would have easily recognized. Instead they showed the more subtle signs dogs give that they are uncomfortable, such as lip licking, looking away, or moving away from the child.

While it’s not a surprise that most people did not recognize these signs, it is alarming, and shows more needs to be done to educate people about canine body language and safety around dogs.

This is not the only study to find people tend to assume safety around dogs. Westgarth and Watkins (2015) found a belief that dog bites “won’t happen to me.” But especially where children are concerned, we need to be aware that any dog can bite, and learn how to recognize signs of stress, anxiety and fear in dogs.

You will find some useful resources at stopthe77.comReisner Veterinary Behaviour Services often provides educational deconstructions of dog bite incidents on Facebook and is on my list of the pet people to follow in 2017.

If you like this post, why not subscribe to Companion Animal Psychology.

You might also like: Educating children reduces risky behaviour around dogs.



Reference
Demirbas, Y. S., Ozturk, H., Emre, B., Kockaya, M., Ozvardar, T., & Scott, A. (2016). Adults’ Ability to Interpret Canine Body Language during a Dog–Child Interaction. Anthrozoƶs, 29(4), 581-596. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08927936.2016.1228750

Companion Animal Psychology is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Companion Animal Psychology is also a participant in the Etsy Affiliate Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Etsy.com.

The benefits of pets for children

A review of the literature concludes that pets may have psychological benefits for children – such as better self-esteem – but more research is needed.

A girl and her dog sit together on the grass. Pets are good for children - read more about the benefits.


The review, by Rebecca Purewal (University of Liverpool) et al involved searching the scientific literature from 1960 to 2016 for studies that examine the effects of pets on children’s psychological health. 22 studies were identified and analysed further.

The results show benefits in some areas, but not enough evidence to draw conclusions in other areas. The paper also considers the potential mechanisms for such effects.

The scientists write,
“This paper provides a review of the evidence on the effects of pet ownership on emotional, behavioural, cognitive, educational and social development. Overall, the evidence suggests that pet ownership, and dog ownership in particular, may benefit these outcomes for children and adolescents. However, the evidence is mixed partly due to a broad range of different methodological approaches and varying quality of studies.”
The scientists used quite broad criteria in selecting the studies for their review. The 22 studies they looked at include two that have been covered on Companion Animal Psychology: Geerdts et al on pets and children’s understanding of biological concepts, and Rhoades et al on the effects of pets on the mental health of homeless youth.


First, the good news. Purewal et al found evidence that pets may be good for children’s emotional health, especially in terms of better self-esteem and reduced loneliness. There also seemed to be benefits in terms of being better able to take another person’s perspective, and for intellectual development.

They also found social benefits – bigger social networks, better social competence, and more social play. (Interestingly, pets have also been found to increase social networks for adults).

However, they did not really find evidence for improvements in depression and anxiety, and there was not enough evidence to come to any conclusions about behaviour development.

The paper describes several potential mechanisms by which pets might benefit children. The effects of the hormone oxytocin may lead to reduced stress, and pets may provide social support. Pets may help to meet children’s needs for a secure attachment, and this could be especially important in cases where a child has poor attachment to their parents. Indeed, it is possible that attachment to pets may be more important than simply owning a pet.

A boy holds his Yorkshire Terrier in his arms. Research shows pets are good for children.

The authors provide illustrations of how effects might occur for each of the domains where an effect was found. For example, improved educational outcomes may be due to better social support and reduced stress, which in turn may cause better executive functioning which will improve learning. Interactions with the pet (such as having conversations with the pet) may also lead to better language skills and social cognition.

Potential benefits of pets may also be related to the stage of a child’s development. For example, young children who are learning about social relationships may especially benefit from interactions with a pet. For self-esteem, it seems that pet ownership is of most benefit to younger children (under 6) and those over 10 years old.

The review highlights a number of problems with the available evidence, such as small sample sizes,  only collecting data at one time-point (therefore not able to assess potential effects over time), and sometimes classifying children as non-pet owners at a particular time when they may have previously had a pet that is now deceased.

Also, there are differences in the kinds of pets studied, and although it appears that dogs had the greatest potential, in some cases other pets (that were not dogs or cats) were not included as pets in the research. So more research is needed to understand the relationship children have with different kinds of pets, and whether this means some pets are more likely to be beneficial than others.

The authors also highlight potential confounding variables. For example, there might be differences in the kind of parent who acquires a pet compared to those who don’t, and it’s possible this could account for some of the effects.

As well as summarizing the literature, the article highlights the need for better quality evidence on the possible benefits of pets. While the potential risks of pets are outside the scope of the paper, they are mentioned. The most obvious might be the risk of dog bites, which young children are especially vulnerable to, but there are also risks of allergies, acquiring an infection from a pet, and of grief on the loss of pet.

That's why it's so helpful to know that research finds dogs and cats may benefit children in some aspects, such as improved self-esteem and bigger social networks. The review highlights priorities for future research, and shows that improving the quality of research in this field is essential. Hopefully it will be a catalyst for better-designed and longitudinal studies in this area.

The paper is open access so you can read it in full. You can also follow one of the authors of the study, Dr. Carri Westgarth, on twitter.

How do you think pets might help children?

You might also like: Reading to dogs may improve literacy and what pets do children have and which do they prefer?

You may also read this post in Chinese, courtesy of our friends at Bambiland Pet Photography and Dog Training.



Reference
Purewal, R., Christley, R., Kordas, K., Joinson, C., Meints, K., Gee, N., & Westgarth, C. (2017). Companion Animals and Child/Adolescent Development: A Systematic Review of the Evidence International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14 (3) DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14030234
Photos: Africa Studio (top) and zagorodnaya (both Shutterstock.com).

Companion Animal Psychology is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Companion Animal Psychology is also a participant in the Etsy Affiliate Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Etsy.com.

Pets May Help Children Learn About Animal Welfare

Children’s beliefs about animal welfare and sentience are linked to their own experiences with animals.

A girl and her pet cat look at each other with love and affection

Surprisingly little is known about children’s beliefs and knowledge about animals. Yet this information could help to improve humane education programs for children. Two recent studies begin to fill this gap, with recommendations for how humane education is taught.

We know from previous research that even very young children like animals, and that children with pets are more likely to attribute biological concepts to animals than those without. Children’s experiences of caring for their pets mostly involve play, while the actual pet care is carried out by parents. Is it possible that even though these experiences are mostly social, children with pets will still have a better understanding of the care that pets need?

A series of group discussions with children aged 7 to 13 was conducted by Janine Muldoon (University of St. Andrews) et al (2016). The discussions lasted from 40 to 60 minutes, depending on school timetabling, and focussed on four types of animal: dogs, cats, guinea pigs and goldfish. Children were asked questions about how to care for the animals, how they knew when they needed care, and whether the animals have feelings.

 

Children’s answers showed a difference between what animals need in theory, and what was actually done in practice. Where they were unsure about an animal’s needs, their answers were framed in terms of their own experience, such as saying that a dog needed breakfast, lunch and dinner.

Answers also depended on the animal species. Dogs were seen as easier to understand if they needed something, although for all species the default position for an animal that needed something seemed to be ‘hunger’. Older children showed an understanding that some animals needed affection and interaction.

Children showed most knowledge about fish, and it seems that experiences of fish dying prompted them to consider what might have gone wrong. They also had knowledge about animals they did not themselves keep as pets. As you might expect, there were many gaps and variability in what they knew about animals and the five welfare needs.

Children talked about how they know what animals want. For instance, 11-year-old Caitlin* said,
“You can tell with a dog, because if they need the toilet they prance about and they brush up against your leg and they’ll go and sit at a door and then you kind of know. But then next they’ll be needing to be fed and he’ll go to this cupboard in the house and it’s where his biscuits sit. So he goes in and pulls the bags open and he’ll be able to get his head in and he brings it through in his mouth and he’ll drop it at my mum.”

A boy plays chess with his pet cat
Photos: Irina Kozorog (top) and Blend Images (Shutterstock.com)  

Muldoon et al conclude,
“Children often express confusion and report being able to identify hunger and injury, but recognize few other cues of welfare state in their pets. As certain types of animals may not have the behavioral repertoire or reinforcement history to give clear cues of need, it seems important that educators cultivate some form of emotional concern for the specific animal they want children to understand better. Perhaps most at risk of negative welfare experiences are animals that are not perceived by children to be reciprocal in their interactions or appear less dependent on them for daily care and attention.”
A large questionnaire study of children from 6 to 13 years old was conducted by Roxanne Hawkins and Joanne Williams (University of Edinburgh) (2016). They investigated the relationship between beliefs about animal minds (BAM), namely that animals are sentient and have feelings, and attachment, compassion and attitudes to animals. This study looked at a range of animals: humans, dogs, goldfish, cows, chimpanzees, robins, badgers and frogs.

Children rated humans as the most sentient animals, followed by dogs and chimpanzees. They rated frogs and goldfish as least sentient.

Children who lived with pets had higher scores for beliefs about animal minds (BAM) than those without, and those who had their own pet or more than one pet had higher scores still. Those with dogs specifically gave higher ratings for the sentience of dogs.

Hawkins and Williams write that,
“The results from the study confirmed the hypothesis that Child-BAM [beliefs about animal minds] is positively related to attachment to pets and compassion to animals, humane behavior toward animals, as well as attitudes toward animals. The findings also confirmed that Child-BAM was negatively associated with acceptance of intentional and unintentional animal cruelty and animal neglect.”

Neither study shows a causal relationship between children’s pet ownership and beliefs or knowledge. Further research would be needed to look at this.


A girl poses for a photo with her pet bulldog
Photo: AlohaHawaii (Shutterstock.com)


Dogs were most often considered to be sentient in both studies. Muldoon et al write that,
“the overwhelming emphasis on dogs throughout all phases of the focus groups suggests that they are the easiest animal with which to “connect.”” 

In Hawkins and Williams study, dogs were rated as having greater sentience than chimpanzees, though this could be because children were more familiar with dogs. In both studies, dogs were the most common pet.

These studies suggest that humane education should include developing emotional connections with animals and education about animal minds, as these are both likely to lead to more compassion toward animals and less tolerance of animal cruelty.

They also suggest that having a pet is a positive experience in terms of learning about animals and animal welfare. Further research can investigate the best ways to teach children about how to care for animals, whether or not they have a pet at home.

Do you think it’s important for children to have pets?




References
Hawkins, R., & Williams, J. (2016). Children’s Beliefs about Animal Minds (Child-BAM): Associations with Positive and Negative Child–Animal Interactions Anthrozoƶs, 29 (3), 503-519 DOI: 10.1080/08927936.2016.1189749 
Muldoon, J., Williams, J., & Lawrence, A. (2016). Exploring Children’s Perspectives on the Welfare Needs of Pet Animals Anthrozoƶs, 29 (3), 357-375 DOI: 10.1080/08927936.2016.1181359
*Not her real name; the children were given pseudonyms.

Companion Animal Psychology is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Companion Animal Psychology is also a participant in the Etsy Affiliate Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Etsy.com.

Educating Children Reduces Risky Behaviour Around Dogs

Dog safety education for children works, according to a systematic review of existing research.


Two boys playing with malamute puppies and a football outside


The CDC estimates that 4.5 million Americans are bitten by a dog every year. Children are at high risk, and bites to children are often more severe than those to adults. Bites to the head and neck are more common than for adults because children are smaller.

The CDC says “Among children, the rate of dog-bite–related injuries is highest for those 5 to 9 years old. Children are more likely than adults to receive medical attention for dog bites.”   When young children are bitten by a dog, it is typically indoors and by a dog they know or live with, often when the child approaches a dog that is lying down or stationary.

The best ways to teach children about dogs are investigated in a systematic review of the literature by Jiabin Shen (University of Alabama at Birmingham) et al.

The review focussed on cognitive and behavioural interventions aimed at children (such as how to behave around dogs), rather than management interventions aimed at parents (such as close supervision of dogs and children).

Some of the interventions involved showing videos to children or using computer programs, while others involved a real dog for children to interact with. They took place in a variety of settings including the children's classroom, hospitals, and university laboratories.

“The results showed that interventions have a moderate effect on improving children’s safety knowledge around dogs,” write the authors, “and a relatively large effect on promoting safe interactions between children and dogs. Video-based interventions were most effective in the improvement of safety knowledge, while instruction with live dogs was most effective in increasing children’s safe behaviours with dogs.”

The behavioural measures differed from study to study, but included visits to emergency because of a dog bite, whether or not the child went to pat an unfamiliar dog, role plays, and acting out behaviour in a dolls house. Knowledge was also assessed differently in each study, but typically included yes/no questions about dog safety, often with pictures.

A little girl playing with water with a dog in the background

It’s interesting that effects on children’s behaviour were larger than those for children’s knowledge. This is a surprising finding; in the field of health promotion, it’s more common that people know they need to change but don’t actually change their behaviour. For example, people might know smoking is bad for them but not give up smoking.

Only some of the studies looked at behaviour changes, and the authors say these studies tended to be better designed, and potentially also had better interventions. But it could also be that it’s easier to teach young children appropriate behaviour around dogs rather than knowledge.

The authors reviewed studies of dog bite prevention and selected those that met certain quality criteria, including having a control group and being specifically focussed on dog bite prevention amongst 0 – 18 year olds. 12 papers were included in the final review, and 9 in the statistical meta-analysis.

The studies included in the review took place in the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and one in China. The authors say programs developed in the West are still relevant to other countries to some extent, in that all children go through the same developmental stages. Therefore programs designed to teach age-appropriate knowledge will still be useful.

However, while the main risk in the West is pet dogs, in developing countries street dogs are the more common cause of bites. This is especially serious because of the risk of rabies. So adaptations to the programs to reflect the source of risk would be necessary.

Although the paper did not look at management interventions (such as fencing), the authors recognize these are also an important factor in preventing dog bites. In the case of (incredibly rare) fatal dog attacks there are often multiple preventable contributing factors, including the isolation, mismanagement and abuse of dogs.

The authors also highlight a problem with the “poor quality of evidence in this field.” They say this is a general problem in pediatric injury prevention. Other meta-analyses in the field of human-animal interaction have also highlighted problems with the quality of evidence,  including on dog walking behaviour and the use of animal-assisted therapy to help adolescents with psychiatric problems. As the field grows, hopefully we can look forward to more high quality research.

The good news is the interventions did improve children’s interactions with dogs. Earlier work has found parents would welcome more education on dog safety for children  This study shows that wider availability of education for children on how to behave around dogs would be a very good thing.

There’s some useful advice on preventing dog bites at stopthe77.com.




Reference
Shen, J., Rouse, J., Godbole, M., Wells, H., Boppana, S., & Schwebel, D. (2016). Systematic Review: Interventions to Educate Children About Dog Safety and Prevent Pediatric Dog-Bite Injuries: A Meta-Analytic Review Journal of Pediatric Psychology DOI: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsv164
Photo: Vasil Syniuk (top) and Grezova Olga (Shutterstock.com).
Companion Animal Psychology is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

The Effects of Seeing Animal Abuse on Children's Mental Health

For children who live in a situation of domestic violence, also witnessing animal cruelty may negatively impact resilience.

Portrait of a sad pug


New research by Shelby McDonald (Virginia Commonwealth University) et al (2016) looks at the effects of seeing animal abuse on children’s psychological health in a context where they already witness intimate partner violence. Last week I reported on a study by McDonald et al (2015) that found a quarter of children whosemothers experience domestic violence also see their pet threatened or abused, and that most often the child says the motivation is to control the mother. Since pets are often sources of social support for children, this may be especially traumatic; the effects of this are the focus of the new study.

Children who are exposed to domestic violence are at risk of psychological problems, and yet some children are surprisingly resilient. One aim of McDonald’s (2016) study was to explore patterns in how children function when there is a family context of domestic violence. Secondly, they wanted to find out about the risk factors for not doing well, and specifically whether being exposed to cruelty to pets in the home worsens children’s mental health.

An ethnically-diverse sample of 291 children aged 7 – 12 took part. They were recruited through their mother’s use of domestic violence services in one state in the US, and they all had a family pet at home. On average, the women had been experiencing domestic violence for nine years.

Each mother and child completed questionnaires. The child’s exposure to animal cruelty was assessed via questions that asked the mother whether her partner had “ever threatened to hurt or kill a family pet” and if he had “ever actually hurt or killed a family pet.”

The results found that children could be grouped into three categories depending on how well they were coping: Resilient, Struggling, and Severe Maladjustment. Children in the group with the most problems (Severe Maladjustment) were much more likely to have experienced animal cruelty in the home. This shows how important it is to have a better understanding of how exposure to animal abuse affects children. 

Dr. Shelby McDonald told me, “we examined six domains of adjustment among children exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV): social problems, attention problems, internalizing behavior, externalizing behavior, empathy, and callous/unemotional traits. Our results provided support for three distinct profiles of socioemotional functioning in our sample: Resilient (66%; n=191), Struggling (28%; n=83), and Severe Maladjustment (6%; n=17). 

In the context of human-animal interactions research, the most important thing to note is that children exposed to animal cruelty were 3.26 times more likely to be in the “struggling” group and 5.72 times more likely to be in the “severe problems” group compared to the reference group of resilient children (however, these estimates must be interpreted with caution due to the large confidence intervals).  

“This finding pertaining to the significance of children’s exposure to animal cruelty is important and suggests that the identification of animal maltreatment among families receiving IPV services has important implications for the mental health and well-being of children. Including questions about companion animals in assessments for families impacted by IPV may help distinguish children at greater risk for psychological maladjustment. 

“Despite the fact that approximately 68% of households in the United States report owning a companion animal and a notable 85% consider pets to be a member of the family, routine integration of questions about pets in the family are not consistently implemented in clinical settings or community agencies that provide family services. 

“Questions about animals in the household can be easily integrated into intake and assessment procedures in a variety of settings (e.g., child protective services, schools, mental health clinics, crisis hotlines, domestic violence shelters) in order to expand the ecological lens from which practitioners approach working with family systems.”

Although the study does not prove a causal relationship between children's experiences of seeing animal cruelty and poor mental health, it has important implications for practice. The full paper is available via the link below or researchgate and is essential reading for anyone working in this field. 
 
Reference
McDonald, S., Graham-Bermann, S., Maternick, A., Ascione, F., & Williams, J. (2016). Patterns of Adjustment among Children Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence: a Person-Centered Approach Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma DOI: 10.1007/s40653-016-0079-y

Children's Experiences of Domestic Violence and Animal Abuse

24% of children whose mothers experience domestic violence also see threats to or abuse of companion animals, research shows.

A beautiful but sad black and white kitten with wide eyes


Every year in the US, 1 in 15 children is exposed to intimate partner violence, according to a national survey. Research by Shelby McDonald(Virginia Commonwealth University) et al finds many also witness abuse of pets in the home, potentially adding to the impacts on their behaviour and mental health.

The researchers interviewed children age 7 – 12 whose mothers had used domestic violence services in the past year. Of 242 children, a quarter had seen someone threaten to or actually injure/kill a pet. They analyzed the data from this group to find out more about the animal abuse these children saw. 

The results show the patterns of animal abuse that children describe as happening in the home, the different family members involved, and the reasons children give as to why it occurs. For children who witness this, it may be especially traumatic, since pets can be a form of social support during difficult times.

Dr. Shelby McDonald told me, “Children experience close bonds with companion animals and rely on pets as a way of managing stress. In the context of high stress, unpredictable environments such as a households experiencing family violence, pets may serve as security-providing attachment figures, offering comfort, consistency, and support to children who are coping with adverse environments. 

“In addition, positive interactions with pets and caring for pets in the home may provide important opportunities for children to build self-esteem, develop empathy, and increase social interactions with peers and members of their community. 

“Thus, the presence of a pet in the home may function as a protective factor that helps buffer the impact of IPV [intimate partner violence] on the child.  Certainly, the protective impact of having a beloved pet in the home would likely be compromised if the pet were being abused in the context of multidirectional family violence.”

The researchers found three contexts in which animal abuse occurred. Most commonly, the mother’s partner threatened or hurt the pet as a way to frighten and control the mother. For example, one boy said, “When my mom and I do not clean well or get up early, he [dad] gets angry and starts kicking the dog with his boot and starts throwing him against the wall time and time again.” 

Children seemed to recognize this kind of behaviour was aimed at upsetting their mother, and sometimes themselves too, as in the example above (‘my mom and I’). For women in these situations, seeing their child upset at abuse of the family pet may add to negative feelings and self-blame. 

At other times, violence was used by the mother, their partner or siblings as a way of punishing the pet for misbehaviour. For example, one girl said, “My dad kicked the dog when it tried to bite visitors to my house.” There was a wide range, from pulling the leash too hard to inflicting serious damage. The authors say that since physical punishment is common for children in households with domestic violence, it is no surprise to see it applied to pets. Also, physically punished pets may become aggressive, potentially leading to more harsh treatment. 

This shows children drawing a distinction between perceived punishment (that they might consider justified) and abuse (that wasn’t justified). This is interesting because at this age children are developing ideas about fairness, and it is believed children’s understanding of interpersonal violence is important for long-term outcomes.

The third context was siblings abusing the animal, for example, “my little brother just got mad and threw the cat down the stairs.” Some children said they had sometimes hurt their pet too.

78% said they had protected or tried to help a pet. Sometimes they took preventive action to keep animals away from their mother’s partner, such as putting the pet in their room. Some children said they directly intervened, e.g. one boy said, “When my dad was trying to hurt my dog, I grabbed my dog and said ‘No, Dad, no.’”

Children’s interventions show pets are important to them, but many domestic violence shelters do not allow pets. The researchers say children may need help in coming to terms with not having been able to help or save their pet, and that humane education programs to teach them how to properly interact with animals may also be beneficial.

This important study shows more research is needed on the effects these experiences have on children. Further research by the same team investigates the risk factors that affect how well children cope with witnessing animal abuse.

The full paper is available via the link below or on researchgate.

Reference
McDonald SE, Collins EA, Nicotera N, Hageman TO, Ascione FR, Williams JH, & Graham-Bermann SA (2015). Children's experiences of companion animal maltreatment in households characterized by intimate partner violence. Child abuse & neglect, 50, 116-27 PMID: 26520828
Photo: m.sava8 (Shutterstock).