Escher Brune
Correlations between Animal Cruelty and the Abuse of Humans



My father tortured cats. They stared at him, you see, so they had to die. Once, he shot one of our dogs in the genitals because it barked at him. The dog died slowly and I learned a valuable lesson: You don't bark at your master. I mastered the art of being invisible, because when his eyes went to cold, I couldn't tell if my father was seeing his little girl or just another animal.


It is natural for me to care about child abuse and neglect, to get personally involved when I see evidence of domestic abuse, and to be emotionally vested in the plight of animals that suffer at the hands of people. These things touch a place in me because my childhood and early adult life was spent in that violent space, first at my father's hands and then my husband's. If mine was the only life touched by violence, it could be forgiven and forgotten. But I am not the first person - and sadly not the last- to live in a world ruled by fear and domination. Approximately four children die every day in the United States from abuse and neglect. While abuse numbers are conservative due to underreporting, a 1995 Gallup poll of parents led researchers to estimate that each year, approximately three million children are the victims of physical abuse alone (Child Welfare League of America, 2007).

Widespread animal abuse is similarly all too common. In two studies of college undergrads, half of the students reported either perpetrating or witnessing animal cruelty. One in five reported perpetrating violence against animals and one in seven reported killing stray animals. The study, conducted in a Midwest College by Miller & Knutson (1997), was followed by a larger survey conducted in a southeastern university by sociologist, Clifton Flynn. Using the same measures as Miller and Knutson, Flynn's survey was administered to 267 undergraduates in introductory psychology and sociology classes. While more than half of Flynn's respondents were female (68.4%), the males surveyed were twice as likely as females to report a history which included observing or committing animal abuse (Flynn, 2000).

Defining child, sexual, emotional, and domestic abuse is difficult and the types and levels of abuse that must be reported to authorities vary across jurisdictions. The Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) defines child maltreatment to include both physical acts which can cause injury and acts of neglect which may cause harm indirectly. Sexual abuse is any sexual activity with a child which can include (but is not limited to) persuasion, physical force, and coercive means. This includes child prostitution and pornography. Emotional maltreatment is an act (or omission) by caregiver that results in an impairment of a child's physical, social, mental, or emotional capacities (Child Welfare League of America, 2007). Domestic violence is equally as ambiguous across jurisdictions. In most cases, it is defined by law as any physical abuse - or threat of physical abuse - between intimate partners, family members, or even roommates. Many advocates define domestic violence as any pattern of intimidating behavior that is used in order to establish power and control over an individual (Abuse, Rape and Domestic Violence Aid and Resource Collection, 2009).


The cruelty visited upon animals is as varied and difficult to measure as the abuse that humans heap on one another. Additionally, animals lack the voice to name their attackers and our society permits - even encourages - some behaviors that not only harm, but kill animals for the purpose of sports hunting, fishing, and even producing food for human consumption (Flynn, 2000). More often than not, the victims of abuse are cats, dogs, and small animals (like birds, rodents, reptiles). Most commonly, the forms of abuse are shooting or direct physical contact (like hitting, kicking, beating, or throwing an animal against the wall). Most killings are carried out with a gun (Flynn, 2000). While the various forms of abuse can be difficult to classify or define, cases of child abuse, animal abuse, and domestic violence are very much connected. The tendency of a child or adolescent to abuse or kill animals can indicate a violent future; a fascination with the suffering of animals can translate into a lack of empathy, which makes it easier to visit the same violence on humans, and the violence or the threat of violence to pets can serve to keep human victims in line.

Hopefully, we can utilize our understanding of this connection to stop - even reverse - the cycle of violence, by using animals to bring the humanity out in the most violent of humans. First, we will examine the possibility that animal abuse can be a predictor of future behaviors, then, we will look at animal abuse as a control mechanism. Finally, we will consider the possibility that animals can be used to rehabilitate violent individuals.

ANIMAL ABUSE & KILLING AS AN INDICATOR OF ABUSIVE TENDENCIES

"Damaged" people often find other similarly damaged people. As I moved through life, I collected many friends with the same experiences as mine, some with histories of even more profound abuse and neglect. A common thread emerged from the stories we shared: an inheritance and/or progression of violence. Most of us were abused by victims of abuse and many of our abusers told stories of cruelty to animals. One friend told me about her brother's fascination with catching squirrels on setting them on fire. Another told me about her molester's history of torturing animals. For me it was my husband, who recalled his time in the service overseas and laughed as he told me about paying to watch shows that featured bestiality, cock fights, and dog fights. When I asked how he could find humor in this he said simply, "Some people laugh and some people cry. I choose to laugh."


There are undeniable links between interpersonal violence and animal abuse. The First Strike campaign of The Humane Society of the United States serves to increase the public's awareness of these connections. While animal abuse has been ignored by many researchers who study human-on-human abuse, other researchers have found links between the two. In clinical studies, children who are cruel to animals have been found more likely to be aggressive or violent towards other humans making it a possible predictor of future violent behavior (Flynn, 2000). In 1987, physical cruelty to animals was added to the list of symptoms for the diagnosis of conduct disorder by the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Ascione & Arkow, 1999). A lack of empathy for animals in childhood may lead to a lack of empathy for both animals and humans in later life (Flynn, 2000) and studies have found that children who have been cruel to animals are more likely to be violent towards people later in life. Many serial killers and mass murders have histories of animal abuse and studies of sexually aggressive criminals have found similar histories of animal cruelty (Kellert & Felthous, 1985). Additionally, animal cruelty tends to be associated with domestic, elder, and child abuse and an overall approval of interpersonal violence, particularly family violence


A meta-analysis of family violence found that the abuse of companion and non-companion animals is seen where there is also physical and sexual abuse of female partners, same sex partners, children and siblings. In studies of child abuse cases where government intervention took place, pet abuse was also occurring in 88% of the cases. One third of the animal abusers were children in the family and two-thirds were their fathers. In cross-cultural studies, researchers found that in societies where animal cruelty is more normative, female victims of violence are more likely to be scarred, permanently injured or even killed. Similar studies were conducted with women entering domestic violence shelters which found that -of those owning pets - 71% reported that their partner had threatened, abused, or killed at least one of their pets. Sadly many of those women delayed seeking shelter out of concern for the well being of their pet (Flynn, 2000).


ANIMAL ABUSE & KILLING AS A CONTROL MECHANISM

My husband scooped up my terrier, Pepper, and threw her out the front door. "You want to leave?" he screamed as she hit the ground with a thud, "You want to leave?" I chose a man much like my father, I suppose. When the police arrived that night, I had no marks and there was no sign of injury to Pepper, so they told me they could not arrest him. I begged them to at least take my husband's guns away but they had no legal standing to do so. The officers urged me to go to a shelter, even offered to take me to one, but none of the shelters would let me bring Pepper. I clung to my trembling dog and knew he would kill her if I went. And so I stayed.


Several studies have been conducted with women seeking refuge in domestic violence shelters (Taylor, 2004; Flynn, 2000) and these studies have found high incidences of interpersonal and animal abuse. Nearly half of the women in these studies reported that their partners had threatened to harm their pets, 88% reported that they had trouble finding a place for their pets to go while they sought the protection of the shelter and 48% had delayed taking a spot in a shelter for fear of what would happen to the animals they left behind. Pets provide emotional support when these women need it most, but they can be used as a tool by batterers to keep a victim in the home. Research has found that abusers, most often male, frequently harm or threaten to harm pets in order to control and intimidate their victims into silence (Ascione & Arkow, 1999). In our patriarchal society, women, children, and animals all have disadvantaged status which makes victimization by more powerful males possible (Flynn, 2000).

CAN ANIMALS MAKE HUMANS MORE HUMANE?

In the last few years, I had the opportunity to conduct research in three Ohio prisons. In two of those prisons, inmates with lengthy sentences and good behavior credit can petition to be part of an animal training program. Dogs from the local dog shelter are brought into the prison where they live, sleep, and are trained alongside inmates. The program fascinated me and I ended up adopting one of those dogs, a miniature husky. I was never allowed to meet the two men who cared for him for those months behind razor wire - one was a convicted rapist, the other had taken a life - but I read their careful notes in his training log. As I pause to reach down and pet him, curled at my feet as I type, he is a testament to the program's success for the dogs; he flourished under the care of the two men. I hope that they benefited from their time with him as much as he did.

Given that a history of childhood exposure to animal abuse can lead to interpersonal violence later in life and understanding that violence to animals is often occurring alongside domestic violence and child abuse, we can only hope that the same mechanism can work in reverse; we can teach men (and women) to be kind to animals and thus teach them to be kind to each other. Several researchers have examined the benefits of programs that take animals into prisons for just that purpose (Strimple, 2003; Deaton, 2005; Harkrader, Burke & Owen, 2004; Furst, 2006; Turner, 2007; Fournier, Geller & Fortney, 2007).


These researchers have found evidence that inmates benefit from these programs, that they learn life-skills while in the programs, and that they experience lower recidivism rates after participating. Whether they are training horses, teaching animals to be service providers for the disabled, or they are rehabilitating animals that would otherwise be euthanized, these inmates seem to benefit, as do the animals. Additionally, the prisons which house these programs report lowered incidences of tension, reductions in fights, and increased morale among both prisoners and correctional officers in the facilities.

The overall success of these programs is promising. The animals receive the best care they have likely had in their lives, the prisoners build trust, empathy, and a sense of responsibility, and society benefits by having rehabilitated animals and humans as a final product. While many prefer for prison to be punitive, we must remember that - for most inmates - the day will come when they return to society. We have to ask ourselves if we wish for those men and women to emerge from their cells angry and vengeful, or if we would prefer that they reenter society with a sense of purpose and empathy. By acknowledging the link between violence against all creatures, we can work collaboratively across agencies towards the goal of a world in which nonviolence is normative.



CONCLUSION

My father left when I was 16 and my parents divorced soon after. My father found a name for his illness and some help to equalize his life, my brother became a loving father, my mother eventually made a safe life for herself, and I finally found peace for myself and my daughter. I believe in the power of people to change their lives and the ability of caring people to intercede on behalf of those who are in need. Change is not easy, however, and we must be vigilant. We must take notice when someone is demonstrating behaviors that make them a risk to themselves or others. We must not tolerate cruelty to any fellow animal. We must do everything in our power to transform the lives of those who have learned to hurt others, or they will continue to cause pain in the world around them. If you have been blessed to live your life outside the shadow of abuse, please contribute to any of the many organizations that are trying to make the world a safe and peaceful place.








BIBLIOGRAPHY


Ascione, F. R. & Arkow, P. (1999). Child Abuse, domestic violence, and animal abuse: Linking the circles of compassion for prevention and intervention. West Lafayette, Indian: Purdue University Press.



Deaton, C. (2005). Humanizing prisons with animals: A closer look at cell dogs and horse programs in correctional institutions. Journal of Correctional Education, 56(1), 46-62.



Flynn, C. (2000). Why family professionals can no longer ignore violence toward animals. Family Relations, 49(1), 87-96.



Fournier, A., Geller, E., & Fortney, E. (2007). Human-animal interaction in a prison setting: Impact on criminal behavior, treatment progress, and social skills. Behavior & Social Issues, 16(1), 89-105.



Furst, G. (2006). Prison-based animal programs. Prison Journal, 86(4), 407-430.



Child protection: facts and figures. Child Welfare League of America (CWLA). Retrieved (April 12, 2009)) from http://www.cwla.org/programs/childprotection/childprotectionfaq.htm#definition



Harkrader, T., Burke, T., & Owen, S. (2004). Pound puppies: The rehabilitative uses of dogs In correctional facilities. Corrections Today, 66(2), 74-79.



Kellert, S., & Felthous, A. (1985). Childhood cruelty toward animals among criminals and noncriminals. Human Relations, 38(12), 1113-1129.



Miller, K. S. & Knutson, J. F. (1997) Reports of severe physical punishment and exposure to animal cruelty by inmates convicted of felonies and by university students. Child Abuse and Neglect, 21, 59-82.



Strimple, E. (2003). A history of prison Inmate-animal interaction programs. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(1), 70-78.



Taylor, N. (2004). Making links: Domestic violence, child abuse and harm to companion animals. Animals Today, 12(2), 18-19.



Turner, W. (2007). The experiences of offenders in a prison canine program. Federal Probation, 71(1), 38-43.



What IS Domestic Violence? Abuse, Rape and Domestic Violence Aid and Resource Collection (AARDVARC) Retrieved (April 12,2009) from http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/whatisdv.shtml