Physical abuse includes the infliction of injuries or causing unnecessary pain, including inappropriate methods of training. Sexual abuse includes any sexual conduct with animals, which may or may not result in physical injury to the animal. Neglect is the failure to provide adequate levels of food, water, shelter, and veterinary care to animals causing poor physical condition. Veterinarians are likely to encounter some form of animal abuse during their career.
Whether providing expert advice to the local humane authorities, visiting neglected farm animals, or treating an animal victim of violence, veterinarians are on the front lines of dealing with abuse. Federal and provincial legislation affords animals protection from abuse, but veterinarians are sometimes concerned about disclosing information to humane authorities due to concerns regarding client confidentiality and personal liability.
Research finds a clear and compelling link between animal abuse and other violent acts. Animal abuse does not only hurt animals; it affects our entire community. Animal abuse has a strong connection to domestic violence. Abusers may threaten or abuse animals in front of children and partners to keep them from reporting abuse or leaving.
By hurting the animals, an abuser is sending the message that a human victim could be next. Children who witness such abuse are three times more likely to abuse animals and to play a role in an abusive relationship later in life. When an animal is abused, a chain reaction begins in our community.
Every state defines animal cruelty differently, both in terms of the specific actions that are prohibited and the categories of animals that are protected. For example, hunting is exempted from animal cruelty laws and livestock are not protected, even though in both cases the animals are killed and quite often suffer. Laws in some states protect wild animals from frivolous harm e.
Animal cruelty cases tend to span the jurisdictions of several state and local agencies and departments, and the agency officially responsible for handling animal cruelty cases varies. Some jurisdictions have sophisticated programs within animal welfare organizations e. They may be called animal cruelty enforcement agents, humane law enforcement agents, cruelty investigators, or animal control officers, and while they may have the legal authority to investigate and enforce animal cruelty laws, the public often grants them less legitimacy than police.
In places without local animal welfare organizations, police may be solely responsible for enforcing all animal-protection laws. The intense public reaction to animal cruelty cases covered by the media suggests that the public is concerned about the treatment of animals and believes animal cruelty to be a social problem worthy of police attention. While some cases will be arduous, involving lengthy investigations, search warrants, and complex crime scenes, most cases of animal cruelty are not particularly complicated.
Particularly in cases of simple neglect, police who identify the signs of animal cruelty can offer information, suggestions for improving animal care, or warnings, which will usually rectify the situation before a serious tragedy occurs.
While specialized training is desirable, particularly for complicated hoarding cases or cases of physical abuse that will be prosecuted, most police officers need only a basic familiarity with animals' health and normal states of being to identify the warning signs of animal cruelty. These signs may include the following: 7. National crime-reporting systems do not monitor animal cruelty.
Doing so would be very difficult, because enforcement authority is scattered across thousands of state and local agencies, laws vary across states, and standardized reporting structures have not been developed.
The two major efforts to collect data on the prevalence of animal mistreatment rely primarily on media reports, rather than enforcement records, as the source. It discontinued the project because of excessive demands on staff Lockwood While the website includes a search engine and crime-mapping capabilities, it includes only those cases with a media reference or that proceeded to court.
As of April 18, , the database included over 17, cases in six countries. Despite the lack of national data, most researchers agree that cases of neglect constitute the vast majority of animal cruelty cases.
As a result, the public may not fully understand the prevalence and nature of animal cruelty. The most obvious harm caused by animal cruelty is the pain and suffering endured by the animal. In contrast to what is often presented by the media, happy endings in cases of physical cruelty are rare: the abuse is often ghastly and victim animals are rarely returned to good health or adopted by a loving family.
In addition to the animal suffering inflicted in even the least sensational cases, the more complicated hoarding cases also generate significant public health concerns. Homes of hoarders are generally filthy, with an accumulation of animal feces and urine on the floor, sometimes several inches deep. The resulting ammonia gas creates toxic air. Utilities and major appliances usually do not work, and most of the basic activities for a functional and sanitary household e.
Carcasses of dead animals are often found in hoarding locations, many of which are eventually condemned. While animal cruelty is a serious social problem in its own right, interest in its association with other forms of violence has motivated a great deal of research. Groups of researchers in both the United States and the United Kingdom assert that people who harm or kill animals are at high risk of interpersonal violence. Further, they claim that victims of child abuse are likely to harm animals and are more likely to be violent toward humans as they mature.
0コメント