Abstract
The abuse of animals is evident in different contexts. This article takes two discrete bodies of literature: threats and actual harm to animals in the context of domestic abuse and sex offending in the context of animal abuse. The reviews focus on the implications for risk assessment and risk management and explore the following questions: What is the international evidence base for threats or violence towards animals, with a specific focus on risk assessment, in the context of domestic abuse? What is the international evidence base for threats or violence towards animals, with a specific focus on risk assessment, in the context of sex offending? What similarities and differences are evident in the approaches in the two bodies of literature? A scoping review methodology was applied to the two bodies of animal abuse literature. The domestic abuse literature elicited 27 studies for full inclusion, while the sex-offending literature examined 15 papers. A broad analysis of the literature was taken to understand the implications for risk assessment and risk management. In the context of risk assessment, the literature indicates that threats or harm towards animals, including the sex abuse of animals, has the potential to be used in four ways: (1) animal abuse as an indicator of domestic abuse; (2) childhood animal abuse as a signal of other problems within a household; (3) animal abuse as an indicator of more severe domestic abuse; and (4) the inclusion of pet abuse as a unique form of domestic abuse. The comparison of the literature on animal abuse and animal sex abuse highlighted not only different approaches theoretically and methodologically but also important similarities. Both literature highlighted gaps in risk assessment, risk management, and the lack of identification and training in this neglected area of the service system prevention and response.
1. Introduction
The abuse of animals sparks widespread concern and often a visceral response of revulsion and anger against people who abuse animals. In Australia, documented evidence of the abuse of cattle in Indonesian abattoirs halted a million-dollar export industry based on widespread community outrage [1]. The abuse of animals in the context of domestic abuse (DA) or sexual violence is equally challenging. While confronting cases are common throughout the media [2], some of which have resulted in custodial sentences for offenders [3–5], these stories are less reflected in the academic literature. This raises questions about how and whether issues of animal abuse and animal sexual abuse are being incorporated into risk assessment, risk management, and prevention frameworks.
The authors of this paper were contracted by a police organization in Australia to explore the literature on harm to animals including both threats and harm to animals in the context of domestic abuse and sex offenses involving animals. These are connected areas for some police response units but are otherwise siloed areas of practice in the human services and justice systems. As researchers, we were struck by both the similarities and differences in the initial literature review and were interested in comparing the literature. This approach can bring “news of difference” [6] shedding a new light on a previously interrogated area of policy and practice.
The research also sought to clarify whether there were implications for risk assessment and risk management arising from the literature. A review of DA risk assessment tools nationally and internationally showed that animal abuse is not a risk factor that is commonly included across tools [7]. Only one—the Tasmanian Risk Assessment Screening Tool (RAST), an actuarial tool utilized by police—included animal abuse as a weighted metric. The RAST designates the act of “kill(ing) a family pet now or in the past” as “high risk” [7]. Currently, risk assessment and management are central in Australia’s approach to identifying and intervening in domestic abuse and corrections/probation practice. It is, therefore, important that research is used to improve understanding of potential risk factors [8]. Generally, the factors associated with domestic abuse risk assessment are derived through working backward from domestic homicides and serious assaults to understand the convergence of factors that surround the victim and the offender. This understanding is then used to ascertain whether earlier identification and/or managing these factors differently would have saved lives and injury [9]. However, it has been argued that a more urgent and high-intensity response is required to respond to the high levels of lethality and serious injury resulting from DA [10]. Thus, the redevelopment of more victim/survivor and perpetrator-centered risk assessment and risk management processes has been a key aspect of DA reform in Australia [11]. This includes the addition of new risk factors that could aid in risk assessment and ongoing risk management.
This paper is divided into discrete areas: study 1, scoping the literature on domestic abuse and harm and threats of harm to animals; study 2, scoping the literature on sex offending and harm to animals; finally, comparing the two literature to highlight similarities and differences in the discussion.
The questions of the literature were broad, but highlighted the issue of risk assessment which was a particular area of interest for the police:(a)What is the international evidence base for threats or violence towards animals, with a specific focus on risk assessment, in the context of domestic abuse?(b)What is the international evidence base for threats or violence towards animals, with a specific focus on risk assessment, in the context of sex offending?(c)What similarities and differences are evident in the approaches in the two bodies of literature?
2. Method
2.1. Overview
To explore the research questions identified, a scoping review has been conducted following the framework set out by Arksey and O’Malley [12], and the later recommendations are made by Levac et al. [13]. Reporting follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) [14].
2.2. Search Strategy
A four-step search strategy was designed to identify relevant publications. The search terms included terms related to domestic violence or intimate partner violence and animals or pets for the first study. The search strategy for the second study included terms related to sexual violence and pets or animals. Both search strategies were utilized on Medline (Ovid), SCOPUS, and Web of Science. For each study, a separate grey literature search was conducted on Google Scholar, which was undertaken using key terms and words related to each study. The reference lists of relevant literature were searched for additional studies. This review includes studies from 2000 to August 2023; no new articles beyond this date are included (see Algorithms 1 and 2).
|
|
2.3. Study Selection
All the references identified from the database search were imported into the reference management software, EndNote 20 (version 20.5), and later uploaded for further screening into the Covidence online screening tool. Two different libraries were created on Covidence, one for each review. In both reviews, the initial screening phase included the automatic and manual removal of any duplicated articles. The second phase involved the screening of potentially relevant articles by title and abstract. This phase was a double-blind process with two reviewers, where two negative votes would mark the article as irrelevant and two positive votes would move it to the next phase of the full-text review, or any two different votes—yes, no, or maybe—would flag it as a conflict. Any conflicts were resolved by both reviewers. The third phase involving the full-text review followed the same protocol, with articles that were marked as included then moving to the data extraction phase, where relevant content was extracted for analysis.
2.4. Selection Criteria
2.4.1. Research Question 1
“What is the international evidence base for threats or violence towards animals, with a specific focus on risk assessment, in the context of DA?”
Studies were included if they explored the links between animal abuse and domestic abuse (DA), with a specific focus on risk assessment. As a result, a wide range of studies were included: those that examined the use of animals for control by an abusive partner and the effects of owning a pet on help-seeking and other behaviors; the link between witnessing DA and perpetrating animal abuse in childhood; the link between witnessing animal abuse in childhood and adult violence towards humans; the link between witnessing DA in childhood and perpetrating animal abuse as an adult; the link between perpetrating animal abuse as a child and domestic violence as an adult; and the role of veterinarians in recognizing and reporting DA.
2.4.2. Research Question 2
“What is the international evidence base for threats or violence towards animals, with a specific focus on risk assessment, in the context of sex offending?”
Studies were considered for inclusion if they investigated one of the following areas: (1) the association between adults who have abused animals and those who have committed sexual crimes or child sexual abuse; (2) the correlation between individuals who experienced sexual abuse in childhood and those who perpetrated sexual abuse towards animals in adulthood; or (3) the connection between individuals who committed sexual abuse towards animals during their childhood and those who perpetrated sexual violence in adulthood. Studies that discussed drug therapies or sex offenses unrelated to animal abuse or animal sexual abuse were excluded.
3. Results
The two bodies of literature are reported upon separately before a comparison is made in the discussion of a critical analysis of the literature in the two studies. In both bodies of literature, risk assessment was often not the central focus, but the study pointed to issues for consideration in risk assessment and risk management.
4. Study 1: Domestic Abuse and Animal Abuse
A total of 1553 studies were extracted from the academic research databases Medline (Ovid), SCOPUS, and Web of Science. Of these, 589 were automatically removed and 38 were manually removed due to duplication. This left a total of 926 studies to be screened based on title and abstract. Of these, 744 were found to be irrelevant, leaving 182 for a full-text analysis. From this analysis, 25 articles were found to be relevant for this study. An additional 2 articles were found in the grey literature, bringing the total to 27 articles included in this study (see Figure 1). A list of articles and their details included in study 1 can be found in Table 1.
4.1. Overview of Studies
There was a diverse variety of methodologies in the studies that explored the links between DA and animal abuse in risk assessment. Nine of them were cross-sectional studies [16–18, 20, 22–24, 26, 34], which only examined data at one point in time: one cohort study that focused on predicting domestic violence based on a history of animal cruelty in children [31], one case-control study that focused on identifying risk factors for abuse and intimate partner violence- (IPV-) related injury among an urban population [8], one case study that aimed to understand the connection between animal cruelty and family violence, a phenomenon often termed as “the Link” [27], one qualitative study that aimed to understand and conceptualize childhood animal harm [40], and two retrospective studies [20] studied domestic violence incident information sheets collected by first responders to domestic violence incidents in one US county, while Bright et al. [19] focused on juvenile offenders to assess the likelihood of engaging in animal cruelty based on a history of family trauma.
There were also 13 literature reviews included in this study. Alleyne and Parfitt [15] and Gullone [25] focused on understanding the shared characteristics of animal abuse with other violent behaviors. Miller [33], Mota-Rojas et al. [32], and Longobardi and Badenes-Ribera [30] explored the link between animal cruelty and violence to people, while Cleary et al. [21] reviewed animal cruelty in abusive adult intimate partner relationships. Tomlinson et al. [38] explored empirical evidence that supports the co-occurrence of family violence and animal cruelty. Newland et al. [36] concluded that pet abuse is a potential risk factor for domestic violence (DV) and argued for education to prepare veterinarians for their response to pet abuse and DV in practice. Lee-Kelland and Finlay [29] and Muscari [35] extended this focus to the response from services more closely related to domestic abuse or other violence.
Ladny and Meyer [28] synthesized the current literature on the relationship between childhood witnessing of cruelty toward animals and violence toward animals and other humans. Randour et al. [37] found strong associations between domestic violence, child abuse, and animal cruelty by searching eight electronic databases for peer-reviewed articles published until September 2021. Lastly, Wauthier and Williams [40] showed that environmental factors predicting childhood animal cruelty (CAC) include exposure to childhood adversity, especially experiences of violence and witnessing animal cruelty.
4.2. Risk Assessment: Animal Abuse as a Marker of Violence against Humans
There was agreement through some of the articles that there was a link between animal abuse and violence against humans. Of the 28 studies, 25 commented on animal abuse as a potential marker of violence towards humans [8, 15–20, 22, 23, 25, 26, 31, 32, 35, 37]. Three studies reported that animal abuse often co-occurs with other violent behaviors such as DA [25, 26, 35].
Out of the total, seven studies argue that more severe domestic abuse and animal abuse within the household should be markers of a high-risk environment for domestic homicide [8, 16, 18, 20, 27, 32, 40].
Many of these articles did not critically or theoretically explore the link between animal abuse and violence against humans. However, among the articles that did identify this link, two common explanations for this link emerged. First, some researchers argue that animal abuse should be viewed as a form of human aggression and that those who commit animal abuse share characteristics with those who commit other violent behaviors. Thus, animal abuse should be conceptualized in the same way as other forms of violence against humans [25, 35].
A second argument emerged. This means that people who commit animal abuse may be more likely to have experienced other forms of trauma and consequently exhibit problematic, trauma-related behaviors including violence towards humans [18, 19, 22, 27–29, 31, 33, 37, 40]. These studies found close relationships between animal abuse and other forms of trauma [19, 22, 29, 31, 33, 37], arguing that animal abuse should be viewed as a distinct indicator of exposure to violence, domestic aggression, or trauma [22, 32, 34, 37–40].
4.3. Motivations for Animal Abuse
When animal abuse was committed in households where domestic abuse was also present, studies reported similar motivations for the animal abuse. These studies argued that perpetrators of domestic abuse may threaten, harm, or kill a pet to frighten and exert physical, psychological, or emotional control over their partner [15, 21, 24, 26, 38]. One literature review which focused on the motivations for animal abuse in domestic abuse settings offered two explanations for rationalizing the use of pets to control victims of domestic violence by perpetrators: (1) the pets are seen as property rather than other living beings, thus minimizing feelings of guilt or cognitive dissonance, and (2) animal abuse is simply another form of aggression and violence among other behaviors which are used to dominate and control [15]. Wauthier and Williams [39] explored children’s motivation for harming animals and found two main reasons being “punishment” and “lashing out.” They also found that most children in their study realized that animals suffered as a result of their actions.
It was argued that these mindsets could be linked to deficits in regulatory processing and emotional competence seen in some trauma victims [15, 29], aligning with past research arguing that there are strong links between animal abuse and trauma [19, 22, 29, 31, 33, 37]. In the case of children, it was argued that animal maltreatment could arise based on the lack of emotional control or as a punishment for bad behavior from the pet in households where violence was normalized. Thus, this link may signify impaired regulatory processing whereby during traumatic experiences, the flight/fight reaction is activated, bypassing the frontal cortex and its function in processing events and subsequent behaviors.
Despite the various motivations and risk factors, which can be numerous, it is essential to thoroughly explore each motivation for harming animals. Appropriate measures should then be implemented from both a justice and health perspective [30].
4.4. Animal Abuse and Help-Seeking Behaviors
Research posits that adults and children often show great care and concern for their family pets; thus, these studies found that concerns about their pet’s safety can prevent women from disclosing abuse, seeking help, or leaving abusive relationship [8, 15, 16, 18, 26]. This concern may be manipulated by abusive partners to prevent women from leaving abusive relationships through threatening or harming pets [15].
These studies also demonstrated that pets are often not taken into account by law enforcement or domestic abuse organizations with four studies reporting that, as shelters often do not take in pets, many women do not leave or they may return to abusive relationships out of concern for their pets [8, 16, 18, 23]. Furthermore, the presence of a perpetrator with a history of animal abuse could indicate further risk and should be considered when responding to a domestic abuse report. These studies found that victims/survivors involved with suspects who have a history of animal abuse were more likely to appear afraid, apologetic, or nervous. This may be a further indication of a controlling environment and should raise the level of concern and risk for the safety of those in the home [20].
4.5. Risk Management: Educating Services on the Link between Animal Abuse and DA
Despite extensive research supporting a link between animal abuse and domestic abuse, there has been little effort to translate this into practice [19, 35, 37]. The research shows that animal abuse needs to be visible to services that are closely related to domestic abuse such as law enforcement and social and health services if they are to respond appropriately, particularly given that it may signal more severe domestic abuse and that it may be a barrier to seeking help [20, 23, 25, 35, 37]. Furthermore, the literature suggests that when animal abuse is present within a household or the perpetrator has a history of animal abuse, it is important that this is not minimized or ignored and instead taken into account when making law enforcement and violence prevention or treatment decisions [25]. An additional three studies also stress the importance of ensuring that domestic abuse organizations and shelters are equipped to serve the needs of women with pets so that women do not delay leaving an abusive partner due to concern for their pet’s safety [16, 18, 20]. One study was able to translate its findings into a potential intervention that emphasizes the importance of approaching the issue in a nonaccusatory manner, involving parents to educate them on animal welfare, and understanding the context and motivations behind the harm [39].
Beyond the services responding in a crisis or to healing and recovery, there was also acknowledgment in the literature that animal abuse and the link to domestic abuse should be known to other practitioners such as teachers, doctors, veterinarians, and animal control officers [19, 23, 32, 35, 36]. Two studies argue that educating these services on this link could support early intervention in cases of DA [19, 36]. Specifically, veterinarians may act as frontline professionals in the recognition of the link between animal abuse and domestic violence and have an important role to play in domestic abuse intervention [30, 36].
4.6. Prevention: Childhood Trauma and Adult Antisocial Behavior
Twelve studies discussed the link between childhood trauma and adult violent behaviors, arguing that children who commit animal abuse may have experienced other traumatic experiences [19, 23, 25, 29–34, 39, 40] and that childhood trauma is highly predictive of adult antisocial behaviors [15, 19, 31, 35]. Studies report that negative childhood experiences such as witnessing domestic violence or noneffective parenting may lead to children learning aggressive or callous behaviors or impair their ability to feel empathy [25, 35]. Furthermore, one study suggests that negative childhood experiences can affect the psychological functioning of children such that their regulatory processing is impaired [15]. Without treatment, these behaviors can continue into adulthood [15, 25, 35]. It is, therefore, argued that child welfare and health services should assess for animal cruelty when responding to reports of disruptive or concerning behaviors and treat these accordingly to prevent further violence [23, 35].
5. Study 2: Sex Offending and Animal Abuse
A total of 2280 studies were extracted from Medline (Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science. Of these, 656 references were removed due to duplication, leaving a total of 1624 studies to be screened based on title and abstract. Out of these, 1585 publications were deemed not relevant for this study, leaving 38 to be assessed for eligibility based on a full-text review. Ultimately, 15 articles were considered relevant and are included in this study (see Figure 2). The search of the grey literature did not yield any relevant texts that had not already been found through the database search. A list of articles and their details included in study 2 can be found in Table 2.
5.1. Overview of Studies
The majority of the studies utilized a cross-sectional study methodology, with ten of the 15 included studies utilizing this study design [41, 42, 45–49, 51, 53, 55]. One study utilized a cohort study design [43] and aimed to investigate relationships among family risk factors, childhood firesetting and animal cruelty, and adolescent delinquency. Another was a case-series study [56] that presented three cases of bestiality among sexual offenders committed under forensic commitment schemes. A qualitative study reviewed 450 bestiality-related arrests to explore patterns of offending, offender characteristics, and how cases were adjudicated [44].
Four of the included studies focused on inmates at medium and maximum-security prisons to explore the effects of childhood animal sexual abuse on adult criminal behaviors [46, 47, 54, 55]. Two focused on sexually violent criminals to assess the effects of a history of animal sexual abuse on future criminal behavior [48, 49].
Multiple studies focused their attention on young children. For example, Ascione et al. [41] studied cruelty to animals in normative, sexually abused, and outpatient psychiatric children between the ages of 6 and 12 years. Jory et al. [45] studied the characteristics of juvenile offenders admitting to sexual activity with nonhuman animals. Another study focused on predicting animal abuse and other disruptive behaviors based on maladaptive parenting [47].
Additionally, two literature reviews focused on the link between animal abuse/animal sexual abuse and other abnormal sexual behaviors in a human services setting were included as well [51, 56].
5.2. Risk Assessment: Animal Sex Abuse and Other Abnormal/Violent Sexual Behaviors
The research articles showed a strong link between animal sex abuse and other abnormal or violent sexual behaviors, with 10 of the 15 included studies finding a link between the two [42, 45, 46, 49–51, 53–56]. Nine studies reported that animal sex abuse is often comorbid with other abnormal, coercive, and violent sexual behaviors including sexual assault, torture, necrophilia, and solicitation for sex with animals [42, 45, 49–51, 53, 55, 56].
One explanation for this link relates to the motivation for animal sex abuse. Research reports that animal sex abuse committed out of a desire for anger, fun, [45, 46, 53, 54], or cruelty [41, 51] is more predictive of other violent and abnormal sexual behaviors. This research suggests that animal abuse based on these motivations should be conceptualized in the same way that other violent crimes are conceptualized and that the psychology behind these motivations could explain the links to other abnormal behaviors [46, 51, 54].
5.3. Risk Management: Risk Management and Service Response
Despite strong support demonstrating a link between animal sex abuse and other abnormal or violent sexual behaviors [42, 46, 49–51, 54, 56], knowledge of this link has not been widely translated into practice [42, 44, 47, 50, 51, 56]. Seven studies commented on the necessity to educate services that are closely related to sexual abuse—domestic abuse and sexual violence services, medical and healthcare services, and police—as well as those more peripherally associated with sexual violence and abuse, such as animal health and welfare services, and education services. Training of these services is important as it may be veterinarians, police, nurses, teachers, counsellors, and crisis workers who human victims disclose the abuse or who become aware of the abuse as a result of interactions with the animals. These services and individuals need to be aware of the heightened risks of harm to others and associated other abnormal sexual behaviors that may exist when animal sex abuse is identified. The outcome would be to improve the detection and response to these behaviors [42, 44, 47, 50, 51, 53, 56]. Specifically, four studies argue that law enforcement and mental health workers should enquire about other abnormal sexual behaviors when presented with animal sex abuse to better intervene and treat these behaviors [47, 50, 51, 56]. Furthermore, two studies stressed the importance of cross-reporting by law enforcement, social services, medical, and veterinary professionals when presented with animal sex abuse to assess for other possible risks to the perpetrator’s partner and children [44, 53].
5.4. Prevention: Childhood/Youth Animal Abuse
There has been significant research exploring childhood animal abuse or animal sex abuse as a predictor of adult abnormal or violent sexual behaviors [33, 42, 43, 45–49, 54]. Extensive research has identified animal abuse as one of the triad of behaviors, along with fire setting and bed wetting, that may signify trauma and the development of disruptive sexual or nonsexual behaviors in children [33, 42, 43] or other trauma-related behavioral difficulties [43, 48]. Four studies reported childhood animal sex abuse as a precursor to adult domestic abuse or violent sexual behaviors [45, 47, 48, 54]. An additional study found that sexually violent criminals with a history of animal sex abuse were more likely to report a history of childhood sexual victimization than those without a history of animal sex abuse [49]. Thus, these studies posit that reports of animal sex abuse among children should be taken seriously to prevent the development of further violent or abnormal sexual or nonsexual behaviors [43, 46, 47].
6. Discussion
We take the opportunity in the discussion to compare the different literature and the implications of the studies for risk assessment and risk management.
Table 3 highlights that there were some significant differences between the literature found in the first and second studies primarily relating to the different lenses that were applied (see Table 3). Most of the literature in the first search was written through a social work and domestic abuse lens. Consequently, most of these articles tended to focus on domestic abuse and its co-occurrence with pets and pet abuse rather than more general animal abuse. Additionally, there were discussions about how threats or harm to animals as a tactic of domestic abuse impacts help-seeking behaviors. The literature from the second search generally utilized a forensic psychology lens and focused on criminal offender populations. This search included animal abuse of all kinds and tended to focus more on prediction, retrospection, and theoretical observations. Interestingly, there were crossover articles in the literature on childhood sex abuse of animals that suggested that it could be a precursor to adult domestic abuse or other violent behaviors [47, 48, 54]. This mirrors the “violence graduation hypothesis” (VGH), a theory that posits that perpetrators first commit violence against animals and then “graduate” to violence against humans [57]. However, other studies [25, 26, 35, 38] are better reflected in an alternative theory to explain the intersection of animal mistreatment and violence towards humans, the “generality of deviance hypothesis” (GDH). Rather than viewing animal mistreatment as something that precedes violence towards humans, the GDH views violence towards animals and violence towards humans as part of an array of violent and nonviolent antisocial and criminal behaviors that perpetrators often engage in, sometimes concurrently [52, 57]. In cases where animal abuse is happening in the context of DA, the GDH may, therefore, be a more applicable theory.
Although both bodies of literature discussed motivations for animal abuse, these varied between the groups. The articles from the first search tended to view animal abuse as a part of domestic abuse; thus, the primary motivations for the abuse were generally to exert control over or create fear in partners and children. The articles from the second search generally presented animal abuse as a standalone, abnormal behavior. Subsequently, the perpetrators’ primary motivations were related to the feelings that might drive the abuse, such as anger, cruelty, or a desire for “fun” at the expense of the animal. In this second search, motivations were directly linked to the animal abuse, and rather than any indirect effects, the animal abuse may have had on other persons.
Despite these differences, there were several common themes found between the two bodies of literature. First, both contained discussion about the links between animal abuse/animal sex abuse and other violent or abnormal behaviors. As discussed above, there were two different conceptualizations of this relationship: a method to control others or to harm the animal and associated criminally harmful behaviors. While the domestic abuse literature emphasizes the former (controlling others), there is an argument that posits that those perpetrating animal abuse in the context of domestic abuse and animal sex abuse should be conceptualized in the same way. This is namely that it draws on similar motivations or mindsets which are about human aggression and point to a propensity for abnormal and often criminal behavior. This argument may have been underestimated in the literature on domestic abuse and the associated risk assessment. The motivations and mindsets surrounding why people abuse animals in the context of DA may also be understood in relation to typologies of violence under which DA perpetrators have been categorized. These typologies include perpetrators who are generally violent and antisocial, perpetrators who are situally violent towards their families (“family-only offenders”) [58] and perpetrators who use coercive control [59]. The typologies of violence in relation to animals specifically have been under-researched, as noted by Giesbrecht et al. [57]. It may, therefore, be beneficial to understand how the abuse of animals fits into these typologies, and going further, whether these typologies and motivations for abuse are differentiated based on the kind of animal being abused and the victim-survivors’ relationship to that animal—e.g., farm animals vs. pets vs. wild animals.
A second commonality in the literature is that both animal abuse and animal sex abuse may point to earlier forms of trauma. People who commit these acts may be more likely to have experienced other trauma, particularly in their childhood. The literature in this area, therefore, suggests that abuse of animals by children may be a red flag (risk indicator) for other problems within the household [19]. Similarly, adults committing aggressive and abusive acts towards animals may also be people who are carrying profound childhood trauma impacting on their ability to regulate their behaviors [15] and requiring interventions that address these earlier destructive experiences. This is uncomfortable territory for those in the domestic abuse arena, where the “psychologizing” of the abuser to explain controlling behaviors towards others (in this case animal abuse) has been shied away from as a distraction, taking the focus from the victim to excusing the behavior of the perpetrator. This is not the focus of perpetrator/men’s behavior change programs [57] but may nevertheless provide an avenue for further potentially individualized exploration for men who use violence where they have other complex needs.
A third common area in the literature lay in the identification of animal abuse or animal sex abuse as risk indicators for domestic abuse or other violent or abnormal behaviors. However, the literature gave this issue only cursory or superficial attention and did not discuss the implications of these risk factors for risk assessment frameworks nor the effectiveness of these risk factors in detecting domestic abuse or other forms of violence. A small number of the reviewed articles posit that harm to animals is associated with increased severity [16, 18, 20]. However, a detailed cluster analysis of other indicators of high risk with animal abuse was not evident in the articles.
However, one review found that despite multiple studies indicating an association between domestic violence and animal cruelty, there was also evidence that this association was not statistically significant [7]. This strong evidence of co-occurrence may indicate a gap in data where, for example, police or health services may not thoroughly explore and document. Ultimately, this apparent contradiction in statistical evidence demonstrates that the field would benefit from further research, as well as the development of tools that are able to detect the occurrence of both domestic and sexual abuse involving animals.
Nevertheless, multiple articles suggest raising awareness of the links between threats or harm to animals and domestic abuse and encourage formulating risk management strategies in response to this link using referral pathways between services both specialist and mainstream responding to domestic abuse [60]. Internationally, research on “The Link” between human and animal-directed violence has been underway for at least two decades [61]. The Link refers to the overlap of DA with child abuse, elder abuse, and animal abuse and shows that animal cruelty occurs more frequently in families where DA is also occurring [44]. This is a fourth area of commonality where the literature demonstrates that there is a link, but little focus on first responders to DA being educated about this link and using it in risk assessment or management. It may be that until more risk assessment tools include animal abuse (see Lamb et al. [7]), training developments will be inconsistent and perfunctory.
7. Limitations
The literature from both searches provided strong evidence of a link between animal abuse and violence against humans, and animal sex abuse and other abnormal sexual behaviors, respectively. However, there were some clear limitations to the research methodologies used in both searches. Definitions of animal abuse were sometimes vague—verbal abuse or threats were not well described. Some abusive behaviors may be more serious or common than others; thus, generalizing all types of animal abuse into one category may obfuscate possible variations. The Partner’s Treatment of Animals Scale (PTAS) [62] has been proposed as one way to consistently define and measure animal maltreatment in abusive romantic relationships. In the context of risk assessment, having better descriptions and explanations of animal abuse, such as within the PTAS, may assist in extracting the most pertinent and accurate information. Additionally, in the second search, the distinction between the types of animals being abused, whether it was a pet, livestock, or wild, was sometimes unclear. It is important to note that as a society pets, livestock and wild animals are treated very differently, and attachments may vary. It is, therefore, possible that behaviors towards domesticated animals should be conceptualized differently than livestock or wild animals.
8. Conclusion
In the context of risk assessment, the literature indicates that threats or harm towards animals, including the sex abuse of animals, has the potential to be used in four ways: (1) animal abuse as an indicator of domestic abuse; (2) childhood animal abuse as a signal of other problems within a household; (3) animal abuse as an indicator of more severe domestic abuse; and (4) the inclusion of pet abuse as a unique form of domestic abuse.
The comparison of the literature on animal abuse and animal sex abuse highlighted not only both interesting differentiations theoretically and methodologically but also some important similarities. Gaps in both literature have been highlighted in relation to risk assessment, risk management, and the lack of identification and training in this neglected area of the service system prevention and response. In short, the research posits that all animal abuse, as a distinct form of violence exposure and treating it as such will allow us to more holistically prevent, assess, or treat other violent behaviors such as domestic abuse [22, 37].
Data Availability
The data supporting the findings of this study are available at the locations cited in the reference section.
Additional Points
What is Known about This Topic? (i) There is a link between violence towards animals and violence towards humans. (ii) The abuse of animals can indicate that a domestic abuse situation is high risk. (iii) The abuse of animals can be an indicator of past experiences of trauma. What This Paper Adds. (i) Physical and/or sexual abuse of animals should be more widely adopted and measured as a risk factor within police risk assessments. (ii) There is a gap in the literature demonstrating a need for further research on risk management tools and training in relation to animals. (iii) Treating animal abuse as a distinct form of violence exposure will facilitate more holistic prevention, assessment, and treatment of violent behaviors including domestic abuse.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgments
The research and this report have been prepared by members of the research team at the University of Melbourne. The research team acknowledges the funding support of Victoria Police enabling this important piece of research. This study was funded through the University of Melbourne School of Social Work and Victoria Police. Open access publishing facilitated by the University of Melbourne, as part of the Wiley—The University of Melbourne agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.