animal cruelty research paper introduction

Extending Animal Cruelty Protections to Scientific Research

Article sidebar.

Main Article Content

Photo by Sandy Millar on Unsplash

INTRODUCTION

On November 25, 2019, the federal law H.R. 724 – the Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act (PACT) prohibiting the intentional harm of “living non-human mammals, birds, reptiles, or amphibians” was signed. [1] This law was a notable step in extending protections, rights, and respect to animals. While many similar state laws existed, the passing of a federal law signaled a new shift in public tone. PACT is a declaration of growing societal sentiments that uphold the necessity to shield our fellow creatures from undue harm. Protecting animals from the harm of citizens is undoubtedly important, but PACT does nothing to protect animals from state-sanctioned harm, particularly in the form of research, which causes death and cruelty. It is time to extend and expand protections for animals used in research.

There is a long history of animal experimentation in the US, but no meaningful ethical protections of animals emerged until the 20 th century. Proscription of human experimentation and dissection led to animals bearing the brunt of harm for scientific and medical progress. For instance, English physician William Harvey discovered the heart did not continuously produce blood but instead recirculated it; he made this discovery by dissecting and bleeding out living dogs without anesthesia. [2] Experiments like this were considered ethically tenable for hundreds of years. Philosophers like Immanuel Kant, Thomas Aquinas, and Rene Descartes held that humans have no primary moral obligations to animals and that one should be concerned about the treatment of an animal only because it could indicate how one would treat a human. [3] During the 20 th century, as agriculture became more industrialized and government funding for animal research increased, the social demand for ethical regulations finally began to shift. In 1966, the Animal Welfare Act (Public Law 89-544) marked the first American federal legislation to protect laboratory animals, setting standards for use of animals in research. [4]

There has been progress in the field of animal research ethics since Harvey’s experiments, but much work remains. In the US alone, there are an estimated 20 million mice, fish, birds, and invertebrates used for animal research each year that are not regulated by the Animal Welfare Act. [5] Instead, the “3Rs Alternatives” approach (“reduce, replace, and refine”) [6] is one framework used to guide ethical treatment of animals not covered by federal protections. Unfortunately, unpacking the meaning and details of this approach only leads to ambiguity and minimal actionable guidance. For instance, an experimenter could reduce the number of animals used in research but subsequently increase the number of experiments conducted on the remaining animals. Replace could be used in the context of replacing one species with another. Refining is creating “any decrease in the severity of inhumane procedures applied to those animals, which still have to be used.” [7] The vague “ any ” implies that even a negligible minimization would be ethically acceptable. [8] An experimenter could technically follow each of the “3Rs” with minimal to no reduction in harm to the animals. One must also consider whether it is coherent to refer to guidelines as ethical when they inevitably produce pain, suffering, and death as consequences of research participation.

Other ethical guides like Humane Endpoints for Laboratory Animals Used in Regulatory Testing [9] encourage researchers to euthanize animals that undergo intractable pain or distress. This is a fate that an estimated one million animals face yearly in the US. [10] However, to use the word “humane” in this context contradicts the traditional meaning and undermines the integrity of the word. Taking living creatures, forcing them to experience intractable pain and suffering for human benefit, and killing them is the antithesis of what it means to be humane. During one of my Animal Ethics classes as a graduate student, our cohort visited an animal research facility to help inform our opinions on animal research. We observed one of the euthanasia chambers for lab mice – an enclosed metal lab bench with a sign above describing methods for euthanasia if CO 2 asphyxiation were to fail. The methods included decapitation, removal of vital organs, opening of the chest cavity, incision of major blood vessels, and cervical dislocation. [11] Behind us were rows and rows of see-through shoebox-sized containers housing five mice in each little box. Thousands of mice were packed together in this room for the sole purpose of breeding. If the mice were not the correct “type” for research, then they were “humanely” euthanized. “Humane,” in this context, has been deprived of its true meaning.

One can acknowledge that animal research was historically necessary for scientific progress, but those that currently claim these practices are still required must show empirically and undoubtedly this is true. As of now, this is not a settled issue. In the scientific community, there is contention about whether current animal research is actually applicable to humans. [12] Many drug researchers even view animal testing as a tedious barrier to development as it may be wholly irrelevant to the drug or medical device being tested. Since 1962, the FDA has required preclinical testing in animals; it is time to question whether this is necessary or helpful for drug development.

The scientific community should stop viewing animal testing as an unavoidable evil in the search for medical and technological innovation. PACT should be amended and extended to all animals and the FDA should modify the requirement for preclinical animal testing of all drugs and medical devices. It is time to encourage the scientific community to find alternative research methods that do not sacrifice our fellow animals. We use animals as test subjects because, in some sense, they resemble humans. But, if they are indeed like humans, they should receive similar protections. Science builds a better world for humans, but perhaps it is time for science to be more inclusive and build a better world for all creatures.

[1] Theodore E. Deutch, “Text - H.R.724 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act,” legislation, November 25, 2019, 2019/2020, https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/724/text.

[2] Anita Guerrini, “Experiments, Causation, and the Uses of Vivisection in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century,” Journal of the History of Biology 46, no. 2 (2013): 227–54.

[3] Bernard E. Rollin, “The Regulation of Animal Research and the Emergence of Animal Ethics: A Conceptual History,” Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27, no. 4 (September 28, 2006): 285–304, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-006-9007-8; Darian M Ibrahim, “A Return to Descartes: Property, Profit, and the Corporate Ownership of Animals,” LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 70 (n.d.): 28.

[4] Benjamin Adams and Jean Larson, “Legislative History of the Animal Welfare Act: Introduction | Animal Welfare Information Center| NAL | USDA,” accessed November 3, 2021, https://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislative-history-animal-welfare-act-introduction.

[5] National Research Council (US) and Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on the Use of Laboratory Animals in Biomedical and Behavioral Research, Patterns of Animal Use , Use of Laboratory Animals in Biomedical and Behavioral Research (National Academies Press (US), 1988), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK218261/.

[6] Robert C. Hubrecht and Elizabeth Carter, “The 3Rs and Humane Experimental Technique: Implementing Change,” Animals: An Open Access Journal from MDPI 9, no. 10 (September 30, 2019): 754, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9100754.

[7] Hubrecht and Carter.

[8] Hubrecht and Carter.                           

[9] William S. Stokes, “Humane Endpoints for Laboratory Animals Used in Regulatory Testing,” ILAR Journal 43, no. Suppl_1 (January 1, 2002): S31–38, https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.43.Suppl_1.S31.

[10] Stokes.

[11] “Euthanasia of Research Animals,” accessed April 21, 2022, https://services-web.research.uci.edu/compliance/animalcare-use/research-policies-and-guidance/euthanasia.html.

[12] Neal D. Barnard and Stephen R. Kaufman, “Animal Research Is Wasteful and Misleading,” Scientific American 276, no. 2 (1997): 80–82.

Chad Childers

MS Bioethics Candidate Harvard Medical School Center for Bioethics

Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

• DOI: 10.1080/1068316X.2017.1414818
• Corpus ID: 148590793

The psychology of animal cruelty: an introduction to the special issue

• Emma Alleyne , B. Henry
• Published 11 December 2017
• Psychology, Crime & Law

24 References

Testing the specificity postulate of the violence graduation hypothesis: meta-analyses of the animal cruelty–offending relationship, animal abuse proclivity: behavioral, personality and regulatory factors associated with varying levels of severity, children who are cruel to animals: a review of research and implications for developmental psychopathology, pampered or pariah: does animal type influence the interaction between animal attitude and empathy, associations between different motivations for animal cruelty, methods of animal cruelty and facets of impulsivity, exploring the social and emotional context of childhood animal cruelty and its potential link to adult human violence.

• Highly Influential

Testing the direct, indirect, and moderated effects of childhood animal cruelty on future aggressive and non-aggressive offending.

The scripts and expertise of firesetters: a preliminary conceptualization, theories of sexual offending, parent and child reports of animal cruelty and their correlations with parent and child reports of child delinquency, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The psychology of animal cruelty: An introduction to the Special Issue

Psychology, Crime, and Law

As guest editors for Psychology, Crime, and Law, it is with great pleasure that we present this Special Issue, “The Psychology of Animal Cruelty”. In this introductory article, we offer broad insights into what we think to be the importance of studying this type of offending behavior. This forms the basis and justification for putting together this compilation of research, which spans three continents, that is diverse in theory application, method and research design. We provide brief synopses for the articles included in this issue. These articles cover the social and psychological factors related to child and adult perpetrators, offence heterogeneity (e.g., varying levels of abuse severity), victim characteristics, amongst other features of animal cruelty. We also offer a commentary on where the research can go next, identifying specific gaps in the existing literature. We conclude that there is an abundance of extant, related research that we can draw upon to inform future studies (e.g., implicit theories, scripts/schemas, dynamic risk factors) and clinical practice.

Related Papers

Evi Rosolimou

Social Work Chronicle

Publishing India Group

Animal abuse is one expression of antisocial behaviour. Aggression and violence towards people in most cases begin with the abuse of animals. Animal abuse is associated with bullying, behavioural problems, experiences of abuse (emotional, physical, and sexual), and juvenile delinquency. The link between animal abuse and human behaviour needs considerable attention and it is critical for practitioners to be aware of the associations between cruelty to animals and human behaviour. A fascination with cruelty to animals is a red flag in the backgrounds of serial killers and rapists. Acts of animal abuse are symptomatic of a deep mental disturbance. Research in psychology and criminology shows that people who commit acts of cruelty on animals do not stop there; many of them move on to their fellow humans. Animal abuse needs to be looked at as a significant indicator of human aggression and violence. People who abuse animals are more likely to engage in antisocial behaviours and commit violence against people. People who abuse animals tend to commit more crimes and engage in criminal activities. Antisocial behaviours like abusing animals usually originate from a traumatic childhood. According to Bratley, A., "Animal mercilessness is certainly not an innocuous venting feeling in a solid individual however this is a significant warning sign". There are deep psychological issues that lead to violent crimes against people. We should surely address the link between animal cruelty and human aggression and violence to prevent and cure conduct disorders in children.

Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Rebecca Fix

Arnold Arluke , Jack Levin

Camilla Pagani

Journal of Social Issues

Patterson-Kane Emily

It has been suggested that acts of violence against human and nonhuman animals share commonalities, and that animal abuse is a sentinel for current or future violence toward people. The popular and professional acceptance of strong connections between types of violence is beginning to be used to justify social work interventions and to influence legal decision making, and so requires greater scrutiny. Examination of the limited pool of empirical data suggests that animal abuse is relatively common among men, with violent offenders having an increased probability of reporting prior animal abuse—with the majority of violent offenders not reporting any animal abuse. Causal explanations for “the link,” such as empathy impairment or conduct disorder, suffer from a lack of validating research and, based on research into interhuman violence, the assumption that violence has a predominant, single underlying cause must be questioned. An (over)emphasis on the danger that animal abusers pose to humans serves to assist in achieving a consensus that animal abuse is a serious issue, but potentially at the cost of failing to focus on the most common types of abuse, and the most effective strategies for reducing its occurrence. Nothing in this review and discussion should be taken as minimizing the importance of animals as frequent victims of violence, or the co-occurrence of abuse types in “at-risk” households. However, given the weakness of the underlying data, emphasizing the indiscriminate dangerousness of all animal abusers may have unforeseen and unwanted consequences.

Emma Alleyne

There is a clear discrepancy in the reporting of animal cruelty complaints, prosecutions and convictions suggesting that any prevalence figures of abuse are significant under-representations. Therefore, it can be inferred that there is a large number of animal abusers who are unapprehended. Currently there is no validated tool that assesses the proclivity or propensity to engage in animal abuse amongst members of the general public. Such a tool would enable researchers to study individuals who may think like animal abusers or may be unapprehended offenders themselves. This paper presents the newly developed Animal Abuse Proclivity Scale (AAPS) and some preliminary findings. The results from our two studies show that: (1) the psychometric properties of the AAPS indicate that the scale is a highly reliable measure; (2) the AAPS relates to measures assessing offence-supportive attitudes and reflects the gender differences seen in the literature; and (3) the AAPS demonstrates cross-national validity. These findings support that the AAPS, similar to other offending proclivity measures, is a tool that can be used to examine the factors most related to animal abuse propensity. We discuss how the AAPS can contribute to future developments in theory and practice in the field.

Crime, Law and Social Change

Geertrui Cazaux

Abstract. Although interactions between people and other animals play an important part in the social arena, this topic has until recently largely been neglected by criminologists. Recent developments in ethical theory on the moral status of animals require a reconsideration of spe-ciesist ...

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology

Randall Lockwood

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Heath Grant , Kimberly Spanjol

Psychology, Crime & Law

Emily Blake

Gisele Kronhardt Scheffer

Choice Reviews Online

Cassandra L . Reyes

Child Psychiatry & Human Development

Heath Grant , Cathryn Lavery , Kimberly Spanjol

Journal of Quantitative Criminology

Ekaterina Bochkovar

Dr Michelle Newberry

Aggressive Behavior

eduardo vasquez

Society and Animals

People and Animals: The International Journal of Research and Practice

Birgit U Stetina

PsycEXTRA Dataset

frank ascione

Society Register

Aviva Vincent

Family Relations

Behavioral and Brain Sciences

Arnold Arluke

Nik Taylor , Tania Signal

Pablo Expósito Campos

The Green Criminology Monthly

Glen Wright

Journal of Marriage and Family

Stephanie Harness

Heather Piper

Australian Veterinary Journal

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• PubMed/Medline
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Animal abuse as an indicator of domestic violence: one health, one welfare approach.

Simple Summary

1. introduction, 2. material and methods, 3. animal cruelty as an indicator of domestic violence, 4. risk factors for the development of animal cruelty in children, 4.1. empathy, 4.2. callous-unemotional traits, 5. warning signs of the potential for domestic violence and animal abuse, 6. animal cruelty and animal protection laws, 7. one health, one welfare approach, 8. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Kellert, S.R.; Felthous, A.R. Childhood cruelty toward animals among criminals and noncriminals. Hum. Relat. 1985 , 38 , 1113–1129. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Volant, A.M.; Johnson, J.A.; Gullone, E.; Coleman, G.J. The relationship between domestic violence and animal abuse. J. Interpers. Violence 2008 , 23 , 1277–1295. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Arkow, P.; Boyden, P.; Patterson-Kane, E. Practical Guidence for the Effective Response by Veterinarians to Suspected Animal Cruelty, Abuse and Neglect. Available online: https://ebusiness.avma.org/Files/ProductDownloads/AVMA%20Suspected%20Animal%20Cruelty.pdf (accessed on 22 December 2021).
• University, T.; Boston, A.R.L.; Folks, A. Reporting Animal Cruelty—The Role of the Veterinarian: Establishing Protocols to Identify and Report Suspected Animal Cruelty in Massachusetts. Available online: https://vet.tufts.edu/wp-content/uploads/MA_Reporting-Manual-August-2018.pdf (accessed on 22 December 2021).
• Ascione, F.R. Children who are cruel to animals: A review of research and implications for developmental psychopathology. Anthrozoos 1993 , 6 , 226–247. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chan, H.C.; Wong, R.W.Y. Childhood and adolescent animal cruelty and subsequent interpersonal violence in adulthood: A review of the literature. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2019 , 48 , 83–93. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gallagher, B.; Allen, M.; Jones, B. Animal abuse and intimate partner violence: Researching the link and its significance in Ireland—A veterinary perspective. Ir. Vet. J. 2008 , 61 , 658. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Bright, M.A.; Huq, M.S.; Spencer, T.; Applebaum, J.W.; Hardt, N. Animal cruelty as an indicator of family trauma: Using adverse childhood experiences to look beyond child abuse and domestic violence. Child Abuse Negl. 2018 , 76 , 287–296. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Beirne, P. Rethinking bestiality. Theor. Criminol. 1997 , 1 , 317–340. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Beetz, A.M. Bestiality/zoophilia: A scarcely investigated phenomenon between crime, paraphilia, and love. J. Forensic Psychol. Pract. 2004 , 4 , 1–36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shih, H.Y.; Paterson, M.B.A.; Phillips, C.J.C. Breed group effects on complaints about canine welfare made to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) Queensland, Australia. Animals 2019 , 9 , 390. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Gomes, L.B.; Paiva, M.T.; Lisboa, L.d.O.; de Oliveira, C.S.F.; Garcia, R.d.C.M.; Soares, D.F.d.M. Diagnosis of animal abuse: A Brazilian study. Prev. Vet. Med. 2021 , 194 , 105421. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Siqueira, A.; Cassiano, F.C.; Landi, M.F.d.A.; Marlet, E.F.; Maiorka, P.C. Non-accidental injuries found in necropsies of domestic cats: A review of 191 cases. J. Feline Med. Surg. 2012 , 14 , 723–728. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• World Health Organization (WHO). World Report on Violence and Health: Summary. Available online: https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/world_report/en/summary_en.pdf (accessed on 22 December 2021).
• Macdonald, J. The threat to kill. Am. J. Psychiatry 1963 , 120 , 125–130. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ascione, F.R.; Weber, C.V.; Thompson, T.M.; Heath, J.; Maruyama, M.; Hayashi, K. Battered Pets and Domestic Violence. Violence Women 2007 , 13 , 354–373. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Febres, J.; Shorey, R.C.; Brasfield, H.; Zucosky, H.C.; Ninnemann, A.; Elmquist, J.; Bucossi, M.M.; Andersen, S.M.; Schonbrun, Y.C.; Stuart, G.L. Adulthood animal abuse among women court-referred to batterer intervention programs. J. Interpers. Violence 2012 , 27 , 3115–3126. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• McDonald, S.E.; Collins, E.A.; Nicotera, N.; Hageman, T.O.; Ascione, F.R.; Williams, J.H.; Graham-Bermann, S.A. Children’s experiences of companion animal maltreatment in households characterized by intimate partner violence. Child Abuse Negl. 2015 , 50 , 116–127. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Monsalve, S.; Ferreira, F.; Garcia, R. The connection between animal abuse and interpersonal violence: A review from the veterinary perspective. Res. Vet. Sci. 2017 , 114 , 18–26. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Newberry, M. Pets in danger: Exploring the link between domestic violence and animal abuse. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2017 , 34 , 273–281. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Faver, C.A.; Strand, E.B. Fear, guilt, and grief: Harm to pets and the emotional abuse of women. J. Emot. Abus. 2007 , 7 , 51–70. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alleyne, E.; Parfitt, C. Adult-perpetrated animal abuse: A systematic literature review. Trauma Violence Abus. 2019 , 20 , 344–357. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McDonald, S.E.; Collins, E.A.; Maternick, A.; Nicotera, N.; Graham-Bermann, S.; Ascione, F.R.; Williams, J.H. Intimate partner violence survivors’ reports of their children’s exposure to companion animal maltreatment: A qualitative study. J. Interpers. Violence 2019 , 34 , 2627–2652. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Monsalve, S.; Pereira, É.L.; Leite, L.O.; Polo, G.; Garcia, R. Perception, knowledge and attitudes of small animal practitioners regarding animal abuse and interpersonal violence in Brazil and Colombia. Res. Vet. Sci. 2019 , 124 , 61–69. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Pinel, P. A treatise on Insanity ; Messers Cadell & Davies, Strand: London, UK, 1806; pp. 1–213. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mead, M. Cultural factors in the cause and prevention of pathological homicide. Bull. Menn. Clin. 1964 , 28 , 11–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leary, T.; Southard, L.; Hill, J.; Ashman, J. The MacDonald Triad revisited: An empirical assessment of relationships between triadic elements and parental abuse in serial killers. N. Am. J. Psychol. 2017 , 19 , 627–640. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reese, L.A.; Vertalka, J.J.; Richard, C. Animal cruelty and neighborhood conditions. Animals 2020 , 10 , 2095. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Allen, M.; Gallagher, B.; Jones, B. Domestic violence and the abuse of pets: Researching the link and its implications in Ireland. Practice 2006 , 18 , 167–181. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hartman, C.; Hageman, T.; Williams, J.H.; Mary, J.S.; Ascione, F.R. Exploring empathy and callous–unemotional traits as predictors of animal abuse perpetrated by children exposed to intimate partner violence. J. Interpers. Violence 2019 , 34 , 2419–2437. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Travers, C.; Dixon, A.; Thorne, K.; Spicer, K. Cruelty towards the family pet: A survey of women experiencing domestic violence on the Central Coast, New South Wales. Med. J. Aust. 2009 , 191 , 409–410. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Faver, C.A.; Strand, E.B. To leave or to stay? J. Interpers Violence 2003 , 18 , 1367–1377. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vaughn, M.G.; Fu, Q.; DeLisi, M.; Beaver, K.M.; Perron, B.E.; Terrell, K.; Howard, M.O. Correlates of cruelty to animals in the United States: Results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2009 , 43 , 1213–1218. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Dadds, M.R.; Whiting, C.; Bunn, P.; Fraser, J.A.; Charlson, J.H.; Pirola-Merlo, A. Measurement of cruelty in children: The cruelty to animals inventory. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2004 , 32 , 321–334. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Dadds, M.R.; Hunter, K.; Hawes, D.J.; Frost, A.D.J.; Vassallo, S.; Bunn, P.; Merz, S.; Masry, Y. El A measure of cognitive and affective empathy in children using parent ratings. Child Psychiatry Hum. Dev. 2008 , 39 , 111–122. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Frick, P.J.; Cornell, A.H.; Barry, C.T.; Bodin, S.D.; Dane, H.E. Callous-unemotional traits and conduct problems in the prediction of conduct problem severity, aggression, and self-report of delinquency. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2003 , 31 , 457–470. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Woolf, J.A. How can veterinarians be reporters of animal abuse when they are not taught to recognize it? J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 2015 , 247 , 1363–1364. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Monsalve, S.; de Souza, P.V.; Lopes, A.S.; Leite, L.O.; Polo, G.; Garcia, R. Veterinary forensics, animal welfare and animal abuse: Perceptions and knowledge of Brazilian and Colombian veterinary students. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2021 , 48 , 640–648. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Creevy, K.E.; Shaver, S.L.; Cornell, K.K. Domestic violence shelter partnerships and veterinary student attitudes at North American veterinary schools and colleges. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2013 , 40 , 184–191. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Sharpe, M.S.; Wittum, T.E. Veterinarian involvement in the prevention and intervention of human violence and animal abuse: A survey of small animal practitioners. Anthrozoos 1999 , 12 , 97–104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Williams, V.; Dale, A.; Clarke, N.; Garrett, N. Animal abuse and family violence: Survey on the recognition of animal abuse by veterinarians in New Zealand and their understanding of the correlation between animal abuse and human violence. N. Z. Vet. J. 2008 , 56 , 21–28. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Randour, M.L.; Smith-Blackmore, M.; Blaney, N.; DeSousa, D.; Guyony, A.-A. Animal abuse as a type of trauma: Lessons for human and animal service professionals. Trauma Violence Abus. 2021 , 22 , 277–288. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McGuinness, K.; Allen, M.; Jones, B.R. Non-accidental injury in companion animals in the Republic of Ireland. Ir. Vet. J. 2005 , 58 , 392. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Roth, I.; Martin, J. A case of animal and domestic abuse initially diagnosed as legg-calve-perthes disease. J. Am. Anim. Hosp. Assoc. 2018 , 54 , e54603. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ascione, F.R.; Arkow, P.; Ascione, F.R.; Arkow, P. Another weapon for combating family violence: Prevention of animal abuse. In Child Abuse, Domestic Violence, and Animal Abuse: Linking the Circles of Compassion for Preventions and Intervention ; Ascione, F.R., Arkow, P., Eds.; Purdue University Press: West Lafayette, IN, USA, 1999; pp. 62–80. [ Google Scholar ]
• DeGue, S.; DiLillo, D. Is animal cruelty a “red flag” for family violence? J. Interpers. Violence 2009 , 24 , 1036–1056. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS). Informe sobre la situación mundial de la prevención de la violencia contra los niños. Available online: https://www.who.int/es/news/item/18-06-2020-countries-failing-to-prevent-violence-against-children-agencies-warn (accessed on 22 December 2021).
• Mora-Medina, P.; Arvizu-Tovar, L.O.; Flores-Peinado, S.C.; Flores-Huitrón, N.R.; Arch-Tirado, E.; Lino-González, A. Animal abuse as an indicator of domestic violence. Enseñanza e Investig. en Psicol. 2020 , 2 , 288–296. [ Google Scholar ]
• Walton-Moss, B.J.; Manganello, J.; Frye, V.; Campbell, J.C. Risk factors for intimate partner violence and associated injury among urban women. J. Community Health 2005 , 30 , 377–389. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Holt, S.; Buckley, H.; Whelan, S. The impact of exposure to domestic violence on children and young people: A review of the literature. Child Abuse Negl. 2008 , 32 , 797–810. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Shirtcliff, E.A.; Vitacco, M.J.; Graf, A.R.; Gostisha, A.J.; Merz, J.L.; Zahn-Waxler, C. Neurobiology of empathy and callousness: Implications for the development of antisocial behavior. Behav. Sci. Law 2009 , 27 , 137–171. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Moul, C.; Hawes, D.J.; Dadds, M.R. Mapping the developmental pathways of child conduct problems through the neurobiology of empathy. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2018 , 91 , 34–50. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Decety, J.; Norman, G.J.; Berntson, G.G.; Cacioppo, J.T. A neurobehavioral evolutionary perspective on the mechanisms underlying empathy. Prog. Neurobiol. 2012 , 98 , 38–48. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mrug, S.; Madan, A.; Windle, M. Emotional desensitization to violence contributes to adolescents’ violent behavior. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2016 , 44 , 75–86. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Commins, S. Behavioral Neuroscience ; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2018; pp. 48–61. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ripoll, L.H.; Snyder, R.; Steele, H.; Siever, L.J. The neurobiology of empathy in borderline personality disorder. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 2013 , 15 , 344. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Decety, J. Empathy in medicine: What it is, and how much we really need it. Am. J. Med. 2020 , 133 , 561–566. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McPhedran, S. A review of the evidence for associations between empathy, violence, and animal cruelty. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2009 , 14 , 1–4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Taylor, N.; Signal, T.D. Empathy and attitudes to animals. Anthrozoos 2005 , 18 , 18–27. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Jegatheesan, B.; Enders-Slegers, M.-J.; Ormerod, E.; Boyden, P. Understanding the link between animal cruelty and family violence: The bioecological systems model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020 , 17 , 3116. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Hardesty, J.L.; Khaw, L.; Ridgway, M.D.; Weber, C.; Miles, T. Coercive control and abused women’s Decemberisions about their pets when seeking shelter. J. Interpers. Violence 2013 , 28 , 2617–2639. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Hartman, C.A.; Hageman, T.; Williams, J.H.; Ascione, F.R. Intimate partner violence and animal abuse in an immigrant-rich sample of mother–child dyads recruited from domestic violence programs. J. Interpers. Violence 2018 , 33 , 1030–1047. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Upadhya, V. The abuse of animals as a method of domestic violence: The need for criminalization. Emory Law J. 2014 , 63 , 1163–1209. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Hawkins, R.D.; McDonald, S.E.; O’Connor, K.; Matijczak, A.; Ascione, F.R.; Williams, J.H. Exposure to intimate partner violence and internalizing symptoms: The moderating effects of positive relationships with pets and animal cruelty exposure. Child Abuse Negl. 2019 , 98 , 104166. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Girardi, A.; Pozzulo, J.D. Childhood experiences with family pets and internalizing symptoms in early adulthood. Anthrozoos 2015 , 28 , 421–436. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Carlisle-Frank, P.; Frank, J.M.; Nielsen, L. Selective battering of the family pet. Anthrozoos 2004 , 17 , 26–42. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Currie, C.L. Animal cruelty by children exposed to domestic violence. Child Abuse Negl. 2006 , 30 , 425–435. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Longobardi, C.; Badenes-Ribera, L. The relationship between animal cruelty in children and adolescent and interpersonal violence: A systematic review. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2019 , 46 , 201–211. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Campbell, A.M. The intertwined well-being of children and non-human animals: An analysis of animal control reports involving children. Soc. Sci. 2022 , 11 , 46. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Baldry, A.C. Animal abuse and exposure to interparental violence in Italian youth. J. Interpers. Violence 2003 , 18 , 258–281. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gullone, E.; Robertson, N. The relationship between bullying and animal abuse behaviors in adolescents: The importance of witnessing animal abuse. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 2008 , 29 , 371–379. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Muñoz, L.C.; Qualter, P.; Padgett, G. Empathy and bullying: Exploring the influence of callous-unemotional traits. Child Psychiatry Hum. Dev. 2011 , 42 , 183–196. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zych, I.; Ttofi, M.M.; Farrington, D.P. Empathy and callous–unemotional traits in different bullying roles: A systematic Review and meta-analysis. Trauma Violence Abus. 2019 , 20 , 3–21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ladny, R.T.; Meyer, L. Traumatized witnesses: Review of childhood exposure to animal cruelty. J. Child Adolesc. Trauma 2020 , 13 , 527–537. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ascione, F.R.; Friedrich, W.N.; Heath, J.; Hayashi, K. Cruelty to animals in normative, sexually abused, and outpatient psychiatric samples of 6- to 12-year-old children: Relations to maltreatment and exposure to domestic violence. Anthrozoos 2003 , 16 , 194–212. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mellor, D.; Yeow, J.; Mamat, N.H.b.; Hapidzal, N.F.b.M. The relationship between childhood cruelty to animals and psychological adjustment: A malaysian atudy. Anthrozoos 2008 , 21 , 363–374. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sanders, C.E.; Henry, B.C. Nonhuman animal cruelty, bullying, and behavioral difficulties among women. Soc. Anim. 2015 , 23 , 68–80. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Baldry, A.C. Animal abuse among preadolescents directly and indirectly victimized at school and at home. Crim. Behav. Ment. Heal. 2005 , 15 , 97–110. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Henry, B.; Sanders, C. Bullying and animal abuse: Is there a connection? Soc. Anim. 2007 , 15 , 107–126. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Walters, G.D. Animal cruelty and bullying: Behavioral markers of delinquency risk or causal antecedents of delinquent behavior? Int. J. Law Psychiatry 2019 , 62 , 77–84. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Tapia, F. Children who are cruel to animals. Child Psychiatry Hum. Dev. 1971 , 2 , 70–77. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hensley, C.; Tallichet, S.E. The effect of inmates’ self-reported childhood and adolescent animal cruelty. Int. J. Offender Ther. Comp. Criminol. 2008 , 52 , 175–184. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hensley, C.; Tallichet, S.E.; Dutkiewicz, E.L. Recurrent childhood animal cruelty. Crim. Justice Rev. 2009 , 34 , 248–257. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hensley, C.; Tallichet, S.E. Childhood and adolescent animal cruelty methods and their possible link to adult violent crimes. J. Interpers. Violence 2009 , 24 , 147–158. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wright, J.; Hensley, C. From animal cruelty to serial murder: Applying the graduation hypothesis. Int. J. Offender Ther. Comp. Criminol. 2003 , 47 , 71–88. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Patterson-Kane, E. The relation of animal maltreatment to aggression. In Animal Maltreatment: Forensic Mental Health Issues and Evaluations ; Levitt, L., Patronek, G.J., Grisso, T., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 140–158. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morales-Vives, F.; Cosi, S.; Lorenzo-Seva, U.; Vigil-Colet, A. The inventory of callous-unemotional traits and antisocial behavior (inca) for young people: Development and validation in a community sample. Front. Psychol. 2019 , 10 , 713. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Anderson, N.E.; Kiehl, K.A. Psychopathy: Developmental perspectives and their implications for treatment. Restor. Neurol. Neurosci. 2014 , 32 , 103–117. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Van Dongen, J.D.M. The empathic brain of psychopaths: From social science to neuroscience in empathy. Front. Psychol. 2020 , 11 , 695. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Pisano, S.; Muratori, P.; Gorga, C.; Levantini, V.; Iuliano, R.; Catone, G.; Coppola, G.; Milone, A.; Masi, G. Conduct disorders and psychopathy in children and adolescents: Aetiology, clinical presentation and treatment strategies of callous-unemotional traits. Ital. J. Pediatr. 2017 , 43 , 84. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Lockwood, R.; Arkow, P. Animal abuse and interpersonal violence. Vet. Pathol. 2016 , 53 , 910–918. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Dadds, M.R.; Whiting, C.; Hawes, D.J. Associations among cruelty to animals, family conflict, and psychopathic traits in childhood. J. Interpers. Violence 2006 , 21 , 411–429. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Henderson, B.B.; Hensley, C.; Tallichet, S.E. Childhood animal cruelty methods and their link to adult interpersonal violence. J. Interpers. Violence 2011 , 26 , 2211–2227. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Salvagni, F.A.; de Siqueira, A.; Fukushima, A.R.; Landi, M.F.d.A.; Ponge-Ferreira, H.; Maiorka, P.C. Animal serial killing: The first criminal conviction for animal cruelty in Brazil. Forensic Sci. Int. 2016 , 267 , e1–e5. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Siever, L.J. Neurobiology of aggression and violence. Am. J. Psychiatry 2008 , 165 , 429–442. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lischinsky, J.E.; Lin, D. Neural mechanisms of aggression across species. Nat. Neurosci. 2020 , 23 , 1317–1328. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Henry, B.C. Exposure to animal abuse and group context: Two factors affecting participation in animal abuse. Anthrozoos 2004 , 17 , 290–305. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McEwen, F.S.; Moffitt, T.E.; Arseneault, L. Is childhood cruelty to animals a marker for physical maltreatment in a prospective cohort study of children? Child. Abuse Negl. 2014 , 38 , 533–543. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Crenshaw, D.A.; Mordock, J.B. Understanding and Treating Aggression of Children ; Jason Aronson: Lanham, MD, USA, 2005; pp. 23–41. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morera, M.D.; Quiles, M.N.; Correa, A.D.; Delgado, N.; Leyens, J.-P. Perception of mind and dehumanization: Human, animal, or machine? Int. J. Psychol. 2018 , 53 , 253–260. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Parkes, D.; Signal, T. Revisiting a link: Animal abuse, bullying, and empathy in Australian youth. Human. Anim. Interat. Bull. 2007 , 5 , 26–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ascione, F.R.; Thompson, T.M.; Black, T. Childhood cruelty to animals: Assessing cruelty dimensions and motivations. Anthrozoos 1997 , 10 , 170–177. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hensley, C.; Tallichet, S.E. Animal cruelty motivations. J. Interpers. Violence 2005 , 20 , 1429–1443. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Miller, K.S.; Knutson, J.F. Reports of severe physical punishment and exposure to animal cruelty by inmates convicted of felonies and by university students. Child. Abuse Negl. 1997 , 21 , 59–82. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Arluke, A.; Madfis, E. Animal abuse as a warning sign of school massacres. Homicide Stud. 2014 , 18 , 7–22. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Flynn, C.P. Exploring the link between corporal punishment and children’s cruelty to animals. J. Marriage Fam. 1999 , 61 , 971. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Riggs, D.W.; Taylor, N.; Fraser, H.; Donovan, C.; Signal, T. The link between domestic violence and abuse and animal cruelty in the intimate relationships of people of diverse genders and/or sexualities: A binational study. J. Interpers. Violence 2021 , 36 , 3169–3195. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Faver, C.A. School-based humane education as a strategy to prevent violence: Review and recommendations. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2010 , 32 , 365–370. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hawkins, R.D.; Williams, J.M. Children’s Beliefs about Animal Minds (Child-BAM): Associations with positive and negative child–animal interactions. Anthrozoos 2016 , 29 , 503–519. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Miralles, A.; Raymond, M.; Lecointre, G. Empathy and compassion toward other species Decemberrease with evolutionary divergence time. Sci. Rep. 2019 , 9 , 19555. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Jolliffe, D.; Farrington, D.P. Empathy and offending: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2004 , 9 , 441–476. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jolliffe, D.; Farrington, D.P. Examining the relationship between low empathy and bullying. Aggress. Behav. 2006 , 32 , 540–550. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Plant, M.; van Schaik, P.; Gullone, E.; Flynn, C. “It’s a dog’s life”: Culture, empathy, gender, and domestic violence predict animal abuse in adolescents—implications for societal health. J. Interpers. Violence 2019 , 34 , 2110–2137. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Hawkins, E.L.; Hawkins, R.D.; Caceres Castellanos, L.M.; Williams, J.M. The links between personality, empathy and animal cruelty attitudes and behaviour: A cross national comparison. In Proceedings of the Human—Animal Interconnections, Davis, CA, USA, 22–25 June 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Frick, P.J.; White, S.F. Research Review: The importance of callous-unemotional traits for developmental models of aggressive and antisocial behavior. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiatry 2008 , 49 , 359–375. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lahey, B.B.; Waldman, I.D.; McBurnett, K. Annotation: The development of antisocial behavior: An integrative causal model. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiatry 1999 , 40 , 669–682. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Muñoz, L.C. Callous-unemotional traits are related to combined deficits in recognizing afraid faces and body poses. J. Am. Acad. Child. Adolesc. Psychiatry 2009 , 48 , 554–562. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Zhang, J.; Li, W.; Zhang, H.; Wilson, A.; Shuai, L.; Xia, W.; Wang, Z.; Qiu, M.; Wang, Y. Callous-unemotional traits in Chinese preschool children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Child. Adolesc. Psychiatry Ment. Health 2021 , 15 , 35. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fanti, K.A. Individual, social, and behavioral factors associated with co-occurring conduct problems and callous-unemotional traits. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 2013 , 41 , 811–824. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Barry, C.T.; Frick, P.J.; DeShazo, T.M.; McCoy, M.; Ellis, M.; Loney, B.R. The importance of callous–unemotional traits for extending the concept of psychopathy to children. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 2000 , 109 , 335–340. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Frick, P.J.; Ray, J.V. Evaluating callous-unemotional traits as a personality construct. J. Pers. 2015 , 83 , 710–722. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wright, N.; Pickles, A.; Sharp, H.; Hill, J. A psychometric and validity study of callous-unemotional traits in 2.5 year old children. Sci. Rep. 2021 , 11 , 8065. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• McDonald, S.E.; Cody, A.M.; Booth, L.J.; Peers, J.R.; O’Connor Luce, C.; Williams, J.H.; Ascione, F.R. Animal cruelty among children in violent households: Children’s explanations of their behavior. J. Fam. Violence 2018 , 33 , 469–480. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Miller, C. Childhood animal cruelty and interpersonal violence. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2001 , 21 , 735–749. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Felthous, A.R.; Bernard, H. Enuresis, firesetting, and cruelty to animals: The significance of two thirds of this triad. J. Forensic Sci. 1979 , 24 , 240–246. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ressler, R.K.; Burgess, A.W.; Hartman, C.R.; Douglas, J.E.; McCormack, A. Murderers who rape and mutilate. J. Interpers. Violence 1986 , 1 , 273–287. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rigdon, J.; Tapia, F. Children who are cruel to animals: A follow-up study. J. Oper. Psychiatr. 1977 , 8 , 27–36. [ Google Scholar ]
• Holoyda, B.J.; Newman, W.J. Childhood animal cruelty, bestiality, and the link to adult interpersonal violence. Int. J. Law Psychiatry 2016 , 47 , 129–135. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kinsey, A.C.; Pomeroy, W.R.; Martin, C.E. Sexual behavior in the human male. Am. J. Public Health 2003 , 93 , 894–898. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fleming, W.; Jory, B.; Burton, D. Characteristics of juvenile offenders admitting to sexual activity with nonhuman animals. Soc. Anim. 2002 , 10 , 31–45. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Hensley, C.; Tallichet, S.E.; Singer, S.D. Exploring the possible link between childhood and adolescent bestiality and interpersonal violence. J. Interpers. Violence 2006 , 21 , 910–923. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Abel, G. What can 44,000 men and 12,000 boys with sexual behavior problems teach us about preventing sexual abuse. In Proceedings of the California Coalition on Sexual Offending 11th Annual Training Conference, Emerging Perspectives on Sexual Abuse Management, San Francisco, CA, USA, 8–11 May 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hensley, C.; Tallichet, S.E.; Dutkiewicz, E.L. Childhood bestiality. J. Interpers. Violence 2010 , 25 , 557–567. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Holoyda, B.; Newman, W. Zoophilia and the law: Legal responses to a rare paraphilia. J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry Law 2014 , 42 , 412–420. [ Google Scholar ] [ PubMed ]
• Gupta, M. Functional links between intimate partner violence and animal abuse: Personality features and representations of aggression. Soc. Anim. 2008 , 16 , 223–242. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Junewicz, A.; Billick, S.B. Conduct disorder: Biology and developmental trajectories. Psychiatr. Q. 2020 , 91 , 77–90. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kimonis, E.R.; Fanti, K.A.; Anastassiou-Hadjicharalambous, X.; Mertan, B.; Goulter, N.; Katsimicha, E. Can callous-unemotional traits be reliably measured in preschoolers? J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 2016 , 44 , 625–638. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• MacDonald, J.M.; Boyd, S.; Galvin, J.A.V. The Murderer and His Victim , 2nd ed.; Thomas, C.C., Ed.; Hemisphere Publisher Comporation: Springfield, MA, USA, 1961; pp. 1–420. [ Google Scholar ]
• Walters, G.D. Animal cruelty and firesetting as behavioral markers of fearlessness and disinhibition: Putting two-thirds of Macdonald’s triad to work. J. Forens. Psychiatry Psychol. 2017 , 28 , 10–23. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McEwen, B. Eternally Vulnerable: The Pathology of Abuse in Domestic Animals. Acad. Forensic Pathol. 2017 , 7 , 353–369. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Teicher, M.H.; Samson, J.A.; Anderson, C.M.; Ohashi, K. The effects of childhood maltreatment on brain structure, function and connectivity. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2016 , 17 , 652–666. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Choi, J.; Jeong, B.; Polcari, A.; Rohan, M.L.; Teicher, M.H. Reduced fractional anisotropy in the visual limbic pathway of young adults witnessing domestic violence in childhood. Neuroimage 2012 , 59 , 1071–1079. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Joinson, C.; Sullivan, S.; von Gontard, A.; Heron, J. Stressful events in early childhood and developmental trajectories of bedwetting at school age. J. Pediatr. Psychol. 2016 , 41 , 1002–1010. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Joinson, C.; Grzeda, M.T.; von Gontard, A.; Heron, J. A prospective cohort study of biopsychosocial factors associated with childhood urinary incontinence. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 2019 , 28 , 123–130. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Gannon, T.A.; Pina, A. Firesetting: Psychopathology, theory and treatment. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2010 , 15 , 224–238. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Collins, J.; Barnoux, M.; Langdon, P.E. A preliminary firesetting offence chain for adults with intellectual and other developmental disabilities. J. Intellect. Dev. Disabil. 2022 , 2022 , 2037186. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Parfitt, C.H.; Alleyne, E. Not the sum of its parts: A critical review of the MacDonald triad. Trauma Violence Abus. 2020 , 21 , 300–310. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Joubert, D.; Welsh, K.; Edward, L.J. Validity of the MacDonald triad as a forensic construct: Links with psychopathology and patterns of aggression in sex offenders. Leg. Criminol. Psychol. 2021 , 26 , 103–116. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hoffer, T.; Hargreaves-Cormany, H.; Muirhead, Y.; Meloy, J.R. Description of the problem of animal cruelty and its association with interpersonal violence. In Violence in Animal Cruelty Offerders ; Hoffer, T., Hargreaves-Cormany, H., Muirhead, Y., Meloy, J.R., Eds.; SpringerBriefs in Psychology: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 31–34. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aggrawal, A. A new classification of zoophilia. J. Forensic Leg. Med. 2011 , 18 , 73–78. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Holoyda, B.; Sorrentino, R.; Friedman, S.H.; Allgire, J. Bestiality: An introduction for legal and mental health professionals. Behav. Sci. Law 2018 , 36 , 687–697. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Stern, A.W.; Smith-Blackmore, M. Veterinary forensic pathology of animal sexual abuse. Vet. Pathol. 2016 , 53 , 1057–1066. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Edwards, M.J. Arrest and prosecution of animal sex abuse (bestiality) offenders in the united states, 1975–2015. J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry Law 2019 , 47 , 335–346. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Satapathy, S.; Swain, R.; Pandey, V.; Behera, C. An adolescent with bestiality behaviour: Psychological evaluation and community health concerns. Indian J. Community Med. 2016 , 41 , 23. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Holoyda, B.; Gosal, R.; Michelle Welch, K. Bestiality among sexually violent predators. J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry Law 2020 , 48 , 358–364. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• De Gea, T. Historia del Derecho Animal. Available online: https://www.abogacia.es/publicaciones/blogs/blog-de-derecho-de-los-animales/historia-del-derecho-animal/ (accessed on 23 July 2020).
• Ryder, R.D. Animal Revolution: Changing Attitudes towards Speciesism ; Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, UK, 1989; pp. 1–300. [ Google Scholar ]
• Trent, N.; Edwards, S.; Felt, J.; O’Meara, K. International animal law, with a concentration on Latin America, Asia, and Africa. In The State of the Animals III ; Salem, D., Rowan, A., Eds.; Humane Society Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; pp. 65–77. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morton, R.; Hebart, M.L.; Ankeny, R.A.; Whittaker, A.L. Assessing the uniformity in australian animal protection law: A statutory comparison. Animals 2020 , 11 , 35. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Cardoso, S.D.; Faraco, C.B.; de Sousa, L.; Da Graça Pereira, G. History and evolution of the European legislation on welfare and protection of companion animals. J. Vet. Behav. 2017 , 19 , 64–68. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Carpenter, A.F.; Song, W. Changing attitudes about the weak: Social and legal conditions for animal protection in China. Crit. Asian Stud. 2016 , 48 , 380–399. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fuseini, A.; Knowles, T.; Hadley, P.; Wotton, S. Food and companion animal welfare: The Islamic perspective. CAB Rev. 2017 , 12 , 1–6. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Villafañe-Ferrer, L.M.; Gómez-Camargo, D.E.; Gómez-Arias, R.D. Normativas para la protección de mascotas: Situación de Colombia, Chile, Uruguay y México. Rev. MVZ Córdoba 2020 , 25 , e1609. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Otto, S.K. State animal protection laws—The next generation. Anim. Law 2005 , 11 , 131–166. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ibrahim, D.M. The anticruelty Statute: A study in animal welfare. arizona legal studies discussion Paper. J. Anim. Law Ethics 2006 , 1 , 175. [ Google Scholar ]
• Benetato, M.A.; Reisman, R.; McCobb, E. The veterinarian’s role in animal cruelty cases. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 2011 , 238 , 31–34. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Scheffer, G.K. Animal abuse: A close relationship with domestic violence. Derecho Anim. Forum Anim. Law Stud. 2019 , 10 , 56. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Morton, R.; Hebart, M.; Whittaker, A. Increasing maximum penalties for animal welfare offences in south australia—Has it caused penal change? Animals 2018 , 8 , 236. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Gilbreath, T. Where’s Fido: Pets are missing in domestic violence shelters and stalking laws. J. Anim. Law 2008 , 4 , 1–18. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cleary, M.; Thapa, D.K.; West, S.; Westman, M.; Kornhaber, R. Animal abuse in the context of adult intimate partner violence: A systematic review. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2021 , 61 , 101676. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Monsalve, S.; Hammerschmidt, J.; Izar, M.L.; Marconcin, S.; Rizzato, F.; Polo, G.; Garcia, R. Associated factors of companion animal neglect in the family environment in Pinhais, Brazil. Prev. Vet. Med. 2018 , 157 , 19–25. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Valiyamattam, G.J.; Kritchevsky, J.; Beck, A.M. Demographics and outcome of dogs and cats enrolled in the PetSafe program at the Purdue University College of Veterinary Medicine: 2004–2019. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 2021 , 260 , 228–233. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Saliba, O.; Garbin, C.A.; Garbin, A.J.; Dossi, A. Responsibility of health professionals on reporting cases of domestic violence. Rev. Saude Publica 2007 , 41 , 472–477. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Gomes, L.; Pinto, T.C.; Costa, E.M.M.; Ferreira, J.M.; Cavalcanti, S.D.L.; Granville-Garcia, A. Perception of dental students about maltreatment in childhood. Odoltol. Clin. Cient. 2011 , 10 , 73–78. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cavalcanti, A.L. Lesões no complexo maxilofacial em vítimas de violência no ambiente escolar. Cien. Saude Colet. 2009 , 14 , 1835–1842. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Garbin, C.A.S.; Garbin, A.J.I.; Dossi, A.P.; Dossi, M.O. Violência doméstica: Análise das lesões em mulheres. Cad. Saude Publica 2006 , 22 , 2567–2573. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Ferraz e Silva, F.; Pereira Franco de Sá, R.M.; Paranhos, L.R. Domestic violence and the role of the dentist from the public health perspective: A review of scientific literature. Acta Bioeth. 2014 , 20 , 125–133. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Moreira, S.d.N.T.; Galvão, L.L.L.F.; Melo, C.O.M.; de Azevedo, G.D. Violência física contra a mulher na perspectiva de profissionais de saúde. Rev. Saude Publica 2008 , 42 , 1053–1059. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Komorosky, D.; O’Neal, K.K. The development of empathy and prosocial behavior through humane education, restorative justice, and animal-assisted programs. Contemp. Justice Rev. 2015 , 18 , 395–406. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jalongo, M.R. Humane education and the development of empathy in early childhood: Definitions, rationale, and outcomes. In Teaching Compassion: Humane Education in Early Childhood ; Jalongo, M.R., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 3–21. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fung, S.C.; Zhou, S. An investigation of pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward animals and empathy toward humans: Implications for humane education development. Anthrozoos 2020 , 33 , 415–426. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Craig, E.A.; Nieforth, L.; Rosenfeld, C. Communicating resilience among adolescents with Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) through Equine Assisted Psychotherapy (EAP). West. J. Commun. 2020 , 84 , 400–418. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pinillos, R.G. One Welfare. A Framework to Improve Animal Welfare and Human Well-Being ; CAB International: Oxfordshire, UK, 2018; pp. 16–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith, H.P.; Smith, H. A qualitative assessment of a dog program for youth offenders in an adult prison. Public Health Nurs. 2019 , 36 , 507–513. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Humby, L.; Barclay, E. Pawsitive solutions: An overview of prison dog programs in Australia. Prison J. 2018 , 98 , 580–603. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Collica-Cox, K.; Furst, G. Implementing successful jail-based programming for women: A case study of planning Parenting, Prison & Pups—Waiting to “let the dogs in”. J. Prison Educ. Reentry 2019 , 5 , 101–119. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barr, J.; Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. Adolescent empathy and prosocial behavior in the multidimensional context of school culture. J. Genet. Psychol. 2007 , 168 , 231–250. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mota-Rojas, D.; Ceballos, M.; Orihuela, A.; Corredor, M.; Pérez, E.; Ramírez, R.; Al, E. Painful practices in farm animals. In Bienestar Animal: Una Visión Global en Iberoamérica ; Mota-Rojas, D., Velarde, A., Maris-Huertas, S., Cajiao, P., Eds.; Elsevier: Barcelona, Spain, 2016; pp. 137–154. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mota-Rojas, D.; Orihuela, A.; Strappini-Asteggiano, A.; Cajiao-Pachón, M.N.; Agüera-Buendía, E.; Mora-Medina, P.; Ghezzi, M.; Alonso-Spilsbury, M. Teaching animal welfare in veterinary schools in Latin America. Int. J. Vet. Sci. Med. 2018 , 6 , 131–140. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tarazona, A.M.; Ceballos, M.C.; Broom, D.M. Human relationships with domestic and other animals: One health, one welfare, one biology. Animals 2020 , 10 , 43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Mota-Rojas, D.; Velarde, A.; Maris-Huertas, S.; Cajiao, M.N. Animal Welfare, a Global Vision in Ibero-America , 3rd ed.; Elsevier: Barcelona, Spain, 2016; pp. 1–516. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mota-Rojas, D.; Broom, D.M.; Orihuela, A.; Velarde, A.; Napolitano, F.; Alonso-Spilsbury, M. Effects of human-animal relationship on animal productivity and welfare. J. Anim. Behav. Biometeorol. 2020 , 8 , 196–205. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mota-Rojas, D.; Mariti, C.; Zdeinert, A.; Riggio, G.; Mora-Medina, P.; del Mar Reyes, A.; Gazzano, A.; Domínguez-Oliva, A.; Lezama-García, K.; José-Pérez, N.; et al. Anthropomorphism and its adverse effects on the distress and welfare of companion animals. Animals 2021 , 11 , 3263. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Mota-Rojas, D.; Napolitano, F.; Strappini, A.; Orihuela, A.; Martínez-Burnes, J.; Hernández-Ávalos, I.; Mora-Medina, P.; Velarde, A. Quality of Death in Fighting Bulls during Bullfights: Neurobiology and Physiological Responses. Animals 2021 , 11 , 2820. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Mota-Rojas, D.; Calderón-Maldonado, N.; Lezama-García, K.; Sepiurka, L.; Garcia, R.C.M. Abandonment of dogs in Latin America: Strategies and ideas. Vet. World 2021 , 14 , 2371–2379. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Mota-Rojas, D.; Monsalve, S.; Lezama-García, K.; Mora-Medina, P.; Domínguez-Oliva, A.; Ramírez-Necoechea, R.; Garcia, R.d.C.M. Animal Abuse as an Indicator of Domestic Violence: One Health, One Welfare Approach. Animals 2022 , 12 , 977. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12080977

Mota-Rojas D, Monsalve S, Lezama-García K, Mora-Medina P, Domínguez-Oliva A, Ramírez-Necoechea R, Garcia RdCM. Animal Abuse as an Indicator of Domestic Violence: One Health, One Welfare Approach. Animals . 2022; 12(8):977. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12080977

Mota-Rojas, Daniel, Stefany Monsalve, Karina Lezama-García, Patricia Mora-Medina, Adriana Domínguez-Oliva, Ramiro Ramírez-Necoechea, and Rita de Cassia Maria Garcia. 2022. "Animal Abuse as an Indicator of Domestic Violence: One Health, One Welfare Approach" Animals 12, no. 8: 977. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12080977

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Definitions and Core Concepts: Animal Maltreatment and the Human-Animal Connection

• First Online: 20 July 2022

Cite this chapter

• Lynett Henderson Metzger 4 ,
• Laura Meyer 4 &
• Lavita Nadkarni 4  

120 Accesses

The introduction to the brief highlights the increasing importance and timeliness of understanding animal maltreatment and the human-animal connection, including core definitions and concepts, as well as themes to be explored throughout the brief.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Addington, L. A., & Randour, M. L. (2012). Animal cruelty crime statistics: Findings from a survey of state Uniform Crime Reporting programs. Washington, DC: Animal Welfare Institute.

Google Scholar  

Ascione, F. R., & Shapiro, K. (2009). People and animals, kindness and cruelty: Research directions and policy implications. Journal of Social Issues, 65 (3), 569–587. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01614.x

Article   Google Scholar  

Balkin, D. (2019, May 3). “The Link” Between Violence Against Animals and Humans 2019. [Webinar]. Available at: Aldf.org/webinars

Collins, E. A., Cody, M. A., McDonald, S. E., Nicotera, N., Ascione, F. R., & Williams, J. H. (2018). A template of intimate partner violence survivors’ experiences of animal maltreatment: Implications for safety planning and intervention. Violence Against Women , 24 (4), 452-476.

Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI]. (2016). Tracking animal cruelty. Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/-tracking-animal-cruelty

Gregorino, T. (2017). The case for including animals in counselors’ duty to report. Counseling Today. Retrieved from https://ct.counseling.org/2017/04/the-case-for-including-animals-in-counselors-duty-to-report/

Henderson Metzger, L. (2020). The case for specialized FAME training: Trends in law and data. Paper presented at the American Psychology-Law Society Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA.

Institute for Human-Animal Connection [IHAC]. (2022). About the Institute for Human-Animal Connection. University of Denver’s Graduate School of Social Work . https://socialwork.du.edu/humananimalconnection/about-institute-human-animal-connection

Itkowitz, C. (2016, January 6). A big win for animals: The FBI now tracks animal abuse like it tracks homicides. The Washington Post . Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2016/01/06/a-big-win-for-animals-the-fbi-now-tracks-animal-abuse-like-it-tracks-homicides/

Marceau, J. (2019). Beyond cages: Animal law and criminal punishment . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Meyer, L., Nadkarni, L., & Henderson Metzger, L. (2018). Broken bonds: Animal abuse legislation, clinician training, and the treatment of offenders. Symposium presented at 2018 American Psychological Association Annual Convention, San Francisco, CA.

Randour, M. L. (2011). What every clinician should know about the link between pet abuse and family violence. American Psychological Association Education Directorate, Office of Continuing Education in Psychology . Retrieved from https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.494.8218&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Robbins, J. (2006). Recognizing the relationship between domestic violence and animal abuse: Recommendations for change to the Texas legislature. Texas Journal of Women and the Law , 16 , 129.

Shapiro, K. (2020). Human-Animal Studies: Remembering the past, celebrating the present, troubling the future. Society & Animals , 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-bja10029

Uniform Crime Reporting [UCR] Program. (2017a). New to NIBRS . U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division National Incident-Based Reporting System. Available from: https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/2016/resource-pages/nibrs-2016-homepage_alt.pdf

Uniform Crime Reporting [UCR] Program. (2017b). NIBRS, 2016 . U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division National Incident-Based Reporting System. Available from: https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/2016/

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Graduate School of Professional Psychology, University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA

Lynett Henderson Metzger, Laura Meyer & Lavita Nadkarni

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Henderson Metzger, L., Meyer, L., Nadkarni, L. (2022). Definitions and Core Concepts: Animal Maltreatment and the Human-Animal Connection. In: Animal Maltreatment Evaluation Basics for Mental Health Practitioners, Students, and Educators. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04984-2_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04984-2_1

Published : 20 July 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-04983-5

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-04984-2

eBook Packages : Law and Criminology Law and Criminology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Home — Essay Samples — Law, Crime & Punishment — Crime — Animal Cruelty

Essays on Animal Cruelty

Animal cruelty essay topics and outline examples, essay title 1: uncovering the horrors of animal cruelty: causes, consequences, and advocacy.

Thesis Statement: This research essay investigates the underlying causes of animal cruelty, its wide-ranging consequences on both animals and society, and the role of advocacy and legislation in combatting this issue.

• Introduction
• Defining Animal Cruelty: Types and Manifestations
• Root Causes: Psychological, Cultural, and Economic Factors
• Consequences for Animals: Physical and Psychological Effects
• Consequences for Society: Links to Violence and Societal Costs
• Advocacy Efforts: Organizations, Legislation, and Public Awareness
• Conclusion: The Ongoing Struggle Against Animal Cruelty

Essay Title 2: The Role of Animal Cruelty in the Food Industry: Factory Farming, Animal Testing, and Ethical Dilemmas

Thesis Statement: This research essay explores the ethical concerns surrounding animal cruelty within the food industry, including factory farming, animal testing, and the moral dilemmas faced by consumers.

• Factory Farming: Conditions, Treatment, and Implications for Food Production
• Animal Testing: Pharmaceutical and Cosmetic Industries' Practices
• Consumer Choices: Ethical Dilemmas and Alternatives
• Regulatory Measures: Government Oversight and Public Pressure
• The Role of Activism: Raising Awareness and Promoting Ethical Consumption
• Conclusion: Balancing the Need for Progress with Ethical Considerations

Essay Title 3: Animal Cruelty in Entertainment: Exploring the Dark Side of Circuses, Zoos, and Exotic Pet Trade

Thesis Statement: This research essay delves into the ethical concerns surrounding animal cruelty in entertainment, focusing on circuses, zoos, and the exotic pet trade, and examining efforts to improve animal welfare in these industries.

• Circuses: Exploitation, Training Methods, and Public Awareness
• Zoos: Conservation vs. Captivity, Enrichment, and Advocacy
• Exotic Pet Trade: Legal and Illegal Aspects, Impact on Wildlife
• Advancements in Animal Welfare: Legislation and Changing Public Attitudes
• Case Studies: Success Stories and Ongoing Challenges
• Conclusion: The Ongoing Struggle to Improve Animal Welfare in Entertainment

Captivity's Ethical Costs: Weighing The Consequences

Animal cruelty in the united states, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

The Different Types of Animal Cruelty

Animal abuse around the world, the issue of mistreatment of animals at seaworld, animal abuse: is cruelty to animals justifiable for serving mankind, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

The Need to Prevent Animal Abuse

The problem of human cruelty to animals, animal cruelty in dog fighting across the world, animal abuse and its negative effects, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Causes and Effects of Animal Abuse: Mistreatment of Dogs

Persuasive animal rights and the importance of treating animals with respect, the need for strict legal punishment for animal abandonment, the reasons why animal testing should be stopped, the laws concerning animal abuse in the united states, why using animals for entertainment should be banned, problem of violence against animals, the link between the cruelty of animals and humans, the responsibilities of human beings to prevent cruelty to animals, using traps to hunt wolves and other animals is immoral and cruel, the forms of animal abuse in the united states, the power of change: how you can change the world, effects of separating animals during infancy from their mothers in factory farming, animal rights and welfare around the world, animal right: understanding the importance of keeping animals safe, animals should not be kept in captivity, arguments for eliminating the use of animal testing, discussion: should animals be used for scientific research, the arguments against keeping animals in captivity, reasons why animal testing should be forbidden.

Animal cruelty is the infliction by omission (neglect) or by commission by humans of suffering or harm upon any animal. More narrowly, it can be the causing of harm or suffering for specific achievement, such as killing animals for entertainment; cruelty to animals sometimes encompasses inflicting harm or suffering as an end in itself, defined as zoosadism.

Industrial animal farming, fur industry, alleged link to human violence and psychological disorders, cultural rituals, television and filmmaking, circuses, animal fighting, rattlesnake round-ups, warfare, unnecessary scientific experiments or demonstrations, no pet policies and abandonment, hunting.

One animal is abused every minute. Dogs comprise 65% of all animals suffering abuse. Over 115 million animals – mice, rats, dogs, cats, rabbits, monkeys, birds, among others – are killed in laboratory experiments worldwide for chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics testing every year. Every major circus that uses animals has been cited for violating the minimal standards of care set by the United States Animal Welfare (AWA).

Relevant topics

• School Shooting
• Serial Killer
• Domestic Violence
• Drunk Driving
• Child Abuse
• War on Drugs

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Ethics Home Page
• Business Ethics
• Campus Ethics
• Character Education
• Government Ethics
• Leadership Ethics
• Ethics Articles
• Ethics Cases
• Ethical Decision Making
• Ethics Blogs
• Center News
• E-letter/Subscribe
• Make a Gift

Featured Materials

• Ethics Home
• About the Center
• © 2014 Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Prev Med Hyg
• v.63(2 Suppl 3); 2022 Jun

Ethical considerations regarding animal experimentation

Aysha karim kiani.

1 Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad, Pakistan

2 MAGI EUREGIO, Bolzano, Italy

DEREK PHEBY

3 Society and Health, Buckinghamshire New University, High Wycombe, UK

GARY HENEHAN

4 School of Food Science and Environmental Health, Technological University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

RICHARD BROWN

5 Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

PAUL SIEVING

6 Department of Ophthalmology, Center for Ocular Regenerative Therapy, School of Medicine, University of California at Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA

PETER SYKORA

7 Department of Philosophy and Applied Philosophy, University of St. Cyril and Methodius, Trnava, Slovakia

ROBERT MARKS

8 Department of Biotechnology Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel

BENEDETTO FALSINI

9 Institute of Ophthalmology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli-IRCCS, Rome, Italy

NATALE CAPODICASA

10 MAGI BALKANS, Tirana, Albania

STANISLAV MIERTUS

11 Department of Biotechnology, University of SS. Cyril and Methodius, Trnava, Slovakia

12 International Centre for Applied Research and Sustainable Technology, Bratislava, Slovakia

LORENZO LORUSSO

13 UOC Neurology and Stroke Unit, ASST Lecco, Merate, Italy

DANIELE DONDOSSOLA

14 Center for Preclincal Research and General and Liver Transplant Surgery Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca‘ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy

15 Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy

GIANLUCA MARTINO TARTAGLIA

16 Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy

17 UOC Maxillo-Facial Surgery and Dentistry, Fondazione IRCCS Ca Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy

MAHMUT CERKEZ ERGOREN

18 Department of Medical Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, Near East University, Nicosia, Cyprus

MUNIS DUNDAR

19 Department of Medical Genetics, Erciyes University Medical Faculty, Kayseri, Turkey

SANDRO MICHELINI

20 Vascular Diagnostics and Rehabilitation Service, Marino Hospital, ASL Roma 6, Marino, Italy

DANIELE MALACARNE

21 MAGI’S LAB, Rovereto (TN), Italy

GABRIELE BONETTI

Astrit dautaj, kevin donato, maria chiara medori, tommaso beccari.

22 Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

MICHELE SAMAJA

23 MAGI GROUP, San Felice del Benaco (BS), Italy

STEPHEN THADDEUS CONNELLY

24 San Francisco Veterans Affairs Health Care System, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA

DONALD MARTIN

25 Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, TIMC-IMAG, SyNaBi, Grenoble, France

ASSUNTA MORRESI

26 Department of Chemistry, Biology and Biotechnology, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

ARIOLA BACU

27 Department of Biotechnology, University of Tirana, Tirana, Albania

KAREN L. HERBST

28 Total Lipedema Care, Beverly Hills California and Tucson Arizona, USA

MYKHAYLO KAPUSTIN

29 Federation of the Jewish Communities of Slovakia

LIBORIO STUPPIA

30 Department of Psychological, Health and Territorial Sciences, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, University "G. d'Annunzio", Chieti, Italy

LUDOVICA LUMER

31 Department of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, UK

GIAMPIETRO FARRONATO

Matteo bertelli.

32 MAGISNAT, Peachtree Corners (GA), USA

Animal experimentation is widely used around the world for the identification of the root causes of various diseases in humans and animals and for exploring treatment options. Among the several animal species, rats, mice and purpose-bred birds comprise almost 90% of the animals that are used for research purpose. However, growing awareness of the sentience of animals and their experience of pain and suffering has led to strong opposition to animal research among many scientists and the general public. In addition, the usefulness of extrapolating animal data to humans has been questioned. This has led to Ethical Committees’ adoption of the ‘four Rs’ principles (Reduction, Refinement, Replacement and Responsibility) as a guide when making decisions regarding animal experimentation. Some of the essential considerations for humane animal experimentation are presented in this review along with the requirement for investigator training. Due to the ethical issues surrounding the use of animals in experimentation, their use is declining in those research areas where alternative in vitro or in silico methods are available. However, so far it has not been possible to dispense with experimental animals completely and further research is needed to provide a road map to robust alternatives before their use can be fully discontinued.

How to cite this article: Kiani AK, Pheby D, Henehan G, Brown R, Sieving P, Sykora P, Marks R, Falsini B, Capodicasa N, Miertus S, Lorusso L, Dondossola D, Tartaglia GM, Ergoren MC, Dundar M, Michelini S, Malacarne D, Bonetti G, Dautaj A, Donato K, Medori MC, Beccari T, Samaja M, Connelly ST, Martin D, Morresi A, Bacu A, Herbst KL, Kapustin M, Stuppia L, Lumer L, Farronato G, Bertelli M. Ethical considerations regarding animal experimentation. J Prev Med Hyg 2022;63(suppl.3):E255-E266. https://doi.org/10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2022.63.2S3.2768

Introduction

Animal model-based research has been performed for a very long time. Ever since the 5 th century B.C., reports of experiments involving animals have been documented, but an increase in the frequency of their utilization has been observed since the 19 th century [ 1 ]. Most institutions for medical research around the world use non-human animals as experimental subjects [ 2 ]. Such animals might be used for research experimentations to gain a better understanding of human diseases or for exploring potential treatment options [ 2 ]. Even those animals that are evolutionarily quite distant from humans, such as Drosophila melanogaster , Zebrafish ( Danio rerio ) and Caenorhabditis elegans , share physiological and genetic similarities with human beings [ 2 ]; therefore animal experimentation can be of great help for the advancement of medical science [ 2 ].

For animal experimentation, the major assumption is that the animal research will be of benefit to humans. There are many reasons that highlight the significance of animal use in biomedical research. One of the major reasons is that animals and humans share the same biological processes. In addition, vertebrates have many anatomical similarities (all vertebrates have lungs, a heart, kidneys, liver and other organs) [ 3 ]. Therefore, these similarities make certain animals more suitable for experiments and for providing basic training to young researchers and students in different fields of biological and biomedical sciences [ 3 ]. Certain animals are susceptible to various health problems that are similar to human diseases such as diabetes, cancer and heart disease [ 4 ]. Furthermore, there are genetically modified animals that are used to obtain pathological phenotypes [ 5 ]. A significant benefit of animal experimentation is that test species can be chosen that have a much shorter life cycle than humans. Therefore, animal models can be studied throughout their life span and for several successive generations, an essential element for the understanding of disease progression along with its interaction with the whole organism throughout its lifetime [ 6 ].

Animal models often play a critical role in helping researchers who are exploring the efficacy and safety of potential medical treatments and drugs. They help to identify any dangerous or undesired side effects, such as birth defects, infertility, toxicity, liver damage or any potential carcinogenic effects [ 7 ]. Currently, U.S. Federal law, for example, requires that non-human animal research is used to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of any new treatment options before proceeding to trials on humans [ 8 ]. Of course, it is not only humans benefit from this research and testing, since many of the drugs and treatments that are developed for humans are routinely used in veterinary clinics, which help animals live longer and healthier lives [ 4 ].

COVID-19 AND THE NEED FOR ANIMAL MODELS

When COVID-19 struck, there was a desperate need for research on the disease, its effects on the brain and body and on the development of new treatments for patients with the disease. Early in the disease it was noticed that those with the disease suffered a loss of smell and taste, as well as neurological and psychiatric symptoms, some of which lasted long after the patients had “survived” the disease [ 9-15 ]. As soon as the pandemic started, there was a search for appropriate animal models in which to study this unknown disease [ 16 , 17 ]. While genetically modified mice and rats are the basic animal models for neurological and immunological research [ 18 , 19 ] the need to understand COVID-19 led to a range of animal models; from fruit flies [ 20 ] and Zebrafish [ 21 ] to large mammals [ 22 , 23 ] and primates [ 24 , 25 ]. And it was just not one animal model that was needed, but many, because different aspects of the disease are best studied in different animal models [ 16 , 25 , 26 ]. There is also a need to study the transmission pathways of the zoonosis: where does it come from, what are the animal hosts and how is it transferred to humans [ 27 ]?

There has been a need for animal models for understanding the pathophysiology of COVID-19 [ 28 ], for studying the mechanisms of transmission of the disease [ 16 ], for studying its neurobiology [ 29 , 30 ] and for developing new vaccines [ 31 ]. The sudden onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the fact that animal research is necessary, and that the curtailment of such research has serious consequences for the health of both humans and animals, both wild and domestic [ 32 ] As highlighted by Adhikary et al. [ 22 ] and Genzel et al. [ 33 ] the coronavirus has made clear the necessity for animal research and the danger in surviving future such pandemics if animal research is not fully supported. Genzel et al. [ 33 ], in particular, take issue with the proposal for a European ban on animal testing. Finally, there is a danger in bypassing animal research in developing new vaccines for diseases such as COVID-19 [ 34 ]. The purpose of this paper is to show that, while animal research is necessary for the health of both humans and animals, there is a need to carry out such experimentation in a controlled and humane manner. The use of alternatives to animal research such as cultured human cells and computer modeling may be a useful adjunct to animal studies but will require that such methods are more readily accessible to researchers and are not a replacement for animal experimentation.

Pros and cons of animal experimentation

Arguments against animal experimentation.

A fundamental question surrounding this debate is to ask whether it is appropriate to use animals for medical research. Is our acceptance that animals have a morally lower value or standard of life just a case of speciesism [ 35 ]? Nowadays, most people agree that animals have a moral status and that needlessly hurting or abusing pets or other animals is unacceptable. This represents something of a change from the historical point of view where animals did not have any moral status and the treatment of animals was mostly subservient to maintaining the health and dignity of humans [ 36 ].

Animal rights advocates strongly argue that the moral status of non-human animals is similar to that of humans, and that animals are entitled to equality of treatment. In this view, animals should be treated with the same level of respect as humans, and no one should have the right to force them into any service or to kill them or use them for their own goals. One aspect of this argument claims that moral status depends upon the capacity to suffer or enjoy life [ 37 ].

In terms of suffering and the capacity of enjoying life, many animals are not very different from human beings, as they can feel pain and experience pleasure [ 38 ]. Hence, they should be given the same moral status as humans and deserve equivalent treatment. Supporters of this argument point out that according animals a lower moral status than humans is a type of prejudice known as “speciesism” [ 38 ]. Among humans, it is widely accepted that being a part of a specific race or of a specific gender does not provide the right to ascribe a lower moral status to the outsiders. Many advocates of animal rights deploy the same argument, that being human does not give us sufficient grounds declare animals as being morally less significant [ 36 ].

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION

Those who support animal experimentation have frequently made the argument that animals cannot be elevated to be seen as morally equal to humans [ 39 ]. Their main argument is that the use of the terms “moral status” or “morality” is debatable. They emphasize that we must not make the error of defining a quality or capacity associated with an animal by using the same adjectives used for humans [ 39 ]. Since, for the most part, animals do not possess humans’ cognitive capabilities and lack full autonomy (animals do not appear to rationally pursue specific goals in life), it is argued that therefore, they cannot be included in the moral community [ 39 ]. It follows from this line of argument that, if animals do not possess the same rights as human beings, their use in research experimentation can be considered appropriate [ 40 ]. The European and the American legislation support this kind of approach as much as their welfare is respected.

Another aspect of this argument is that the benefits to human beings of animal experimentation compensate for the harm caused to animals by these experiments.

In other words, animal harm is morally insignificant compared to the potential benefits to humans. Essentially, supporters of animal experimentation claim that human beings have a higher moral status than animals and that animals lack certain fundamental rights accorded to humans. The potential violations of animal rights during animal research are, in this way, justified by the greater benefits to mankind [ 40 , 41 ]. A way to evaluate when the experiments are morally justified was published in 1986 by Bateson, which developed the Bateson’s Cube [ 42 ]. The Cube has three axes: suffering, certainty of benefit and quality of research. If the research is high-quality, beneficial, and not inflicting suffering, it will be acceptable. At the contrary, painful, low-quality research with lower likelihood of success will not be acceptable [ 42 , 43 ].

Impact of experimentations on animals

Ability to feel pain and distress.

Like humans, animal have certain physical as well as psychological characteristics that make their use for experimentation controversial [ 44 ].

In the last few decades, many studies have increased knowledge of animal awareness and sentience: they indicate that animals have greater potential to experience damage than previously appreciated and that current rights and protections need to be reconsidered [ 45 ]. In recent times, scientists as well as ethicists have broadly acknowledged that animals can also experience distress and pain [ 46 ]. Potential sources of such harm arising from their use in research include disease, basic physiological needs deprivation and invasive procedures [ 46 ]. Moreover, social deprivation and lack of the ability to carry out their natural behaviors are other causes of animal harm [ 46 ]. Several studies have shown that, even in response to very gentle handling and management, animals can show marked alterations in their physiological and hormonal stress markers [ 47 ].

In spite of the fact that suffering and pain are personalized experiences, several multi-disciplinary studies have provided clear evidence of animals experiencing pain and distress. In particular, some animal species have the ability to express pain similarly to human due to common psychological, neuroanatomical and genetic characteristics [ 48 ]. Similarly, animals share a resemblance to humans in their developmental, genetic and environmental risk factors for psychopathology. For instance, in many species, it has been shown that fear operates within a less organized subcortical neural circuit than pain [ 49 , 50 ]. Various types of depression and anxiety disorders like posttraumatic stress disorder have also been reported in mammals [ 51 ].

PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPABILITIES OF ANIMALS

Some researchers have suggested that besides their ability to experience physical and psychological pain and distress, some animals also exhibit empathy, self-awareness and language-like capabilities. They also demonstrate tools-linked cognizance, pleasure-seeking and advanced problem-solving skills [ 52 ]. Moreover, mammals and birds exhibit playful behavior, an indicator of the capacity to experience pleasure. Other taxa such as reptiles, cephalopods and fishes have also been observed to display playful behavior, therefore the current legislation prescribes the use of environmental enrichers [ 53 ]. The presence of self-awareness ability, as assessed by mirror self-recognition, has been reported in magpies, chimpanzees and other apes, and certain cetaceans [ 54 ]. Recently, another study has revealed that crows have the ability to create and use tools that involve episodic-like memory formation and its retrieval. From these findings, it may be suggested that crows as well as related species show evidence of flexible learning strategies, causal reasoning, prospection and imagination that are similar to behavior observed in great apes [ 55 ]. In the context of resolving the ethical dilemmas about animal experimentation, these observations serve to highlight the challenges involved [ 56 , 57 ].

Ethics, principles and legislation in animal experimentation

Ethics in animal experimentation.

Legislation around animal research is based on the idea of the moral acceptability of the proposed experiments under specific conditions [ 58 ]. The significance of research ethics that ensures proper treatment of experimental animals [ 58 ]. To avoid undue suffering of animals, it is important to follow ethical considerations during animal studies [ 1 ]. It is important to provide best human care to these animals from the ethical and scientific point of view [ 1 ]. Poor animal care can lead to experimental outcomes [ 1 ]. Thus, if experimental animals mistreated, the scientific knowledge and conclusions obtained from experiments may be compromised and may be difficult to replicate, a hallmark of scientific research [ 1 ]. At present, most ethical guidelines work on the assumption that animal experimentation is justified because of the significant potential benefits to human beings. These guidelines are often permissive of animal experimentation regardless of the damage to the animal as long as human benefits are achieved [ 59 ].

PRINCIPLE OF THE 4 RS

Although animal experimentation has resulted in many discoveries and helped in the understanding numerous aspects of biological science, its use in various sectors is strictly controlled. In practice, the proposed set of animal experiments is usually considered by a multidisciplinary Ethics Committee before work can commence [ 60 ]. This committee will review the research protocol and make a judgment as to its sustainability. National and international laws govern the utilization of animal experimentation during research and these laws are mostly based on the universal doctrine presented by Russell and Burch (1959) known as principle of the 3 Rs. The 3Rs referred to are Reduction, Refinement and Replacement, and are applied to protocols surrounding the use of animals in research. Some researchers have proposed another “R”, of responsibility for the experimental animal as well as for the social and scientific status of the animal experiments [ 61 ]. Thus, animal ethics committees commonly review research projects with reference to the 4 Rs principles [ 62 ].

The first “R”, Reduction means that the experimental design is examined to ensure that researchers have reduced the number of experimental animals in a research project to the minimum required for reliable data [ 59 ]. Methods used for this purpose include improved experimental design, extensive literature search to avoid duplication of experiments [ 35 ], use of advanced imaging techniques, sharing resources and data, and appropriate statistical data analysis that reduce the number of animals needed for statistically significant results [ 2 , 63 ].

The second “R”, Refinement involves improvements in procedure that minimize the harmful effects of the proposed experiments on the animals involved, such as reducing pain, distress and suffering in a manner that leads to a general improvement in animal welfare. This might include for example improved living conditions for research animals, proper training of people handling animals, application of anesthesia and analgesia when required and the need for euthanasia of the animals at the end of the experiment to curtail their suffering [ 63 ].

The third “R”, Replacement refers to approaches that replace or avoid the use of experimental animals altogether. These approaches involve use of in silico methods/computerized techniques/software and in vitro methods like cell and tissue culture testing, as well as relative replacement methods by use of invertebrates like nematode worms, fruit flies and microorganisms in place of vertebrates and higher animals [ 1 ]. Examples of proper application of these first “3R2 principles are the use of alternative sources of blood, the exploitation of commercially used animals for scientific research, a proper training without use of animals and the use of specimen from previous experiments for further researches [ 64-67 ].

The fourth “R”, Responsibility refers to concerns around promoting animal welfare by improvements in experimental animals’ social life, development of advanced scientific methods for objectively determining sentience, consciousness, experience of pain and intelligence in the animal kingdom, as well as effective involvement in the professionalization of the public discussion on animal ethics [ 68 ].

OTHER ASPECTS OF ANIMAL RESEARCH ETHICS

Other research ethics considerations include having a clear rationale and reasoning for the use of animals in a research project. Researchers must have reasonable expectation of generating useful data from the proposed experiment. Moreover, the research study should be designed in such a way that it should involve the lowest possible sample size of experimental animals while producing statistically significant results [ 35 ].

All individual researchers that handle experimental animals should be properly trained for handling the particular species involved in the research study. The animal’s pain, suffering and discomfort should be minimized [ 69 ]. Animals should be given proper anesthesia when required and surgical procedures should not be repeated on same animal whenever possible [ 69 ]. The procedure of humane handling and care of experimental animals should be explicitly detailed in the research study protocol. Moreover, whenever required, aseptic techniques should be properly followed [ 70 ]. During the research, anesthetization and surgical procedures on experimental animals should only be performed by professionally skilled individuals [ 69 ].

The Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines that are issued by the National Center for the Replacement, Refinement, and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) are designed to improve the documentation surrounding research involving experimental animals [ 70 ]. The checklist provided includes the information required in the various sections of the manuscript i.e. study design, ethical statements, experimental procedures, experimental animals and their housing and husbandry, and more [ 70 ].

It is critical to follow the highest ethical standards while performing animal experiments. Indeed, most of the journals refuse to publish any research data that lack proper ethical considerations [ 35 ].

INVESTIGATORS’ ETHICS

Since animals have sensitivity level similar to the human beings in terms of pain, anguish, survival instinct and memory, it is the responsibility of the investigator to closely monitor the animals that are used and identify any sign of distress [ 71 ]. No justification can rationalize the absence of anesthesia or analgesia in animals that undergo invasive surgery during the research [ 72 ]. Investigators are also responsible for giving high-quality care to the experimental animals, including the supply of a nutritious diet, easy water access, prevention of and relief from any pain, disease and injury, and appropriate housing facilities for the animal species [ 73 ]. A research experiment is not permitted if the damage caused to the animal exceeds the value of knowledge gained by that experiment. No scientific advancement based on the destruction and sufferings of another living being could be justified. Besides ensuring the welfare of animals involved, investigators must also follow the applicable legislation [ 74 , 75 ].

To promote the comfort of experimental animals in England, an animal protection society named: ‘The Society for the Preservation of Cruelty to Animals’ (now the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) was established (1824) that aims to prevent cruelty to animal [ 76 ].

ANIMAL WELFARE LAWS

Legislation for animal protection during research has long been established. In 1876 the British Parliament sanctioned the ‘Cruelty to Animals Act’ for animal protection. Russell and Burch (1959) presented the ‘3 Rs’ principles: Replacement, Reduction and Refinement, for use of animals during research [ 61 ]. Almost seven years later, the U.S.A also adopted regulations for the protection of experimental animals by enacting the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 [ 60 ]. In Brazil, the Arouca Law (Law No. 11,794/08) regulates the animal use in scientific research experiments [ 76 ].

These laws define the breeding conditions, and regulate the use of animals for scientific research and teaching purposes. Such legal provisions control the use of anesthesia, analgesia or sedation in experiments that could cause distress or pain to experimental animals [ 59 , 76 ]. These laws also stress the need for euthanasia when an experiment is finished, or even during the experiment if there is any intense suffering for the experimental animal [ 76 ].

Several national and international organizations have been established to develop alternative techniques so that animal experimentation can be avoided, such as the UK-based National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) ( www.caat.jhsph.edu ), the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) [ 77 ], the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW) ( www.ufaw.org.uk ), The Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) [ 78 ], and The Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT) ( www.caat.jhsph.edu ). The Brazilian ‘Arouca Law’ also constitutes a milestone, as it has created the ‘National Council for the Control of Animal Experimentation’ (CONCEA) that deals with the legal and ethical issues related to the use of experimental animals during scientific research [ 76 ].

Although national as well as international laws and guidelines have provided basic protections for experimental animals, the current regulations have some significant discrepancies. In the U.S., the Animal Welfare Act excludes rats, mice and purpose-bred birds, even though these species comprise almost 90% of the animals that are used for research purpose [ 79 ]. On the other hand, certain cats and dogs are getting special attention along with extra protection. While the U.S. Animal Welfare Act ignores birds, mice and rats, the U.S. guidelines that control research performed using federal funding ensure protections for all vertebrates [ 79 , 80 ].

Living conditions of animals

Choice of the animal model.

Based on all the above laws and regulations and in line with the deliberations of ethical committees, every researcher must follow certain rules when dealing with animal models.

Before starting any experimental work, thorough research should be carried out during the study design phase so that the unnecessary use of experimental animals is avoided. Nevertheless, certain research studies may have compelling reasons for the use of animal models, such as the investigation of human diseases and toxicity tests. Moreover, animals are also widely used in the training of health professionals as well as in training doctors in surgical skills [ 1 , 81 ].

Researcher should be well aware of the specific traits of the animal species they intend to use in the experiment, such as its developmental stages, physiology, nutritional needs, reproductive characteristics and specific behaviors. Animal models should be selected on the basis of the study design and the biological relevance of the animal [ 1 ].

Typically, in early research, non-mammalian models are used to get rapid insights into research problems such as the identification of gene function or the recognition of novel therapeutic options. Thus, in biomedical and biological research, among the most commonly used model organisms are the Zebrafish, the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster and the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans . The main advantage of these non-mammalian animal models is their prolific reproducibility along with their much shorter generation time. They can be easily grown in any laboratory setting, are less expensive than the murine animal models and are somewhat more powerful than the tissue and cell culture approaches [ 82 ].

Caenorhabditis elegans is a small-sized nematode with a short life cycle and that exists in large populations and is relatively inexpensive to cultivate. Scientists have gathered extensive knowledge of the genomics and genetics of Caenorhabditis elegans ; but Caenorhabditis elegans models, while very useful in some respects, are unable to represent all signaling pathways found in humans. Furthermore, due to its short life cycle, scientists are unable to investigate long term effects of test compounds or to analyze primary versus secondary effects [ 6 ].

Similarly, the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster has played a key role in numerous biomedical discoveries. It is small in size, has a short life cycle and large population size, is relatively inexpensive to breed, and extensive genomics and genetics information is available [ 6 ]. However, its respiratory, cardiovascular and nervous systems differ considerably from human beings. In addition, its immune system is less developed when compared to vertebrates, which is why effectiveness of a drug in Drosophila melanogaster may not be easily extrapolated to humans [ 83 ].

The Zebrafish ( Danio rerio ) is a small freshwater teleost, with transparent embryos, providing easy access for the observation of organogenesis and its manipulation. Therefore, Zebrafish embryos are considered good animal models for different human diseases like tuberculosis and fetal alcohol syndrome and are useful as neurodevelopmental research models. However, Zebrafish has very few mutant strains available, and its genome has numerous duplicate genes making it impossible to create knockout strains, since disrupting one copy of the gene will not disrupt the second copy of that gene. This feature limits the use of Zebrafish as animal models to study human diseases. Additionally they are rather expensive, have long life cycle, and genomics and genetics studies are still in progress [ 82 , 84 ].

Thus, experimentation on these three animals might not be equivalent to experimentation on mammals. Mammalian animal model are most similar to human beings, so targeted gene replacement is possible. Traditionally, mammals like monkey and mice have been the preferred animal models for biomedical research because of their evolutionary closeness to humans. Rodents, particularly mice and rats, are the most frequently used animal models for scientific research. Rats are the most suitable animal model for the study of obesity, shock, peritonitis, sepsis, cancer, intestinal operations, spleen, gastric ulcers, mononuclear phagocytic system, organ transplantations and wound healing. Mice are more suitable for studying burns, megacolon, shock, cancer, obesity, and sepsis as mentioned previously [ 85 ].

Similarly, pigs are mostly used for stomach, liver and transplantation studies, while rabbits are suitable for the study of immunology, inflammation, vascular biology, shock, colitis and transplantations. Thus, the choice of experimental animal mainly depends upon the field of scientific research under consideration [ 1 ].

HOUSING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENRICHMENT

Researchers should be aware of the environment and conditions in which laboratory animals are kept during research, and they also need to be familiar with the metabolism of the animals kept in vivarium, since their metabolism can easily be altered by different factors such as pain, stress, confinement, lack of sunlight, etc. Housing conditions alter animal behavior, and this can in turn affect experimental results. By contrast, handling procedures that feature environmental enrichment and enhancement help to decrease stress and positively affect the welfare of the animals and the reliability of research data [ 74 , 75 ].

In animals, distress- and agony-causing factors should be controlled or eliminated to overcome any interference with data collection as well as with interpretation of the results, since impaired animal welfare leads to more animal usage during experiment, decreased reliability and increased discrepancies in results along with the unnecessary consumption of animal lives [ 86 ].

To reduce the variation or discrepancies in experimental data caused by various environmental factors, experimental animals must be kept in an appropriate and safe place. In addition, it is necessary to keep all variables like humidity, airflow and temperature at levels suitable for those species, as any abrupt variation in these factors could cause stress, reduced resistance and increased susceptibility to infections [ 74 ].

The space allotted to experimental animals should permit them free movement, proper sleep and where feasible allow for interaction with other animals of the same species. Mice and rats are quite sociable animals and must, therefore, be housed in groups for the expression of their normal behavior. Usually, laboratory cages are not appropriate for the behavioral needs of the animals. Therefore, environmental enrichment is an important feature for the expression of their natural behavior that will subsequently affect their defense mechanisms and physiology [ 87 ].

The features of environmental enrichment must satisfy the animals’ sense of curiosity, offer them fun activities, and also permit them to fulfill their behavioral and physiological needs. These needs include exploring, hiding, building nests and gnawing. For this purpose, different things can be used in their environment, such as PVC tubes, cardboard, igloos, paper towel, cotton, disposable masks and paper strips [ 87 ].

The environment used for housing of animals must be continuously controlled by appropriate disinfection, hygiene protocols, sterilization and sanitation processes. These steps lead to a reduction in the occurrence of various infectious agents that often found in vivarium, such as Sendai virus, cestoda and Mycoplasma pulmonis [ 88 ].

Euthanasia is a term derived from Greek, and it means a death without any suffering. According to the Brazilian Arouca Law (Article 14, Chapter IV, Paragraphs 1 and 2), an animal should undergo euthanasia, in strict compliance with the requirements of each species, when the experiment ends or during any phase of the experiment, wherever this procedure is recommended and/or whenever serious suffering occurs. If the animal does not undergo euthanasia after the intervention it may leave the vivarium and be assigned to suitable people or to the animal protection bodies, duly legalized [ 1 ].

Euthanasia procedures must result in instant loss of consciousness which leads to respiratory or cardiac arrest as well as to complete brain function impairment. Another important aspect of this procedure is calm handling of the animal while taking it out of its enclosure, to reduce its distress, suffering, anxiety and fear. In every research project, the study design should include the details of the appropriate endpoints of these experimental animals, and also the methods that will be adopted. It is important to determine the appropriate method of euthanasia for the animal being used. Another important point is that, after completing the euthanasia procedure, the animal’s death should be absolutely confirmed before discarding their bodies [ 87 , 89 ].

Relevance of animal experimentations and possible alternatives

Relevance of animal experiments and their adverse effects on human health.

One important concern is whether human diseases, when inflicted on experimental animals, adequately mimic the progressions of the disease and the treatment responses observed in humans. Several research articles have made comparisons between human and animal data, and indicated that the results of animals’ research could not always be reliably replicated in clinical research among humans. The latest systematic reviews about the treatment of different clinical conditions including neurology, vascular diseases and others, have established that the results of animal studies cannot properly predict human outcomes [ 59 , 90 ].

At present, the reliability of animal experiments for extrapolation to human health is questionable. Harmful effects may occur in humans because of misleading results from research conducted on animals. For instance, during the late fifties, a sedative drug, thalidomide, was prescribed for pregnant women, but some of the women using that drug gave birth to babies lacking limbs or with foreshortened limbs, a condition called phocomelia. When thalidomide had been tested on almost all animal models such as rats, mice, rabbits, dogs, cats, hamsters, armadillos, ferrets, swine, guinea pig, etc., this teratogenic effect was observed only occasionally [ 91 ]. Similarly, in 2006, the compound TGN 1412 was designed as an immunomodulatory drug, but when it was injected into six human volunteer, serious adverse reactions were observed resulting from a deadly cytokine storm that in turn led to disastrous systemic organ failure. TGN 1412 had been tested successfully in rats, mice, rabbits, and non-human primates [ 92 ]. Moreover, Bailey (2008) reported 90 HIV vaccines that had successful trial results in animals but which failed in human beings [ 93 ]. Moreover, in Parkinson disease, many therapeutic options that have shown promising results in rats and non-human primate models have proved harmful in humans. Hence, to analyze the relevance of animal research to human health, the efficacy of animal experimentation should be examined systematically [ 94 , 95 ]. At the same time, the development of hyperoxaluria and renal failure (up to dialysis) after ileal-jejunal bypass was unexpected because this procedure was not preliminarily evaluated on an animal model [ 96 ].

Several factors play a role in the extrapolation of animal-derived data to humans, such as environmental conditions and physiological parameters related to stress, age of the experimental animals, etc. These factors could switch on or off genes in the animal models that are specific to species and/or strains. All these observations challenge the reliability and suitability of animal experimentation as well as its objectives with respect to human health [ 76 , 92 ].

ALTERNATIVE TO ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION/DEVELOPMENT OF NEW PRODUCTS AND TECHNIQUES TO AVOID ANIMAL SACRIFICE IN RESEARCH

Certainly, in vivo animal experimentation has significantly contributed to the development of biological and biomedical research. However it has the limitations of strict ethical issues and high production cost. Some scientists consider animal testing an ineffective and immoral practice and therefore prefer alternative techniques to be used instead of animal experimentation. These alternative methods involve in vitro experiments and ex vivo models like cell and tissue cultures, use of plants and vegetables, non-invasive human clinical studies, use of corpses for studies, use of microorganisms or other simpler organism like shrimps and water flea larvae, physicochemical techniques, educational software, computer simulations, mathematical models and nanotechnology [ 97 ]. These methods and techniques are cost-effective and could efficiently replace animal models. They could therefore, contribute to animal welfare and to the development of new therapies that can identify the therapeutics and related complications at an early stage [ 1 ].

The National Research Council (UK) suggested a shift from the animal models toward computational models, as well as high-content and high-throughput in vitro methods. Their reports highlighted that these alternative methods could produce predictive data more affordably, accurately and quickly than the traditional in vivo or experimental animal methods [ 98 ].

Increasingly, scientists and the review boards have to assess whether addressing a research question using the applied techniques of advanced genetics, molecular, computational and cell biology, and biochemistry could be used to replace animal experiments [ 59 ]. It must be remembered that each alternative method must be first validated and then registered in dedicated databases.

An additional relevant concern is how precisely animal data can mirror relevant epigenetic changes and human genetic variability. Langley and his colleagues have highlighted some of the examples of existing and some emerging non-animal based research methods in the advanced fields of neurology, orthodontics, infectious diseases, immunology, endocrine, pulmonology, obstetrics, metabolism and cardiology [ 99 ].

IN SILICO SIMULATIONS AND INFORMATICS

Several computer models have been built to study cardiovascular risk and atherosclerotic plaque build-up, to model human metabolism, to evaluate drug toxicity and to address other questions that were previously approached by testing in animals [ 100 ].

Computer simulations can potentially decrease the number of experiments required for a research project, however simulations cannot completely replace laboratory experiments. Unfortunately, not all the principles regulating biological systems are known, and computer simulation provide only an estimation of possible effects due to the limitations of computer models in comparison with complex human tissues. However, simulation and bio-informatics are now considered essential in all fields of science for their efficiency in using the existing knowledge for further experimental designs [ 76 ].

At present, biological macromolecules are regularly simulated at various levels of detail, to predict their response and behavior under certain physical conditions, chemical exposures and stimulations. Computational and bioinformatic simulations have significantly reduced the number of animals sacrificed during drug discovery by short listing potential candidate molecules for a drug. Likewise, computer simulations have decreased the number of animal experiments required in other areas of biological science by efficiently using the existing knowledge. Moreover, the development of high definition 3D computer models for anatomy with enhanced level of detail, it may make it possible to reduce or eliminate the need for animal dissection during teaching [ 101 , 102 ].

3D CELL-CULTURE MODELS AND ORGANS-ON-CHIPS

In the current scenario of rapid advancement in the life sciences, certain tissue models can be built using 3D cell culture technology. Indeed, there are some organs on micro-scale chip models used for mimicking the human body environment. 3D models of multiple organ systems such as heart, liver, skin, muscle, testis, brain, gut, bone marrow, lungs and kidney, in addition to individual organs, have been created in microfluidic channels, re-creating the physiological chemical and physical microenvironments of the body [ 103 ]. These emerging techniques, such as the biomedical/biological microelectromechanical system (Bio-MEMS) or lab-on-a-chip (LOC) and micro total analysis systems (lTAS) will, in the future, be a useful substitute for animal experimentation in commercial laboratories in the biotechnology, environmental safety, chemistry and pharmaceutical industries. For 3D cell culture modeling, cells are grown in 3D spheroids or aggregates with the help of a scaffold or matrix, or sometimes using a scaffold-free method. The 3D cell culture modeling conditions can be altered to add proteins and other factors that are found in a tumor microenvironment, for example, or in particular tissues. These matrices contain extracellular matrix components such as proteins, glycoconjugates and glycosaminoglycans that allow for cell communication, cell to cell contact and the activation of signaling pathways in such a way that the morphological and functional differentiation of these cells can accurately mimic their environment in vivo . This methodology, in time, will bridge the gap between in vivo and in vitro drug screening, decreasing the utilization of animal models during research [ 104 ].

ALTERNATIVES TO MICROBIAL CULTURE MEDIA AND SERUM-FREE ANIMAL CELL CULTURES

There are moves to reduce the use of animal derived products in many areas of biotechnology. Microbial culture media peptones are mostly made by the proteolysis of farmed animal meat. However, nowadays, various suppliers provide peptones extracted from yeast and plants. Although the costs of these plant-extracted peptones are the same as those of animal peptones, plant peptones are more environmentally favorable since less plant material and water are required for them to grow, compared with the food grain and fodder needed for cattle that are slaughtered for animal peptone production [ 105 ].

Human cell culture is often carried out in a medium that contains fetal calf serum, the production of which involves animal (cow) sacrifice or suffering. In fact, living pregnant cows are used and their fetuses removed to harvest the serum from the fetal blood. Fetal calf serum is used because it is a natural medium rich in all the required nutrients and significantly increases the chances of successful cell growth in culture. Scientists are striving to identify the factors and nutrients required for the growth of various types of cells, with a view to eliminating the use of calf serum. At present, most cell lines could be cultured in a chemically-synthesized medium without using animal products. Furthermore, data from chemically-synthesized media experiments may have better reproducibility than those using animal serum media, since the composition of animal serum does change from batch to batch on the basis of animals’ gender, age, health and genetic background [ 76 ].

ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL-DERIVED ANTIBODIES

Animal friendly affinity reagents may act as an alternative to antibodies produced, thereby removing the need for animal immunization. Typically, these antibodies are obtained in vitro by yeast, phage or ribosome display. In a recent review, a comparative analysis between animal friendly affinity reagents and animal derived-antibodies showed that the affinity reagents have superior quality, are relatively less time consuming, have more reproducibility and are more reliable and are cost-effective [ 106 , 107 ].

Conclusions

Animal experimentation led to great advancement in biological and biomedical sciences and contributed to the discovery of many drugs and treatment options. However, such experimentation may cause harm, pain and distress to the animals involved. Therefore, to perform animal experimentations, certain ethical rules and laws must be strictly followed and there should be proper justification for using animals in research projects. Furthermore, during animal experimentation the 4 Rs principles of reduction, refinement, replacement and responsibility must be followed by the researchers. Moreover, before beginning a research project, experiments should be thoroughly planned and well-designed, and should avoid unnecessary use of animals. The reliability and reproducibility of animal experiments should also be considered. Whenever possible, alternative methods to animal experimentation should be adopted, such as in vitro experimentation, cadaveric studies, and computer simulations.

While much progress has been made on reducing animal experimentation there is a need for greater awareness of alternatives to animal experiments among scientists and easier access to advanced modeling technologies. Greater research is needed to define a roadmap that will lead to the elimination of all unnecessary animal experimentation and provide a framework for adoption of reliable alternative methodologies in biomedical research.

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano in the framework of LP 15/2020 (dgp 3174/2021).

Conflicts of interest statement

Authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author's contributions

MB: study conception, editing and critical revision of the manuscript; AKK, DP, GH, RB, Paul S, Peter S, RM, BF, NC, SM, LL, DD, GMT, MCE, MD, SM, Daniele M, GB, AD, KD, MCM, TB, MS, STC, Donald M, AM, AB, KLH, MK, LS, LL, GF: literature search, editing and critical revision of the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Contributor Information

INTERNATIONAL BIOETHICS STUDY GROUP : Derek Pheby , Gary Henehan , Richard Brown , Paul Sieving , Peter Sykora , Robert Marks , Benedetto Falsini , Natale Capodicasa , Stanislav Miertus , Lorenzo Lorusso , Gianluca Martino Tartaglia , Mahmut Cerkez Ergoren , Munis Dundar , Sandro Michelini , Daniele Malacarne , Tommaso Beccari , Michele Samaja , Matteo Bertelli , Donald Martin , Assunta Morresi , Ariola Bacu , Karen L. Herbst , Mykhaylo Kapustin , Liborio Stuppia , Ludovica Lumer , and Giampietro Farronato

Report animal abuse and cruelty

What you can do to help stop animal abuse

Every state has laws prohibiting animal cruelty and all of them contain felony provisions. However, a law is only as good as its enforcement and that's why animals rely on you to protect them by reporting animal abuse.

Defining cruelty

Most reported animal cruelty comes in the form of neglect, with direct violence occurring less. Often times, it can be difficult to gauge whether or not you’ve witnessed animal cruelty—the following examples may help you categorize suspected cruelty you do see.

Neglect, or a failure to provide basic needs for an animal, makes up the vast majority of cruelty cases that animal control officers respond to. Neglect often includes hoarding, lack of shelter or veterinary care, tethering and abandonment, as well as other forms of abuse.

Direct abuse

It can be very upsetting to see someone beating or physically attacking an animal, but it's important not to turn away. It's crucial to involve law enforcement quickly, as violence toward animals is often part of a larger pattern of violence that can include people as well.

Reporting abuse

If you witness suspected cruelty to animals, call your local animal control agency as soon as possible or dial 9-1-1 if you’re unfamiliar with local organizations. If you make a report of alleged animal cruelty, the responding agency is required to investigate.

If your area lacks the proper animal welfare agency and your local authorities are not equipped to deal with animal cruelty cases, you can also contact us .

Be sure to document the case as well as you can with dates, times, specific details and, if possible, footage and photographs from a cell phone. All of these things can help appropriate agencies during any investigation they may do of the suspected cruelty.

Hoarding behavior often victimizes animals. Sufferers of a hoarding disorder may impose severe neglect on animals by housing far more than they are able to adequately take care of. Contact your local animal control agency if you find out about animal hoarding. Some animal hoarding situations can be more difficult than others to solve.

Lack of veterinary care

Untreated wounds are a red flag that demand immediate attention; emaciation, scabs and hair loss can also be a sign of untreated diseases. If you can, alert the owner to the animal's condition and alert local authorities of suspected neglect as soon as possible.

Inadequate shelter

In extreme heat or cold , temperatures can be deadly. It can seem daunting or unnecessary to report neglect for inadequate sheltering, but conditions can change quickly, causing suffering or even death of the animal. Contact a local animal control agency immediately if you see an animal in inadequate shelter and document the incident with a cell phone camera if possible.

Abandonment

Animals die every year when people move out of their residences and simply leave the animals behind. Sometimes an abandoned dog's barking or cat's howling can alert the neighbors, but it's wise to keep an eye on a recently vacated home, especially if the former residents moved suddenly. Companion animals kept in cages or tanks are often overlooked upon a resident's sudden passing and may suffer neglect as well. If you find or know of abandoned animals, contact your local animal control agency immediately.

Pets left in cars

Time is of the essence when reporting pets left in parked cars. Even if the outside temperature seems cool, these animals could be minutes away from death or irreversible organ damage. If you cannot locate the owner immediately, don’t be afraid to call local authorities, detailing your location and the make, model and license plate number of the vehicle the animal is inside.

Learn More About Pets in Hot Cars

Beating and physical abuse

If you witness direct physical violence to an animal, report the incident immediately to authorities. If you decide to intervene in any way, use your best judgement and do not become physically involved in the situation; remember, even well-intentioned actions could compromise the process of investigation into suspected abuse.

Animal fighting and organized cruelty

Organized cruelty, such as dogfighting and cockfighting, is illegal in all 50 states and is linked to other criminal activities such as human violence, gambling and drug distribution. If you hear about or witness events like these, immediately report them to the local authorities and the HSUS.

Learn More about Animal Fighting

These are just common examples of animal cruelty. Even if a case doesn’t fit neatly into these categories, take action if something feels off. In many cases, you may be the only chance an animal has at escaping cruelty or neglect.

We never know where disasters will strike or when animals may be in need of urgent rescue, but we know we must be ready. Your support makes this lifesaving work possible.

What role does the HSUS play in local animal abuse and neglect cases?

We're fighting to:

• Promote public education.
• Advise local agencies and provide monetary grants to assist in specific local cases.
• Direct intervention and rescue in large-scale cruelty cases.
• Conduct regular investigations into institutionalized cruelty within agribusiness.
• Lobby to strengthen animal protection laws.
• Offer rewards for information leading to an animal cruelty or animal fighting conviction.

With each case the HSUS initiates, we assist not only in the rescue, handling and rehoming of animals, but also in the subsequent prosecution of each case.

Training for law enforcement

The HSUS also provides specialized training, assistance and resources to animal welfare agencies, law enforcement and prosecutors around the country on issues involving animal cruelty and animal fighting. We provide educational materials, online courses, operations guidelines and other expertise.

We never know where disasters will strike or when animals may be in need of rescue, but we know we must be ready. Donate today to support all our lifesaving work. 

California Animal Cruelty Education Program

Course For Animal Cruelty provides access to the Animal Cruelty Education Program, an educational program that, in accordance with California Penal Code § 597.9(d)(1)(C), is often required in the state of California for individuals that are facing charges related to animal cruelty.

Our Animal Cruelty Education Program has been written to meet national standards and is recognized by courts and organizations that allow distance learning. The Course For Animal Cruelty program provides meaningful content intended to meet court, legal, or employer requirements. We also recommend the Animal Cruelty Education Program for personal growth.

Nationally Recognized

This online Animal Cruelty Prevention Class is recognized throughout the United States and satisfies court, legal, probation, parole, and employment requirements.

Easily Accessible

Our Animal Cruelty Prevention Class is 100% online and self-paced, which allows you to start and stop at any time and as often as necessary to accommodate your schedule.

The course can also be taken on any device that has access to the Internet:

• Desktop computers
• Laptop computers
• Smart phones

You can even start on one device and continue on another!

Guaranteed Acceptance

Your Animal Cruelty Prevention Class certificate comes backed by a 100% money-back guarantee.

If your certificate is not accepted for any reason, contact us and let us know. We will refund you the full price of the course.

Lowest Price Guarantee

Starting at only $25, we offer the lowest priced Animal Cruelty Prevention Class with absolutely no hidden fees; guaranteed! If you find a similar course for a lesser price, we'll beat it! Just contact us and let us know . It's that simple!

The course price includes an enrollment verification letter and your certificate of completion. We do not charge additional fees for providing these documents.

Other benefits include...

Free enrollment confirmation letter. ( View a sample )

Free certificate of completion sent via email. ( View a sample )

Instant certificate upon completion of course requirements; 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

No tests. You cannot fail the course!

Is this the class I am required to take?

The Animal Cruelty Education Program has a number of different names but they all reference the same class requirement. If you have been instructed to take any one of the following classes then our online Animal Cruelty Prevention Class may satisfy that requirement:

Is this distance learning program (online class) acceptable in my county?

In some cases the court or rules of a particular county may disallow distance learning. This means that the Animal Cruelty Education Program cannot be taken with an online provider. Below is a listing of every county in the state of California. Those displayed in red and with an are specifically known to reject certificates from distance learning providers:

What our students are saying...

Thank you, everything is finished and my case dismissed. Thank you for all your help.

The customer service I received from your organization is exemplary!!

Case dismissed. Thank you for all your help.

Awesome! Thank you so much! You guys are very ethical and a great service!

Will this certificate be accepted in - select - Alabama Alaska American Samoa Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Northern Mariana Islands Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas US Virgin Islands Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Alberta British Columbia Manitoba New Brunswick Newfoundland and Labrador Northwest Territories Nova Scotia Nunavut Ontario Prince Edward Island Quebec Saskatchewan Yukon ?

Before getting started you may be curious to check certificate acceptance information for your particular state or province. Select your home state/province from the list above to view region-specific information regarding certificate acceptance. You may also click this link if you're in the United States or click this link if you're in Canada.