Animals Other than Human Animals and Their Claim to Equal Consideration in Coronavirus and Criminological Study: Examining Harm to Domesticated Dogs during COVID-19 in the UK

Abstract

While the financial and social support afforded to United Kingdon (UK) ‘animals other than human animals’ (AOTHAs) welfare charities, such as the RSPCA and Dogs Trust, could suggest that they are valued intrinsically within Western society criminological texts largely omit them from recognition, with some important exceptions, see non-speciesist criminology. Most human animals likely do not want to directly or indirectly harm AOTHAs and even value relationships with “companion” AOTHAs. Regardless, AOTHAs have been victimized throughout history and continue to be. This article examines harm to AOTHAs in the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic to argue that abuse proliferates where harmful subjectivities are generated by society’s acceptance of (1) the anthropocentric culture, and (2) when humanity values their individual advancement within the competitive consumer culture. Companion dogs were specifically focused upon within this article due to their so called close emotional and physical proximity to human animals, with proximity meaning that they were directly impacted by the lockdown measures implemented. The coronavirus pandemic was addressed by governments throughout the world by initiating an array of social restrictions. Because of these social restrictions, millions of individuals within England, and in countries such as the United States of America (USA), decided to adopt or purchase dogs for a variety of reasons, including to help them mitigate feelings of isolation and loneliness and to provide them with an excuse to participate in outdoor exercise. In order to determine the impact that the coronavirus pandemic has had upon the plight of domesticated companion dogs within England, semi-structured interviews, document analyses, and observation research were undertaken. The initial analysis of data presented here suggests that the coronavirus pandemic threatened the wellbeing of dogs within England, with their reproductive, physical, medical, and psychological wellbeing being put at risk.

The Well-Being of Companion Animal Caregivers and Their Companion Animals during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review

“…Study population sizes ranged from 4-12,068 (mean: 1686; median: 611). Most studies recruited participants from the general population, although some focused on specific subgroups, including people living alone [133,153]; older adults [85,94,108,110,180,192]; adolescents [137,146,147], both children and adolescents [193], both parents and adolescents [95] or both parents and children [117]; parents [80][81][82]91,143,171]; teleworkers [119,125,172]; employees [183]; university students [111,149] or university students with emotional support animals [126]; individuals identifying as sexual or gender minorities [141]; people with severe mental illness [178]; people with dementia and their caregivers [166]; AIDS survivors [114]; unhoused individuals [105]; people with experience of veterinary consultations during the pandemic [92,93]; people who met the criteria for low-income veterinary care support [145]; people who had suffered the loss of an animal during the pandemic [150]; people who had purchased dogs during lockdown [113,157,158,188]; and domestic abuse helpline staff…”

“…Increased anxiety Boardman and Farnworth [84]; Shoesmith et al [176] Increased irritability Bowen et al [87]; Shoesmith et al [176] Increased aggression Boardman and Farnworth [84]; Platto et al [164]; Sacchettino et al [170]; Sherwell et al [175] Increased destructive behavior Holland et al [121]; PDSA [160]; Ribeiro et al [167] Increased mouthing/nipping Holland et al [121] Increased territoriality Kirnan et al [126] Increased toileting accidents in the home Esam et al [106]; Ribeiro et al [167] Less social Boardman and Farnworth [84]; Kirnan et al [126] Expectations of increased attention Applebaum et al [75] Training regression Boardman and Farnworth [84] More behaviors associated with stress during veterinary appointments Caney et al [92]; Muzzatti and Grieve [148] General behavioral issues due to lack of socialization and training Gregory [113] Negative impacts on animal health and well-being…”

“…Lack of clinical examination Caney et al [93] Delays in receiving diagnosis or treatment Caney et al [93] Risk of misdiagnosis Caney et al [93]; Gregory [113] Difficulties communicating with vets Caney et al [93]; Kogan et al [128]; Kogan [129]; Morris et al [145]; Wu et al [189] Perceived to be stressful Caney et al [93] Price quotations not always clear, resulting in discrepancies between true costs and what participants believed they would be paying Wu et al [189] Veterinarians overwhelmed due to adoption blitzes leading to surge in demand for care Muzzatti and Grieve [148]…”

“…Fifteen studies described financial concerns, causing participants to worry about how they would care for their animals if they lost their income or were furloughed [75,77,79,81,106,120,126,129,145,154,161,177,186,189]. Participants in eight studies described the emotional challenge of having to wait outside when their animals received veterinary care [79,102,113,128,129,145,189,190]. In some cases, participants actually avoided taking animals for treatment where normally they would have, as they could not bear the thought of their animals having treatment without their caregivers there to accompany them [113].…”

“…Participants in eight studies described the emotional challenge of having to wait outside when their animals received veterinary care [79,102,113,128,129,145,189,190]. In some cases, participants actually avoided taking animals for treatment where normally they would have, as they could not bear the thought of their animals having treatment without their caregivers there to accompany them [113]. Participants in one study felt negatively affected by the loss of interactions with other animal caregivers during the pandemic [184].…”