Confrontations and Donations: Encounters between Homeless Pet Owners and the Public

Abstract

This study examines the interactions between homeless pet owners and the domiciled public with a focus on how the activities of pet ownership help construct positive personal identities. Homeless people are often criticized for having pets. They counter these attacks using open and contained responses to stigmatization. More often, they redefine pet ownership to incorporate how they provide for their animals, challenging definitions that require a physical home. Homeless pet owners thus create a positive moral identity by emphasizing that they feed their animals first and give them freedom that the pets of the domiciled lack. Through what we call “enabled resistance,” donations of pet food from the supportive public provide the resources to minimize the impact of stigmatization.

Street-Involved Youth and Their Animal Companions—Stigma and Survival

“…For example, after systematically reviewing the medical records of over 300 of Community Veterinary Outreach patients (to veterinarians, animals are the "patients", and the pet owners are "clients"), we found that 73 % of our patients were in ideal body condition score, compared to the household pets in the U.S. where it is estimated that 52.6 % of dogs and 57.6 % of cats are clinically overweight (2013 National Pet Obesity Awareness Day Survey 2014). In fact, studies have shown that most homeless pet guardians do not have trouble feeding their animal companions (Irvine et al 2012). In a survey of 332 homeless youth in Los Angeles, only 10.42 % of respondents indicated that it was hard to get pet food (Rhoades et al 2014).…”

“…Despite the many barriers to establishing and/or maintaining self-esteem for street-involved youth, Irvine et al (2012) have shown that pet ownership by homeless pet guardians helps to create a positive sense of self. Homeless pet owners described challenging public stigma of what good pet ownership looks like by demonstrating their ability to feed, care, and provide for their pets constant companionship and a freedom that housed pets are limited to.…”

“…Homeless pet owners described challenging public stigma of what good pet ownership looks like by demonstrating their ability to feed, care, and provide for their pets constant companionship and a freedom that housed pets are limited to. Through these confrontations with members of the public, marginalized pet owners established a "moral personal identity" that mitigates the stigma of pet ownership among those who are homeless (Irvine et al 2012). In the aforementioned Canadian study of street-involved youth, the vast majority of pet-owning street-involved youth we interviewed (97.8 %) indicated that they were proud of being a good pet owner.…”

“…Streetinvolved youth often face public scrutiny for "using a dog" to panhandle, as it may be assumed by some that youth exploit dogs to increase income earned from panhandling. However, dogs may be both social and economic capital, in that panhandling with a dog may increase social interaction with members of the public, as well as the amount of cash or other goods received such as dog food (Irvine et al 2012). As Irvine (2012) describes, donations of food provided homeless pet owners with "enabled resistance to stigmatizing confrontations".…”

“…However, dogs may be both social and economic capital, in that panhandling with a dog may increase social interaction with members of the public, as well as the amount of cash or other goods received such as dog food (Irvine et al 2012). As Irvine (2012) describes, donations of food provided homeless pet owners with "enabled resistance to stigmatizing confrontations". While male youth have described earning more when panning with their dog, this extrinsic reason was not the primary purpose for youth to own a dog, rather they have them because of a love of animals, youth often believe that they are giving the animal a better life and for companionship (Lem 2012).…”