Caroline Wendzel is a staff writer and a first-year MPP student.

For decades, researchers have documented a strong connection between interpersonal violence and animal abuse. This connection, commonly referred to as “the Link” in research literature, functions as a perverse positive feedback loop of destruction and cruelty. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, between one-in-four and two-in-three violent offenders have animal abuse in their developmental history, and animal abusers are five times as likely to harm humans as compared to their non-animal abusing counterparts. 

Violence against animals is connected to instances of mass violence and terrorism as well — one study found that 43% of those who perpetrate school massacres have a history of animal cruelty, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has documented several recent instances of cruelty to animals in the backgrounds of those arrested for terrorist plots. 

Policymakers and government officials have started to take note of the Link in some ways — for example, in 2016, the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) began collecting data on acts of animal cruelty, as supplied by local law enforcement agencies. However, there is one area where federal policy and government action falls frighteningly short — the connection between child abuse and animal abuse. 

According to the National Coalition on Domestic Violence, 71% of domestic violence survivors entering shelters had pets that had been threatened, physically injured or killed by their abusers, and 76% of this abuse occurred in the presence of children. Pet abuse is considered one of the top four indicators that a person may go on to perpetrate abusive tactics in future intimate partner relationships, and is well-established in psychological literature as a key element of the family violence system, co-occurring alongside spousal and child abuse. 

Although mandatory reporting laws for child abuse and animal abuse separately are widespread, cross-reporting from one agency type to another is comparatively rare. Twenty states mandate veterinary professionals to report suspected child abuse, but only 12 states and D.C. mandate or permit social service workers to report suspected animal abuse, and vice versa. Only five states and D.C. specifically mandate cross-reporting for social service and animal control officers, and no mention of cross-reporting is included in the primary federal laws covering abuse to children and companion animals: the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) and the Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act (PACT Act), respectively.

To ensure consistency of protection, mandating cross-reporting of all animal care professionals and social service professionals on a federal level is essential. However, simply passing legislation ordering state agencies to meet these new reporting requirements is not sufficient. Providing civil immunity for professionals making good-faith reports is an essential step to ensuring compliance, a standard many states with permitted or mandated reporting laws don’t currently meet. Thorough, evidence-based training outlining the signs of abuse and neglect in animals and children must also be baked into legislation. Even in states permitting or mandating report-making, professionals in all fields often lack training, hindering report follow-through. By way of profession, animal control and veterinary professionals are not experts in child behavior, and conversely, social service workers are not experts in animal behavior. Therefore, if free and comprehensive training on these points is not mandated on a recurring basis, legitimate cases of abuse are more likely to fall through the cracks, while incidences of unfounded reports may rise.

The only way to ensure such legislation is not only introduced and passed, but widely and robustly implemented, is adequate federal funding and oversight. Though CAPTA and PACT are federal laws, the programs they mandate are primarily funded and run by state governments. Worryingly, zero states currently meet all 27 provisions of CAPTA, according to a 2019 Boston Globe expose, and no data exists on state compliance with the PACT Act, as of this writing. CAPTA provisions consistently unmet include accurate recordkeeping of child fatalities due to abuse or neglect, the creation of safe plans for the protection of infants affected by drugs, and provision of legal representatives for children in court proceedings, among others. Increased funding, and perhaps more importantly, increased oversight of fund use, is thus vital to ensure cross-species report stipulations are successfully implemented nationwide, and do not become another unmet provision.

As previously mentioned, children who witness abuse to animals are more likely to experience abuse as well as, in some cases, engage in abuse of both animals and people later in life. These behaviors become cyclical, affecting future generations and negatively impacting the wider community. For the sake of not only individual children and animals but also the well-being of the public, well-funded, mandated cross-reporting and training of social service workers and animal care professionals is vital.

This piece was edited by Deputy Editor Kathleen Bever and Executive Editor Nathan Varnell.

Photo courtesy of Sasha Sashina at Unsplash.