animal abuse essay conclusion

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

Puppy Mills Research Paper

Understanding animal cruelty: causes, effects, and prevention, 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

• Domestic Violence
• School Shooting
• Serial Killer
• 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

The Truth About Animal Brutality: How Do We Live With Ourselves?

by Ameyavikram Pathak | Jun 27, 2023 | Blog , Featured

By: Ameyavikram Pathak. Member, finance Committee. Princeton Foundation for Peace and Learning

“Thank you for caring.”

These were the words my friend said to me a few days ago after I inquired about a very young Yellow Labrador puppy (pictured here, and evidently distressed / scared) he found on the side of a busy street in New Brunswick, NJ. My friend, who found the puppy but did not have enough resources to properly take care of him, was reluctantly left with no other choice but to leave the puppy with local Animal Control, where he was impounded.

The young puppy has been living there alone ever since, along with 300 other dogs in the New Brunswick animal shelter. This story is only from one American city… there are countless cities and areas in the United States with animal shelters as such.

This encounter has sparked a deep need for reflection on the prevalent issue of animal abuse and the pressing need for change. By understanding the prevalence of animal abuse and its connection to broader societal issues, we can work towards creating a more compassionate and empathetic society. Thus, in this article, we will delve into the alarming reality of animal brutality in the United States, the moral implications it raises, and the imperative for collective action. 

The Increasing Prevalence of Animal Abuse

Animal abuse is a distressing reality that permeates our society, impacting countless innocent creatures.

The statistics are staggering.

• According to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), approximately 6.5 million companion animals enter U.S. animal shelters each year.
• According to the latest research and data, Around 920,000 Shelter Animals are Euthanized each year including 390,000 Dogs and 530,000 Cats.
• Studies have explored the psychological and social implications of animal abuse, highlighting its negative impact on all individuals and communities. A study published in the journal Animal Abuse and Human Abuse: Partners in Crime found that individuals who engage in animal abuse are five times more likely to commit violent crimes against humans. 

These findings underscores the importance of recognizing animal abuse as an indicator of potential future violence; not just against other species, but even towards our own. Is this truly the society we want to raise the next generation in?

Moral Implications

The prevalence of animal abuse raises fundamental questions about our ethical responsibility and the values we uphold as a society. Animals, as sentient beings, experience pain, suffering, and emotional trauma. It is our moral duty to protect and respect their rights.

Research on the Animal Consciousness

The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness , signed by a group of prominent scientists in 2012, asserts that animals, including mammals and birds, possess neurobiological substrates that generate consciousness and experience emotions. This declaration highlights the scientific consensus that animals are capable of experiencing a range of emotions, including joy, fear, and suffering. Consequently, subjecting animals to abuse and cruelty becomes morally unacceptable, as it infringes upon their inherent capacity to feel and their right to live free from unnecessary harm.

Many jurisdictions worldwide recognize animals as sentient beings, granting them legal protections and rights. For instance, various countries like Australia and Switzerland have implemented laws that criminalize animal cruelty and establish penalties for offenders. These legal measures do reflect global society’s evolving recognition of the moral rights of animals and the need to ensure their welfare. However, many practices concerning animal abuse in the United States are not majorly recognized, nor are they moral.

Philosophical Morality

Prominent scholars and ethicists have also contributed to the discourse on animal ethics. Philosopher Peter Singer, in his seminal work Animal Liberation , argues for the equal consideration of animal interests and advocates against speciesism, the arbitrary discrimination of animals based on their species. 

Singer’s arguments have influenced the development of animal rights and animal welfare movements, reinforcing the notion that our treatment of animals reflects our moral character as a society.

The Need for Collective Action

Addressing animal abuse necessitates a collaborative effort from individuals, communities, governments, and organizations. By addressing animal abuse, we not only protect the rights of animals but also contribute to the overall well-being of society by fostering a culture of empathy, compassion, and non-violence. To alleviate this issue, we can begin with promoting education and awareness. Initiating educational campaigns and influencing government policies to promote responsible pet ownership can increase awareness about animal welfare issues and reduce instances of neglect and abuse.

California’s Ban on the Sale of Companion Animals

Furthermore, by strengthening animal protection laws, we can advocate for stricter legislation and penalties against animal abusers can deter such acts and provide justice for the victims. 

In a 2017 landmark move for animal welfare, California’s state government has implemented legislation prohibiting the sale of companion animals in retail settings.

This progressive step aims to address the issues of puppy mills, kitten factories, and the exploitation of animals for commercial gain. The laws also encourage pet adoption, by requiring pet stores to source animals from shelters and rescue organizations. This promotes the adoption of homeless animals and helps alleviate overcrowding in shelters, giving abandoned or neglected animals a chance at finding loving homes. By focusing on shelter and rescue animals, the legislation discourages the demand for commercially bred animals, thereby encouraging responsible breeding practices that prioritize the health and well-being of animals over profit.

While challenges and adjustments may arise during the implementation, California’s legislation stands as an inspiring example for other regions to follow in safeguarding the well-being of companion animals. 

A Step Towards Animal Welfare

By curbing the demand for commercially bred animals, promoting adoption, and supporting ethical breeding practices, these laws take a significant stride towards creating a more compassionate society. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that humanity supports animal rescue organizations. Donating to, and volunteering for animal shelters and rescue groups helps provide care, rehabilitation, and rehoming opportunities for abused animals.

The existence of animal abuse poses a significant challenge to our collective conscience. As responsible and compassionate beings, we, as humans, must confront this issue head-on by recognizing the inherent rights and well-being of animals.  Through education, advocacy, and action, we can forge a path towards a society that rejects cruelty and fosters empathy towards all living beings. 

Let us stand together, united in our commitment to end animal abuse.

Bibliography

– American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. “Ways to Give.” Retrieved from: https://www.aspca.org/ways-to-give

– American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). “Pet Statistics.” Retrieved from: https://www.aspca.org/animal-homelessness/shelter-intake-and-surrender/pet-statistics

– https://worldanimalfoundation.org/advocate/pet-adoption-statistics/

– Animal Legal Defense Fund. “Laws Protecting Animals.” Retrieved from: https://aldf.org/article/laws-protecting-animals/

– Ascione, F.R., Weber, C.V., & Wood, D.S. (1997). “The Abuse of Animals and Domestic Violence: A National Survey of Shelters for Women Who Are Battered.” Retrieved from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/107755959700300402

– Bekoff, M., & Pierce, J. (2009). Wild Justice: The Moral Lives of Animals. University of Chicago Press.

– California Legislative Information. “Assembly Bill No. 485.” Retrieved from: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB485

– California Legislative Information. “Senate Bill No. 572.” Retrieved from: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB572

– DeGrazia, D. (1996). Taking Animals Seriously: Mental Life and Moral Status. Cambridge University Press.

– Francione, G. L. (2015). Animals as Persons: Essays on the Abolition of Animal Exploitation. Columbia University Press.

– Humane Society of the United States. “Animal Cruelty and Family Violence.” Retrieved from: https://www.humanesociety.org/resources/animal-cruelty-and-family-violence

– Humane Society of the United States. “Puppy Mills: Frequently Asked Questions.” Retrieved from: https://www.humanesociety.org/resources/puppy-mills-faq

– Humane Society of the United States. “The Prevalence of Animal Abuse.” Retrieved from: https://www.humanesociety.org/resources/prevalence-animal-abuse

– Merz-Perez, L., Heide, K. M., & Silverman, I. J. (2001). “Animal Abuse and Human Abuse: Partners in Crime.” Retrieved from: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2002-11907-006

– Low, P. (2012). “Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness.” Retrieved from: http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf

– Pet Rescue and Adoption Act. “Frequently Asked Questions.” Retrieved from: https://www.petrescueandadoptionact.com/faqs

– Singer, P. (1975). Animal Liberation. Harper Perennial.

– The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. “Animal Shelters: How They Help Animals.” Retrieved from: https://www.aspca.org/animal-shelters

– The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness. (2012). Retrieved from: https://www.cambridgeconferences.com/declaration.html

– World Animal Protection. “Global Animal Welfare Legislation Review.” Retrieved from: https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/sites/default/files/us_files/global_animal_welfare_legislation_review.pdf

View all posts

• Undergraduate
• High School
• Architecture
• American History
• Asian History
• Antique Literature
• American Literature
• Asian Literature
• Classic English Literature
• World Literature
• Creative Writing
• Linguistics
• Criminal Justice
• Legal Issues
• Anthropology
• Archaeology
• Political Science
• World Affairs
• African-American Studies
• East European Studies
• Latin-American Studies
• Native-American Studies
• West European Studies
• Family and Consumer Science
• Social Issues
• Women and Gender Studies
• Social Work
• Natural Sciences
• Pharmacology
• Earth science
• Agriculture
• Agricultural Studies
• Computer Science
• IT Management
• Mathematics
• Investments
• Engineering and Technology
• Engineering
• Aeronautics
• Medicine and Health
• Alternative Medicine
• Communications and Media
• Advertising
• Communication Strategies
• Public Relations
• Educational Theories
• Teacher's Career
• Chicago/Turabian
• Company Analysis
• Education Theories
• Shakespeare
• Canadian Studies
• Food Safety
• Relation of Global Warming and Extreme Weather Condition
• Movie Review
• Admission Essay
• Annotated Bibliography
• Application Essay
• Article Critique
• Article Review
• Article Writing
• Book Review
• Business Plan
• Business Proposal
• Capstone Project
• Cover Letter
• Creative Essay
• Dissertation
• Dissertation - Abstract
• Dissertation - Conclusion
• Dissertation - Discussion
• Dissertation - Hypothesis
• Dissertation - Introduction
• Dissertation - Literature
• Dissertation - Methodology
• Dissertation - Results
• GCSE Coursework
• Grant Proposal
• Marketing Plan
• Multiple Choice Quiz
• Personal Statement
• Power Point Presentation
• Power Point Presentation With Speaker Notes
• Questionnaire
• Reaction Paper

Research Paper

• Research Proposal
• SWOT analysis
• Thesis Paper
• Online Quiz
• Literature Review
• Movie Analysis
• Statistics problem
• Math Problem
• All papers examples
• How It Works
• Money Back Policy
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• We Are Hiring

Animal Abuse and Cruelty, Essay Example

Pages: 8

Words: 2161

Hire a Writer for Custom Essay

Use 10% Off Discount: "custom10" in 1 Click 👇

You are free to use it as an inspiration or a source for your own work.

Introduction

The question of whether or not certain rights should be given to animals is a very difficult one to address. People view animal rights in ways which range from beliefs that it is acceptable to abuse animals and because they have no natural rights, to thinking that animals should be accorded the same rights as human beings. This view that animals have rights may also go to animals as requiring greater protections than humans because they are unable to care for themselves and are vulnerable to their rights being violated.  My opinion on the matter is that animals should be treated with a certain level of respect and rights but not to the point of equality with humans. The reasons behind my belief are set out in this order and are: that it is morally wrong to make anything suffer that is capable of feeling physical pain; that it is an inherent right of any living creature to not be a victim of emotional pain caused by humans; and that when we as people neglect or are cruel to animals, we greatly lower our own standing as a superior form of life.  Ultimately, in keeping with Bentham’s views, animals, as living creatures largely dependent on human treatment and capable of feeling forms of pain, most certainly deserve moral recognition. They have moral rights because humanity has no right at all to harm them.

Intentional Cruelty to Animals

To begin, my first argument going to my belief is based on the reality that there is a specific moral wrong in human beings’ causing physical pain to animals.  As will be brought up elsewhere, human moral standards cannot be known to animals.  It may be that animals have senses of morality similar to humans, but this is not something we may know as fact.  Consequently, the moral value of how animals are treated rests completely with humans, just as humans have control over how animals live.  This translates to an innate responsibility. The stronger creature, the human, is obligated by morality to not cause physical pain to animals.  This exists apart from the reality that animals usually cannot protect themselves from the physical abuse of humans.  It is in fact a very basic reasoning; as human beings tend to hold that the deliberate causing of physical pain is wrong, and as animals certainly feel this pain, the human who behaves in such a way is greatly violating decency or morality.

It is also important to note that physical cruelty to animals takes many forms.  Some people actually enjoy inflicting pain on their pets or on random animals and directly abuse them physically. Others cause physical pain through gross neglect, as in not feeding animals in their care and/or exposing them to harsh conditions. There are even people who physically abuse animals through sexual assault, and this is widely established as being extreme physical cruelty (Beirne 120). In all these cases, then, what is occurring is that humans are ignoring the moral responsibility to not intentionally harm another creature. They are causing pain to living beings who can feel, and there can be no real justification for any such action.

Some may argue that human morality does not attach to animals or has no meaning in these cases. As noted, there is no way to know whether or not animals have any sense of right or wrong behavior. With this point of view, humans are only obligated to act morally toward one another and animals, who have limited intelligence and who exist to serve human interests, are removed from morality itself.  This perception cannot be held, however, because it relies on mistaken thinking.  Human morality is such that it has impact on  other creatures.  The nature of acting in a moral way in fact is never based on the degrees of understanding in the other being.  For example, the person who has the opportunity to steal from another but who chooses not to acts morally in a way that is unknown to the other.  In other words, morality is defined by the right thinking and actions of only the individual, so this obligation exists in regard to any living creature, or even thing, affected by the individual’s behavior.  Human morality is then attached to all living creatures because they are affected by it.  Then, there is no question that animals suffer from physical pain. They cannot articulate this in human ways, but, as they have complex nervous systems like humans, they most certainly experience physical distress (Beckoff). It is understood by anyone who has heard an animal being abused that the cries they make express pain, as animals whimper, howl, and make many noises that cannot be mistaken.  Clearly then, to cause an animal such pain is a moral wrong because it is always wrong to abuse another living being.

Emotional Pain and Animals

My second point is based on the first and is different only in terms of the treatment.  More exactly, it is a great moral wrong to inflict emotional pain on an animal; humans have the responsibility to prevent this and never engage in it. Animals have an actual moral right here just as they do in regard to physical pain, and this right exists no matter their own understanding of morality.  In both cases, it is a right created by the human need to hold to morality.  Just as all humans have the right to be free from emotional abuse, the same is true of animals.  No matter the laws in place in this regard, human morality alone makes it a reality that must be observed.

Also going to physical cruelty, emotional abuse of animals may take many forms. It may also be easily connected to the physical. The animal locked outdoors in extreme weather, for example, suffers the physical pain as well as the awareness that it is not wanted or cared about. The dog kept on a very short chain for long periods of time undergoes physical issues because it is denied movement, just as it must feel that it is being kept away from all contact with people. Other forms of abuse may be only emotional, as when a pet owner verbally abuses the animal and makes it cower in fear. The animal that is owned by people but completely ignored by them must develop a sense of being unloved. Then, there is as well the extreme emotional abuse when owners train animals to be violent, and warp their natures to be completely hostile.  Training dogs for dog fighting, for example, is increasingly being legislated as an act of animal cruelty (Merz-Perez and Heide 13). This legislation is as based on the emotional abuse of the dogs as it is on the physical cruelty.  Ultimately, the point here is that animals have feelings and are then able to suffer from emotional pain and abuse; they have the moral right, through how human morality functions, to not experience such pain.

Some may say that animals have no moral right to be protected from emotional abuse and because it is irrational to believe that animals experience emotion as humans do.  If animals feel in emotional ways, it is probably so different from human feeling, we cannot even comprehend it.  Such a view would hold that as animals have limited intelligence, it is likely that their ability to feel emotion is also limited. This thinking goes to supporting that animals mainly exist to serve human needs and wants, so the emotions of the human are the only relevant matter.  After all, people are allowed to own animals; clearly there is little concern as to their emotional rights.  To claim that animals have such a moral right in fact leads to giving animals the same standing as human beings, and that is completely unreasonable. It is, opponents would argue, another case of humans’ attaching human qualities to that which is not human.

When all of these claims are examined, however, none may stand up as valid.  To begin with, the point is not that animals must experience emotion as humans do in order to have this moral right; what matters is that they experience it at all, and this is established as fact.  For example, anthropologist Jane Goodall notes: “Farm animals feel pleasure and sadness, excitement and resentment, depression, fear, and pain” (Beckoff). Animals may serve human interests, but this is only due to human power and has nothing to do with the morality of treating other creatures correctly.  That animals have this moral right also in no way goes to granting them the same stature as human beings.  Instead, it only affirms that anything that feels emotion has the right to not be abused emotionally.  The argument is in fact based on the idea that humans and animals are different, but this is not the issue at hand. The issue is, again, human responsibility; this is supported by human knowledge of the suffering animals undergo when they are victims of emotional abuse.  It is in fact documented that some forms of emotional cruelty create greater suffering in animals than does physical abuse (Linzey 79).  As these are living creatures who depend on humanity, humanity is again obligated to acknowledge that any living creature that can feel has an innate right to be spared abuse.

Animal Rights and Human Stature

The last argument made regarding why animals have moral rights is based on the nature of humanity itself.  As has been discussed, it is known that animals feel physical and emotional pain.  It is generally true that animals, in terms of domestic pets and farm and utility animals, are under the authority of people.  Human beings actually control how animals live, and in all ways, just as humans tend to believe that they themselves are the most evolved and superior species on the planet. In the West, for example, many centuries of Judeo-Christian culture have gone to an insistence on the right of mankind to rule over animals because God gave man this absolute right (Ascione 158). This translates to animals as being completely dependent on humans, which in turn goes to the human responsibility to not abuse them.  When that abuse occurs, then the human surrenders the status of being a superior species or creature.  The surrender is in place because, by acting immorally and abusing creatures who rely on their care, humans give up the right to be seen as superior.  Put another way, human superiority is in place only when mankind accepts that all living creatures have the moral right to not be victims of abuse.

Opposition to this thinking would likely be based on the superiority factor itself.  It may be argued that, while harming animals is not necessarily right or moral, the right to do so lies within all the rights of mankind as the most evolved species on the planet.  This may exist apart from ideas of God as granting these rights or the status.  Human stature cannot then be lessened by abusing animals because, as humans are superior, the ways in which they treat animals cannot affect that fact.  Being the most superior creature is not a thing that can be qualified, so there can be no decrease of standing.

What defeats this argument is the greater reality of how superiority itself is defined.  As people believe themselves to be above other animals, they do so because they hold to certain standards of behavior that are “civilized” and moral.  It is no coincidence, for example, that when humans act in cruel ways, they are seen as “animals” by others.  The cruelty completely undermines the values necessary for being superior at all.  Consequently, when humans refuse to accept that animals have moral rights and abuse them, they are sacrificing their own claim to being above animals themselves.

As noted, animal rights is a controversial subject. People who strongly oppose animal abuse even debate over just what rights animals possess.  At the same time, that animals do have moral rights is very much in place because of the fact that human morality insists on this. When people physically and/or emotionally abuse animals, morality is destroyed and humanity loses its right to see itself as superior.  This does not mean that animals are equal to human beings; instead, it simply goes to basic human responsibility.  Animals are living creatures very much dependent on human treatment and capable of feeling physical and emotional pain; they have moral rights because humans have no right to abuse them.

Works Cited

Ascione, Frank. (Ed.)  The International Handbook of Animal Abuse and Cruelty: Theory, Research, and Application . West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 2010. Print.

Beckoff, Marc.  “Do Dogs Really Feel Pain and Are They Really Conscious?”  Psychology Today .  21 June 2012. Web. 17 Feb. 2015. <https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/animal-emotions/201206/do-dogs-really-feel-pain-and-are-they-really-conscious>

Beirne, Piers.   Confronting Animal Abuse: Law, Criminology, and Human-Animal Relationships. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2009.  Print.

Linzey, Andrew.  The Link Between Animal Abuse and Human Violence . Portland, OR: Sussex Press, 2009. Print.

Merz-Perez, Linda, & Heide, Kathleen M.  Animal Cruelty: Pathway to Violence Against People. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 2004. Print

Stuck with your Essay?

Get in touch with one of our experts for instant help!

The Roaring '20s, Research Paper Example

Is the Internet Hurting Children? Essay Example

Time is precious

don’t waste it!

Plagiarism-free guarantee

Privacy guarantee

Secure checkout

Money back guarantee

Related Essay Samples & Examples

Voting as a civic responsibility, essay example.

Pages: 1

Words: 287

Utilitarianism and Its Applications, Essay Example

Words: 356

The Age-Related Changes of the Older Person, Essay Example

Pages: 2

Words: 448

The Problems ESOL Teachers Face, Essay Example

Words: 2293

Should English Be the Primary Language? Essay Example

Pages: 4

Words: 999

The Term “Social Construction of Reality”, Essay Example

Words: 371

Essay on Cruelty On Animals

Students are often asked to write an essay on Cruelty On Animals in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Cruelty On Animals

Introduction.

Cruelty on animals is a big problem. It means hurting animals on purpose. This can include not giving them food or water, hitting them, or not taking care of them when they are sick. It is wrong and against the law.

Types of Cruelty

There are two types of cruelty: active and passive. Active cruelty means hurting animals on purpose. Passive cruelty is when people don’t take care of their animals. They might not give them food, water, or medical care. Both types are harmful.

Effects on Animals

Cruelty can hurt animals in many ways. They can get sick or injured. They can also become scared of people. Some animals might even die because of cruelty.

Preventing Cruelty

We can stop cruelty by being kind to animals. We should take care of them and give them what they need. It’s also important to tell an adult if we see someone being cruel to an animal.

Cruelty on animals is wrong. Everyone should treat animals with kindness and respect. If we all work together, we can stop cruelty and make the world a better place for animals.

250 Words Essay on Cruelty On Animals

What is animal cruelty.

Animal cruelty is when people harm animals or do not care for their well-being. It can be physical, like hitting or hurting animals on purpose, or neglect, like not giving an animal food, water, and shelter.

Types of Animal Cruelty

There are two main types of animal cruelty. First, active cruelty, which means people purposely hurting animals. This can include kicking, hitting, or starving an animal. Second, passive cruelty, which is when people neglect animals. They may not mean to hurt the animal, but by not taking care of it, they cause harm.

Animal cruelty can cause animals to get sick, hurt, or even die. Animals who are hurt by people often become scared and may have trouble trusting people again. They can also become sad and not want to eat or play.

How to Stop Animal Cruelty

There are many ways to stop animal cruelty. If you see someone hurting an animal, tell an adult or call the police. You can also help by adopting animals from shelters instead of buying them from pet stores. Educating others about the importance of treating animals kindly can also make a big difference.

Animal cruelty is a serious problem, but we can all do our part to help stop it. By treating animals with kindness and respect, and by speaking up when we see them being mistreated, we can help ensure that all animals live happy, healthy lives.

500 Words Essay on Cruelty On Animals

Cruelty on animals is a serious issue that we all need to think about. It means causing harm to animals for no reason. This is wrong and needs to be stopped. Animals have feelings just like us and they should be treated with kindness and respect.

Forms of Animal Cruelty

There are many ways in which animals are mistreated. Some people hurt animals directly by hitting them or not giving them food or water. This is called physical abuse. Other times, animals are treated badly by being kept in very small spaces where they cannot move around. This is known as neglect.

Animals are also used in harmful experiments in some labs. They are given drugs or have operations done on them that can cause them pain. This is called animal testing. It is another form of animal cruelty that is often hidden from the public.

Effects of Cruelty on Animals

When animals are treated badly, they suffer. They can get hurt or sick and may even die. They can also become scared of people and may act out in fear. This is not good for the animals or for the people who might come into contact with them.

Cruelty to animals also affects our environment. Animals are an important part of our world. They help to keep things in balance. When they are hurt or killed, it can upset this balance and cause problems for other animals and even for us.

What Can Be Done to Stop Animal Cruelty

There are many things that we can do to help stop animal cruelty. One of the most important things is to be kind to animals. We should treat them with respect and care. If we see someone being cruel to an animal, we should tell an adult or call the local animal control.

We can also help by not supporting businesses that treat animals badly. This includes circuses that use animals for entertainment or shops that sell products tested on animals. Instead, we can choose to support companies that treat animals well.

Cruelty to animals is a big problem, but it is one that we can help to solve. By treating animals with kindness, standing up against cruelty, and making good choices about what we buy, we can make a difference. Remember, every creature deserves to live a life free from pain and fear. Let’s all do our part to make sure that happens.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Cruise Ship
• Essay on Crusades
• Essay on Cryptocurrency Boon Or Bane

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Find anything you save across the site in your account

What Would It Mean to Treat Animals Fairly?

By Elizabeth Barber

A few years ago, activists walked into a factory farm in Utah and walked out with two piglets. State prosecutors argued that this was a crime. That they were correct was obvious: The pigs were the property of Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer in the country. The defendants had videoed themselves committing the crime; the F.B.I. later found the piglets in Colorado, in an animal sanctuary.

The activists said they had completed a “rescue,” but Smithfield had good reason to claim it hadn’t treated the pigs illegally. Unlike domestic favorites like dogs, which are protected from being eaten, Utah’s pigs are legally classified as “livestock”; they’re future products, and Smithfield could treat them accordingly. Namely, it could slaughter the pigs, but it could also treat a pig’s life—and its temporary desire for food, space, and medical help—as an inconvenience, to be handled in whatever conditions were deemed sufficient.

In their video, the activists surveyed those conditions . At the facility—a concentrated animal-feeding operation, or CAFO —pregnant pigs were confined to gestation crates, metal enclosures so small that the sows could barely lie down. (Smithfield had promised to stop using these crates, but evidently had not.) Other pigs were in farrowing crates, where they had enough room to lie down but not enough to turn their bodies around. When the activists approached one sow, they found dead piglets rotting beneath her. Nearby, they found two injured piglets, whom they decided to take. One couldn’t walk because of a foot infection; the other’s face was covered in blood. According to Smithfield, which denied mistreating animals, the piglets were each worth about forty-two dollars, but both had diarrhea and other signs of illness. This meant they were unlikely to survive, and that their bodies would be discarded, just as millions of farm animals are discarded each year.

During the trial, the activists reiterated that, yes, they entered Smithfield’s property and, yes, they took the pigs. And then, last October, the jury found them not guilty. In a column for the Times , one of the activists—Wayne Hsiung, the co-founder of Direct Action Everywhere—described talking to one of the jurors, who said that it was hard to convict the activists of theft, given that the sick piglets had no value for Smithfield. But another factor was the activists’ appeal to conscience. In his closing statement, Hsiung, a lawyer who represented himself, argued that an acquittal would model a new, more compassionate world. He had broken the law, yes—but the law, the jury seemed to agree, might be wrong.

A lot has changed in our relationship with animals since 1975, when the philosopher Peter Singer wrote “ Animal Liberation ,” the book that sparked the animal-rights movement. Gestation crates, like the ones in Utah, are restricted in the European Union, and California prohibits companies that use them from selling in stores, a case that the pork industry fought all the way to the Supreme Court—and lost. In a 2019 Johns Hopkins survey, more than forty per cent of respondents wanted to ban new CAFO s. In Iowa, which is the No. 1 pork-producing state, my local grocery store has a full Vegan section. “Vegan” is also a shopping filter on Sephora, and most of the cool-girl brands are vegan, anyway. Wearing fur is embarrassing.

And yet Singer’s latest book, “ Animal Liberation Now ,” a rewrite of his 1975 classic, is less a celebratory volume than a tragic one—tragic because it is very similar to the original in refrain, which is that, big-picture-wise, the state of animal life is terrible. “The core argument I was putting forward,” Singer writes, “seemed so irrefutable, so undeniably right, that I thought everyone who read it would surely be convinced by it.” Apparently not. By some estimates, scientists in the U.S. currently use roughly fifteen million animals for research, including mice, rats, cats, dogs, birds, and nonhuman primates. As in the seventies, much of this research tries to model psychological ailments, despite scientists’ having written for decades that more research is needed to figure out whether animals—and which kind of animals—provide a useful analogue for mental illness in humans. When Singer was first writing, a leading researcher created psychopathic monkeys by raising them in isolation, impregnating them with what he called a “rape rack,” and studying how the mothers bashed their infants’ heads into the ground. In 2019, researchers were still putting animals through “prolonged stress”—trapping them in deep water, restraining them for long periods while subjecting them to the odor of a predator—to see if their subsequent behavior evidenced P.T.S.D. (They wrote that more research was needed.) Meanwhile, factory farms, which were newish in 1975, have swept the globe. Just four per cent of Americans are vegetarian, and each year about eighty-three billion animals are killed for food.

It’s for these animals, Singer writes, “and for all the others who will, unless there is a sudden and radical change, suffer and die,” that he writes this new edition. But Singer’s hopes are by now tempered. One obvious problem is that, in the past fifty years, the legal standing of animals has barely changed. The Utah case was unusual not just because of the verdict but because referendums on farm-animal welfare seldom occur at all. In many states, lawmakers, often pressured by agribusiness, have tried to make it a serious crime to enter a factory farm’s property. The activists in Utah hoped they could win converts at trial; they gambled correctly, but, had they been wrong, they could have gone to prison. As in 1975, it remains impossible to simply petition the justice system to notice that pigs are suffering. All animals are property, and property can’t take its owner to court.

Philosophers have debated the standing of animals for centuries. Pythagoras supposedly didn’t eat them, perhaps because he believed they had souls. Their demotion to “things” owes partly to thinkers like Aristotle, who called animals “brute beasts” who exist “for the sake of man,” and to Christianity, which, like Stoicism before it, awarded unique dignity to humans. We had souls; animals did not. Since then, various secular thinkers have given this idea a new name—“inherent value,” “intrinsic dignity”—in order to explain why it is O.K. to eat a pig but not a baby. For Singer, these phrases are a “last resort,” a way to clumsily distinguish humans from nonhuman animals. Some argue that our ability to tell right from wrong, or to perceive ourselves, sets us apart—but not all humans can do these things, and some animals seem to do them better. Good law doesn’t withhold justice from humans who are elderly or infirm, or those who are cognitively disabled. As a utilitarian, Singer cites the founder of that tradition, the eighteenth-century philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who argued that justice and equality have nothing to do with a creature’s ability to reason, or with any of its abilities at all, but with the fact that it can suffer. Most animals suffer. Why, then, do we not give them moral consideration?

Singer’s answer is “speciesism,” or “bias in favor of the interests of members of one’s own species.” Like racism and sexism, speciesism denies equal consideration in order to maintain a status quo that is convenient for the oppressors. As Lawrence Wright has written in this magazine , courts, when considering the confinement of elephants and chimpanzees, have conceded that such animals evince many of the qualities that give humans legal standing, but have declined to follow through on the implications of this fact. The reason for that is obvious. If animals deserved the same consideration as humans, then we would find ourselves in a world in which billions of persons were living awful, almost unimaginably horrible lives. In which case, we might have to do something about it.

Equal consideration does not mean equal treatment. As a utilitarian, Singer’s aim is to minimize the suffering in the world and maximize the pleasure in it, a principle that invites, and often demands, choices. This is why Singer does not object to killing mosquitos (if done quickly), or to using animals for scientific research that would dramatically relieve suffering, or to eating meat if doing so would save your life. What he would not agree with, though, is making those choices on the basis of perceived intelligence or emotion. In a decision about whether to eat chicken or pork, it is not better to choose chicken simply because pigs seem smarter. The fleeting pleasure of eating any chicken is trounced by its suffering in industrial farms, where it was likely force-fed, electrocuted, and perhaps even boiled alive.

Still, Singer’s emphasis on suffering is cause for concern to Martha Nussbaum , whose new book, “ Justice for Animals ,” is an attempt to settle on the ideal philosophical template for animal rights. Whereas Singer’s argument is emphatically emotion-free—empathy, in his view, is not just immaterial but often actively misleading—Nussbaum is interested in emotions, or at least in animals’ inner lives and desires. She considers several theories of animal rights, including Singer’s, before arguing that we should adopt her “capabilities approach,” which builds on a framework developed by the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen, and holds that all creatures should be given the “opportunity to flourish.” For decades, Nussbaum has adjusted her list of what this entails for humans, which includes “being able to live to the end of a human life of normal length,” “being able to have attachments to things and people outside ourselves,” and having “bodily integrity”—namely, freedom from violence and “choice in matters of reproduction.” In “Justice for Animals,” she outlines some conditions for nonhuman flourishing: a natural life span, social relationships, freedom of movement, bodily integrity, and play and stimulation. Eventually, she writes, we would have a refined list for each species, so that we could insure flourishing “in the form of life characteristic to the creature.”

In imagining this better world, Nussbaum is guided by three emotions: wonder, anger, and compassion. She wants us to look anew at animals such as chickens or pigs, which don’t flatter us, as gorillas might, with their resemblance to us. What pigs do, and like to do, is root around in the dirt; lacquer themselves in mud to keep cool; build comfy nests in which to shelter their babies; and communicate with one another in social groups. They also seek out belly rubs from human caregivers. In a just world, Nussbaum writes, we would wonder at a pig’s mysterious life, show compassion for her desire to exist on her own terms, and get angry when corporations get in her way.

Some of Nussbaum’s positions are more actionable, policy-wise, than others. For example, she supports legal standing for animals, which raises an obvious question: How would a pig articulate her desires to a lawyer? Nussbaum notes that a solution already exists in fiduciary law: in the event that a person, like a toddler or disabled adult, cannot communicate their decisions or make sound ones, a representative is appointed to understand that person’s interests and advocate for them. Just as organizations exist to help certain people advance their interests, organizations could represent categories of animals. In Nussbaum’s future world, such a group could take Smithfield Foods to court.

Perhaps Nussbaum’s boldest position is that wild animals should also be represented by fiduciaries, and indeed be assured, by humans, the same flourishing as any other creature. If this seems like an overreach, a quixotic attempt to control a world that is better off without our meddling, Nussbaum says, first, to be realistic: there is no such thing as a truly wild animal, given the extent of human influence on Earth. (If a whale is found dead with a brick of plastic in its stomach, how “wild” was it?) Second, in Nussbaum’s view, if nature is thoughtless—and Nussbaum thinks it is—then perhaps what happens in “the wild” is not always for the best. No injustice can be ignored. If we aspire to a world in which no sentient creature can harm another’s “bodily integrity,” or impede one from exploring and fulfilling one’s capabilities, then it is not “the destiny of antelopes to be torn apart by predators.”

Here, Nussbaum’s world is getting harder to imagine. Animal-rights writing tends to elide the issue of wild-animal suffering for obvious reasons—namely, the scarcity of solutions. Singer covers the issue only briefly, and mostly to say that it’s worth researching the merit of different interventions, such as vaccination campaigns. Nussbaum, for her part, is unclear about how we would protect wild antelopes without impeding the flourishing of their predators—or without impeding the flourishing of antelopes, by increasing their numbers and not their resources. In 2006, when she previously discussed the subject, she acknowledged that perhaps “part of what it is to flourish, for a creature, is to settle certain very important matters on its own.” In her new book, she has not entirely discarded that perspective: intervention, she writes, could result in “disaster on a large scale.” But the point is to “press this question all the time,” and to ask whether our hands-off approach is less noble than it is self-justifying—a way of protecting ourselves from following our ideals to their natural, messy, inconvenient ends.

The enduring challenge for any activist is both to dream of almost-unimaginable justice and to make the case to nonbelievers that your dreams are practical. The problem is particularly acute in animal-rights activism. Ending wild-animal suffering is laughably hard (our efforts at ending human suffering don’t exactly recommend us to the task); obviously, so is changing the landscape of factory farms, or Singer wouldn’t be reissuing his book. In 2014, the British sociologist Richard Twine suggested that the vegan isn’t unlike the feminist of yore, in that both come across as killjoys whose “resistance against routinized norms of commodification and violence” repels those who prefer the comforts of the status quo. Wayne Hsiung, the Direct Action Everywhere activist, was only recently released from jail, after being sentenced for duck and chicken rescues in California. On his blog, he wrote that one reason the prosecution succeeded was that, unlike in Utah, he and his colleagues were cast as “weird extremists.”

It’s easy to construct a straw-man vegan, one oblivious to his own stridency, privilege, or hypocrisy. Isn’t he driving deforestation with all his vegetables? (No, Singer replies, as the vast majority of soybeans are fed to farm animals.) Isn’t he ignoring food deserts or the price tag on vegan substitutes, which puts them out of the reach of poor families? (Nussbaum acknowledges that cost can be an issue, but argues that it only emphasizes the need for resourced people to eat as humanely as they can, given that the costs of a more ethical diet “will not come down until it is chosen by many.”) Anyone pointing out moral culpability will provoke, in both others and themselves, a certain defensiveness. Nussbaum spends a lot of time discussing her uneasiness with her choice to eat fish for nutritional reasons. (She argues that fish likely have no sense of the future, a claim that even she seems unsure about.) Singer is eager to intervene here, emphasizing that animal-rights activism should pursue the diminishment of suffering, not the achievement of sainthood. “We are more likely to persuade others to share our attitude if we temper our ideals with common sense than if we strive for the kind of purity that is more appropriate to a religious dietary law than to an ethical and political movement,” he writes. Veganism is a boycott, and, while boycotts are more effective the more you commit to them, what makes them truly effective is persuading others to join them.

Strangely, where Singer and Nussbaum might agree is that defining the proper basis for the rights of animals is less important, at least in the short term, than getting people not to harm them, for any reason at all. Those reasons might have nothing to do with the animals themselves. Perhaps you decide not to eat animals because you care about people: because you care that the water where you live, if it’s anything like where I live, is too full of CAFO by-products to confidently drink. Perhaps you care about the workers in enormous slaughterhouses, where the pay is low and the costs to the laborer high. Perhaps you believe in a God, and believe that this God would expect better of people than to eat animals raised and killed in darkness. Or perhaps someone you love happens to love pigs, or to love the idea that the world could be gentler or more just, and you love the way they see the future enough to help them realize it. Nussbaum, after all, became interested in animal rights because she loved a person, her late daughter, an attorney who championed legislation to protect whales and other wild animals until her death, in 2019. Nussbaum’s book is dedicated to her—and also, now, to the whales. ♦

New Yorker Favorites

Searching for the cause of a catastrophic plane crash .

The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool .

Gloria Steinem’s life on the feminist frontier .

Where the Amish go on vacation .

How Colonel Sanders built his Kentucky-fried fortune .

What does procrastination tell us about ourselves ?

Fiction by Patricia Highsmith: “The Trouble with Mrs. Blynn, the Trouble with the World”

Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive the best stories from The New Yorker .

By signing up, you agree to our User Agreement and Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

By Jay Caspian Kang

By Amy Davidson Sorkin

By Jill Lepore

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
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Understanding the Link between Animal Cruelty and Family Violence: The Bioecological Systems Model

Brinda jegatheesan.

1 Faculty of Educational Psychology, Learning Sciences and Human Development, University of Washington, 322 F Miller Hall, Box 353600, Seattle, WA 98195-3600, USA

Marie-Jose Enders-Slegers

2 Faculty of Psychology, Open University of The Netherlands, Valkenburgerweg 177, 6419 AT Heerlen, The Netherlands; [email protected]

Elizabeth Ormerod

3 Society for Companion Animal Studies (SCAS), P.O. Box 23, Chertsey, Surrey KT16 9WQ, UK; [email protected]

Paula Boyden

4 Dogs Trust, 17 Wakely Street, London EC1V 7RQ, UK; [email protected]

Violence towards animals and violence towards people are often interconnected problems, and as such, this phenomenon has been termed the Link. Violence towards animals is a strong predictor that the abuser may inflict violence on people. However, it must not be assumed this is always the case. Professionals treating an animal or a human patient/client who has been subjected to abuse are uniquely situated to act in the role of ‘first responders’ when they suspect or recognize animal abuse, human abuse, or family violence. To more fully understand the Link the authors introduce Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems model through which to examine the complexity of the problem. Using data from earlier studies in which they interviewed police officers, other law enforcers, veterinarians, social workers, and community and family members, the authors discuss the correlation between animal cruelty and family violence. Furthermore, they examine how Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems model has the potential to better support animal and human health and welfare professionals in the identification of strategies for animals and humans caught in abusive settings. The authors recommend that these professionals become familiar with the bioecological systems model, which will enable them to better understand the psychological problems of animal cruelty and family violence and the different bioecological contributing factors. The authors emphasize transdisciplinary collaboration as vital in the recognition, prevention, and protection of animal and human victims trapped in family violence.

1. Introduction

1.1. companion animals in the family system.

Companion animals are increasingly becoming an integral part of family ecology worldwide. The number of households in the United States having a pet was estimated to be 67% [ 1 ]. In Europe, e.g., in The Netherlands, 59% of the households in France, 50% of the households and in the U.K., 40% of the households have companion animals [ 2 , 3 , 4 ]. A vast majority of these families consider their pet to be a family member and have deep emotional relationships with them. Research has demonstrated that many health, physical, psychological, and social benefits accrue from having companion animals across the life cycle [ 5 , 6 ].

Children and adolescents, particularly those who are vulnerable, derive significant benefits across a range of developmental areas from having a companion animal in their midst. These include social and emotional, cognitive, educational, and behavioral areas of positive influence [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ]. Among adults, companion animals also serve as important sources of psychological and social support (e.g., provide comfort, reduce feelings of loneliness during stressful times, increase social connectedness and self-esteem) and improved physical health arising from increased exercise [ 14 ]. Studies have found that for children who frequently experience trauma, their companion animals become their confidants, comforters, and bosom buddies who help them heal emotionally, find solace, provide a sense of security, and relieve them of stress [ 8 , 15 ].

The primary goal of this paper is to introduce the bioecological systems model and propose that professionals addressing and/or treating an animal or a human being who have been subjected to abuse are uniquely situated to act in the role of ‘first responders’ when they suspect or recognize animal abuse, human abuse, and family violence. The authors introduce the bioecological systems model because they believe that this will help professionals understand the complexity of the problem. The model will also provide an insight into the different ways professionals from a range of disciplines can work together for guiding mental health prevention and interventions [ 16 ].

Four cases identified during clinical and research fieldwork of the authors are used to discuss the usefulness of the Bronfenbrenner bioecological model to illustrate the correlation between animal abuse and family violence [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. The cases are in agreement with the findings of researchers worldwide who found correlations between the abuse directed towards partners, children, and companion animals [ 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ].

1.2. One Health-One Welfare

The human–animal bond is recognized as a key aspect in both the One Health [ 25 ] and the One Welfare approaches. In the One Health and One Welfare approaches, factors that concern each area—humans, animals, and environment—are all considered [ 26 ]. One Health is not a new concept but dates from the introduction of veterinary training. Many of its applications involve veterinary and other scientists collaborating to protect public health. The One Health approach recognizes that the “health of the people is connected to the health of animals and the environment” and the “goal is to attain optimal health outcomes recognizing the interconnection between people, animals, plants and their shared environment” [ 26 ]. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) defines health as “a state of complete physical, mental, and social wellbeing” [ 27 ]. CDC’s reference to emotional, social, and natural states can also be found in the definition of One Welfare which emphasizes the strong Link between animal welfare and human health [ 28 ]. In addition, the World Health Organization defines health as a state of complete physical, mental, and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. Jordan and Lem explain that “where there are poor states of human welfare there commonly exists poor states of animal welfare… Similarly, animals often act as indicators of human health and welfare as can be seen in the Link between animal abuse and family violence” [ 26 ] (p. 1203). More recently the transdisciplinary approach has been extended to One Health One Welfare [ 26 , 29 ].

1.3. The Link—Animal Cruelty and Family Violence

For companion animals, their status as family members comes with both benefits and possible harm. In most families, companion animals are an integral part of the family and are treated similarly to the rest of the family members (e.g., including playtime and walks, food and medical care, birthday celebrations, and sleeping together). However, in other families, they are subjected to the harshest and most unkind conditions of neglect, emotional and physical abuse [ 30 ]. Ascione defined animal cruelty as “socially unacceptable behavior that intentionally causes unnecessary pain, suffering, or distress to and/or the death of an animal [ 31 ] (p. 228). Cruelty to animals is also described as a multidimensional construct that includes among others, severity, duration, frequency, and lack of empathy [ 32 , 33 ], as well as physical and mental dimensions of cruelty [ 34 ]. The lack of standardized definitions of animal cruelty, types of animals involved, and the time frame within which the abuse occurred have been viewed as methodological shortcomings when it concerns reporting animal cruelty incidents [ 34 , 35 ].

1.3.1. Animal Cruelty as a Marker

In a 2011 literature review conducted about animal abuse in the context of other violent and antisocial behaviors Gullone concluded that animal abuse is a marker of other potentially sinister experiences in children’s lives and that the relationship between animal abuse and aggression in childhood can extend into adulthood [ 36 ]. Often, companion animals can become victims during family violence, or used as pawns by the perpetrators to instill and enforce fear and control over their partner and children, creating interlocking systems of companion animal abuse, child abuse, and family violence [ 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 ].

The connection between the treatment of animals being closely associated with the treatment of fellow human beings was first documented in the 13th century [ 46 ]. Understanding of family violence and its repercussions have deepened over the past 50 years. The Battered Child Syndrome, a landmark paper in 1962 by Kempe et al., described the types of injuries received from deliberate physical abuse, usually perpetrated by a family member or a babysitter [ 47 ]. Following the publication of the Battered Child Syndrome there was initial reluctance in the medial professions to accept the evidence and act in such cases to prevent further abuse. Writing in 1964, Mead found that across a range of cultures, extraordinary abuse of animals (e.g., torture, killing) by children may precede more violent acts by that individual as an adult [ 48 ]. She argued that an act of cruelty towards an animal by a child could “prove a diagnostic sign, and that such children, diagnosed early, could be helped instead of being allowed to embark on a long career of episodic violence and murder (p. 22). Her writings influenced the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to add animal cruelty to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–III R (DSM-III R) in 1987. In the 2013 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5) animal cruelty was retained as a symptom of conduct disorder [ 49 , 50 ].

Additional studies in the 60′s also documented the Link between violence towards animals in childhood and aggressive behavior towards humans in adulthood [ 51 , 52 ]. Fucini, in 1978, made the Link between animal abuse and child abuse and expressed the belief that a battered pet may be indicative of other types of violence happening in the family [ 53 ]. Van Leeuwen, a child psychiatrist, writing in 1981 stated among so-called accidental injuries brought to veterinarian attention “It would be sad if in analogy to child abuse there persisted a reluctance to recognize the existence of animal abuse among the so-called accidental injuries brought to the veterinarian’s attention. Greater awareness of animal abuse may lead veterinarians to initiate mental health intervention for the abusing family in addition to treating the animal” [ 54 ] (p. 182). Indeed, there has been resistance to accepting the evidence that family violence frequently involves family pets. In 1981, Hutton, a social worker in England, highlighted that animal abuse could be used as a diagnostic indicator for family violence [ 55 ]. His study found that 82% of families known to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) for animal abuse or neglect were also known to Social Services as having children at risk or having signs of physical abuse or neglect. He found clients were more willing to talk about their ill treatment of their pets, and from this, he could make better judgements as to when children were at risk. In 1983, in the International Journal for the Study of Animal Problems, DeViney et al. described a survey of pet owning families in the US with substantiated child abuse and neglect [ 56 ]. The authors found that animals were abused in 88 percent of homes in which children had been physically abused. In the majority of these cases, the abuse of the animals was perpetrated by a parent(s). The association between substantial animal directed abuse in childhood and later aggression towards people was confirmed by Kellert and Felthous in a 1985 paper [ 57 ]. In 1998, in a study published in the Journal of Emotional Abuse of abused women who sought shelter at a safe home and who had companion animals, 71 percent confirmed that their partner had threatened, injured or killed their pets [ 58 ]. Numerous studies in the millennium to date have documented the co-occurrence of family violence and animal abuse internationally [ 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 ].

1.3.2. Impact of Witnessing Animal Cruelty

There is growing evidence that many children and adults have often witnessed one or more forms of family violence as well as animal cruelty [ 40 , 65 , 66 , 67 ]. Children and adults can be exposed to direct forms of abuse or they may indirectly have experienced the effects of abuse by virtue of being a witness of family violence that has included a companion animal. Companion animals are often considered as a cherished family member and can also be subjected to abuse as a form of intimidation and retaliation to have/maintain control and power by the perpetrator. Although all cases of family violence can have a negative effect on children, frequency, length, and severity of the violent act will influence its effect [ 68 , 69 ]. Children who are frequently exposed to severe forms of family violence are found more likely to often abuse animals as are children who are regularly exposed to animal abuse [ 70 ]. Both these groups of children are more inclined to repeatedly abuse animals as compared to children who have witnessed a few incidents of animal abuse [ 71 ]. Both direct and indirect forms of abuse have profound short and long term impact on child development. Five key areas of child development documented as having significant traumatic impact are physical or biological functioning, behavioral, emotional development, social adaptation, and cognitive development [ 72 ]. Children who witness or experience animal cruelty or neglect are more likely in the future to engage in the abuse of other animals and people, often mimicking the behavior of the perpetrator [ 73 , 74 ]. Children and adults who have a strong bond with their companion animals have been documented to intervene during incidents of abuse of their animals [ 75 ]. Such preventative acts of protection occur either verbally (e.g., pleading with the abuser) or physically (e.g., blocking their companion animals with their body).

In all cases of animal abuse, there is, besides the physical animal abuse, a psychological impact on the bystanders including the animals [ 54 , 76 ]. Victims who often choose to remain in family violence situations feel that they are unable to leave for fear of repercussions by the perpetrator on the companion animal [ 67 , 77 ]. Few family violence shelters accept companion animals, even though it is now well recognized this is why victims with animals delay fleeing and thus remain in jeopardy [ 45 , 58 , 77 ]. To address this problem some countries have introduced pet fostering services. The U.K. has a number of pet fostering services, e.g., Dogs Trust Freedom project which will house the companion animal while the victim is rehomed in a safe place [ 78 ]. A pet fostering service has recently been established in The Netherlands [ 79 ]. In addition, pilot programs in which companion animals stay together with their families in refuges have been recently introduced [ 80 ]. However, in most countries pet fostering services are still unavailable and there are very few refuges accepting companion animals from violent situations. This results in ongoing abuse and fatalities of women, children and animals that are preventable.

1.4. Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Systems Model

The Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems model introduced in this article emphasizes that the contexts in which an active developing individual spends time and the relations of the individual with others in the same setting, the personality of the individual (and those with whom he/she interacts), both in terms of development over time and the historical time in which these individuals live and the mechanisms that propel development (proximal process) should be considered [ 81 ]. Bronfenbrenner’s model has been a landmark advance in understanding family violence and in helping early detection of abuse and early intervention. The model has greatly advanced practitioners’ understanding of and response to family violence. It has been found to be a useful tool across health services and as such strongly recommended to be employed by organizations such as World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control, and the United Nations (UN).

The bioecological systems model is characterized by four systems: microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem. These systems enable the examination of human development within nested contexts of close relationships with individuals within the family (e.g., parents, siblings, companion animals), schools, neighborhoods, religious centers, health institutions, human health and safety services, animal welfare services among others. Socio-cultural beliefs and norms are also considered as influencing factors of human development. Interactions that occur between the systems are as much of importance and influence to human development as those interactions that occur within them.

The innermost circle and the closest layer to the individual is the microsystem, the individual’s immediate physical, social, and psychological environment. It consists of patterns of activities, social, and familial roles, and interpersonal relations with which he/she interacts in bidirectional or face to face settings (e.g., settings such as family, school, workplace, peer group). The second level, which is a system of microsystems, is known as the mesosystem. The mesosystem consists of interconnections and processes of two or more microsystem settings that involve the developing individual (e.g., relationship between home and school, home and workplace). Surrounding the mesosystem is the exosystem which comprises of interconnections and processes that happen between two or more immediate settings, of which in at least one setting the individual is not present or does not participate within it. However, events in this setting indirectly influence processes in the immediate environment in which the individual lives (e.g., for the child, the relationship between school and parent’s workplace) and from time to time the events are influenced by the individual. The macrosystem contains cultural beliefs, societal norms, socio-political factors, economic facts and government systems that affect the circumstances and processes existing in the microsystem. The hallmark of the macrosystem is its overarching belief system or ideology. It is the broadest ecosystemic level within which the microsystem and exosystem operate. The fifth and final system is the chronosystem which reflects change or continuity that occurs over the individual’s lifetime caused by events or experiences [ 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 ]. The critical message of this model is that all systems interact with and influence each other and are reflected in the development processes of the individual. It suggests that every small intervention in a system or between the systems will affect the micro system of the individual (and the companion animals) with potential to achieve positive or negative changes.

1.5. Animal Abuse and Family Violence: Integrating the Bioecological Systems Model

The multi-tiered set of systems illustrates the range of professionals who may be involved with the individual in his/her development process within and across the range of ecological contexts. In cases of family violence in which animal and human victims are evident, collaborative efforts can therefore be established between a range of relevant individuals and professionals for more effective interventions to be applied.

With the ecological map in mind, the animal or human health and welfare professionals would begin the process of building knowledge by first examining the immediate environment (microsystem) of the subject human or companion animal. Understanding the whole context and making home visits are vital. Home visits allow for a better assessment of both human and animal welfare [ 90 ]. For example, using the ecological map of the hypothetical case of Bo and Sam in Figure 1 , the concerned health and welfare professional can further his/her knowledge by simultaneously examining the microsystem of both, the companion animal (Bo) and the child (Sam), thus identifying the structures and individuals at the closest layer to both of them in which interpersonal relationships and interactions occur on a frequent basis. Should the animal health and welfare officer have concerns about the welfare of Bo then he/she could consider the quality of Bo’s life with his family, his interactions with his caregivers (Smith parents) and with Sam, the emotional reaction of the dog towards the Smith parents (e.g., does Bo, during the clinical visit, seek support/comfort from his caregiver or is he afraid and avoids physical contact) and vice-versa (e.g., are the caregivers aloof, unconcerned, disinterested about Bo during the clinical visit?). However, it has been documented that some abused dogs try hard to please their perpetrator, and appear to be bonded; and some perpetrators feign concern about animals they have abused. If during a consultation the professional suspects this may be a case of animal abuse he/she should not confront the caregiver. Occasionally careful questioning may be warranted, for example, when there are injuries that may be the result of a deliberate act. The concerned professional should aim to have the animal admitted for tests/treatment or observation. Admitting the animal allows an animal health professional (e.g., veterinarian) time to conduct a more detailed examination including checking for bruising, and also provides the time needed to undertake careful analysis of all available records in the clinic. The veterinarian should also check on the history of Bo’s prior visits in the clinic; and the records of any other animals in the family. Concerns should be discussed with other veterinarians in the practice, especially with those who have treated Bo or the family’s other companion animals. Veterinary technicians, nurses, and reception staff should be asked about any discrepancies in histories provided and their impressions arising from interface with the family. Similarly, such a procedure could be undertaken by a child or adult protection services professional when investigating the welfare of a child or an adult in the family. Where suspicions are raised, both animal and human welfare officers can compare their findings since it is known that where animals are at risk, people are often at risk and vice versa. Neighbors, friends and teachers, for example, can also be inquired about the welfare of the child in the concerned family.

Bioecological Map.

The mesosystem in Figure 1 demonstrates the myriad ways in which individuals in the microsystem of Bo and Sam both separately and together are interconnected. These interconnections allow animal and human health and welfare professionals to attain additional information. They also demonstrate the need for follow up actions towards identification and prevention of abuse and neglect including providing support for the victims such as removal to a safe place and/or counseling. An examination of Bo and Sam’s exosystem identifies potential risks to both. These could include negative influences from peer groups or family friends who support aggressive behavior of the Smith parents, stress from loss of job, separation from extended family, which reduces additional family protection and support for Bo and Sam and a lack of institutional support (child protection and animal protection services). Any or all of the above may be associated with features of family violence. The macrosystem provides information on deep seated cultural beliefs on the acceptability of violent and aggressive behaviors towards animals, children, or an adult and a lack of government services or absence of policies or laws for their protection. Examples of chronosystem information that can assist human health and welfare professionals would be a history of life events over time, (e.g., perpetrator or a victim of abuse), changes in family structure through displacement or relocation, illness, and death all of which predict negative psychological and behavioral outcomes.

The model has the ability to systematically document the scope of the problem and add depth to the understanding of both positive and negative relationships between the companion animal and his/her family members and vice versa, as well as the many aspects of the animal and human environment and how they interact with and impact each other. Animal abuse, child abuse, family violence, and actions of prevention and intervention of abuse can be better understood and planned through this model.

1.6. Transdisciplinary Collaboration: An Approach for the Identification and Prevention of Violence and Protection of Animal and Human Victims

By situating the animal and the humans at the center of the model, we are able to examine the multiplicity of factors such as the family, community, institutions (e.g., schools, workplace), society, cultural factors, and historical events that can aggravate or lessen incidents of violence and subsequently the harmful effects on the animal and the human.

Historically, it has been animal welfare professionals who have been most attentive to and concerned about animal abuse in situations of family violence. However, recent times have seen an interdisciplinary interest among mental health and law enforcement professionals in the connection between cruelty to animals and family violence. Their interest has been attributed to the inclusion of animal cruelty into the American Psychiatric Association diagnostic criteria for conduct disorder in 1994 [ 91 ], several other important awareness campaigns and activities in the United States, and elsewhere in the world such as in The Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom, and France [ 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 ]. Furthermore, overwhelming evidence on the Link between cruelty to animals and violence against children and adults in family settings across a range of disciplines (judiciary, police, psychology, social work, veterinary sciences, medicine, nursing) have further substantiated the occurrences [ 67 ].

Intervention, crucial in the identification, prevention, and protection of victims of family violence requires transdisciplinary collaboration. Psychologists, social workers, veterinarians, educators and other health and behavioral professionals witness an amalgam of victims/clients whose lives have been tragically impacted by family violence. The complex and fragile nature of this problem cannot be solved using any single discipline nor can it be addressed through the actions of an individual professional [ 96 ]. On the contrary, for a change in outcome, every effort must be made by a range of professionals to stand unified in sharing responsibility and working towards a common goal, each depending on the expertize of the other. Flexibility, contribution towards, and collective ownership of goals, interdependence, and maximizing the expertize of one another are all viewed as hallmarks of successful interdisciplinary collaboration [ 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 ].

Animal health and welfare professionals have traditionally worked independently of the other health and social care professions. When presented with cases of suspected animal abuse and/or family violence they face difficult challenges in emotionally charged situations, many of which would benefit from a multidisciplinary approach.

2. Methodology

In this article, the authors introduced the bioecological theoretical model of Bronfenbrenner. To demonstrate the model the authors provided cases that were selected from four separate studies conducted in The Netherlands, United States, and the United Kingdom [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. The studies used one or more qualitative methods such as interviews, observations, video, and document analysis (e.g., family violence records, incident reports, duty logs). The participants were police officers, other law enforcers, veterinarians, social workers, community, and family members. The cases were selected from the studies to serve as examples of how the bioecological model could have helped reveal the abuse to the professionals involved. The authors incorporated the cases into the bioecological model of Bronfenbrenner to reflect the usefulness of this model in cases of family violence and animal cruelty.

Ethical Issues

Formal ethics approval of the cases was obtained from the Institutional Review Board at the University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA (IRB ID: STUDY00003277). Consent from the interviewees was attained. A pseudonym was assigned to each individual (humans and animal) to protect his or her identity. Interviews were conducted in the participants’ preferred language.

3. The Link between Child Abuse, Animal Abuse, and Family Violence: Four Cases of Connections

Four cases were purposefully selected as exemplars because of their relevance to the phenomenon of the Link between violence towards animals and humans and how it is intricately related to the behavior of individuals in each case and to demonstrate that understanding these cases requires a wide sweep of familial, historical, social, and cultural contexts. Furthermore, the cases provide an opportunity to learn about the particularity and complexity of the contexts in which the Link occurs. Additionally, the cases illustrate how the bioecological model has the potential to support animal and human health, welfare, and protection professionals in the identification and follow up strategies to prevent further abuse on animals and humans caught in abusive settings. Case 4 also demonstrates the value of professionals working together with transdisciplinary colleagues and institutions (e.g., social workers, animal welfare services) and organizations (e.g., companion animal foster services, refuges for human and animal victims of abuse) that extend beyond one’s usual practice in their respective fields in order to aid in the psychological and physical wellbeing of their patients and clients.

Each of the four cases presented below is accompanied by a case synopsis, contextual information, case analysis using the bioecological model, and an ecological map to demonstrate the Link between animal cruelty and child abuse in family violence.

3.1. Case 1 Synopsis: The Abuse of Sisters Ena and Mai and Their Dog Bamboo (USA)

Chan often threatened his two daughters Ena and Mai to comply with his orders by yelling at their dog Bamboo until she cowered in fear. There were times when Chan hit and kicked Bamboo in front of Ena and Mai until Bamboo cried and Ena and Mai would tearfully plead with their father to stop hurting Bamboo and promised that they would do anything he wanted them to do. Their mother Kiku remained as a silent witness to the frequent incidents of abuse of her daughters and their family dog taking no action to protect them. Kiku attributed her silence to socio-cultural, familial issues and social isolation. Attempts by Kiku’s friend to convince her to get help remained unfruitful.

3.1.1. Case 1: Contextual Information

Sisters Ena and Mai lived with their mother (Kiku) and father (Chan) both first generation immigrant parents. Bamboo is their family dog and Ena and Mai are deeply bonded with her. The sisters’ best friend is Micki who is their classmate and neighbor. Micki’s mother, Yuna, is a friend of Kiku. Both families are of the same cultural background. Chan frequently emotionally and physically abused his daughters and their family dog. The sisters were forced to watch the abuse of Bamboo as a way to control them. During this time Ena and Mai would try to shield their dog and emotionally implore their father to show mercy on Bamboo and promised to comply with his wishes. It became clear to the sisters that their mother, who was often present when the abuse occurred, was helpless to intervene and end the trauma. The sisters considered informing their teacher Ms. Sasha but were hesitant because they viewed her as unfriendly and not welcoming of informal interactions with students. Instead, the sisters turned to their friend Micki and shared with her the abuse inflicted on them and Bamboo. Micki, distraught at what she heard disclosed their situation with her mother.

Yuna’s attempts to convince Kiku to get help were in vain. Kiku felt that family violence was not unusual in their community and that it was quite natural for husbands to have outbursts since they had stressors in their lives as a result of being the primary providers in the family. Kiku, who comes from a traditional family was unwilling to report her husband’s abuse for fear of shaming him in the eyes of her extended family and the community. She felt that it was her role to protect the family honor. Additionally, she believed in adhering to gender-specific responsibilities such as silent sacrifice, unquestioning loyalty, and complete obedience to male authority which is expected in a patriarchal family system. She also felt that there was not much she could do because of her dependency on her husband, limited English proficiency, and her lack of support of extended family members because they lived a distance away in her native country. Yuna discussed Kiku’s situation with a psychologist whom she had known for a few years and was given advice on next steps and offered assistance. When the psychologist followed up with Yuna to check if she provided Kiku with the information, Yuna uncomfortably responded ‘not yet.’ Numerous requests to Yuna by the psychologist for an update including offers of help for the victims failed. Yuna eventually stopped visiting the psychologist and multiple attempts to contact her were unsuccessful.

3.1.2. Case 1: Analysis Using the Bioecological Systems Theory

As shown in Figure 2 individuals within the microsystem of Ena and Mai and Bamboo are the parents/caregivers (Chan and Kiku), a school friend Micki and her mother Yuna and their teacher Ms. Sasha. The sisters experienced significant trauma in witnessing the abuse of Bamboo by their father. During this time they took emotional (i.e., pleading) and physical (shielding) actions to intervene and protect Bamboo from their father. Children’s interventions in preventing violence towards their companion animals and the protective strategies they have utilized have been reported in DeGue, et al. (2011) and Jegatheesan (2013) [ 15 , 18 ]. The sisters chose to confide in Micki (microsystem) about the abuse their father inflicts on them and on their dog Bamboo. Kiku’s explanations to Yuna for not taking her advice on reporting the abuse revolves around a lack of structures in her exosystem such as social and institutional support and absence of extended family members. Macrosystem factors associated with her unwillingness to report her husband’s violent behavior stem from traditional cultural beliefs, such as bringing shame to the family if she went public about her husband’s abusive behavior and through seeking help. As a result she chose to remain silent and in doing so felt she was safeguarding family honor. It is also critical to note that although Kiku harbors a strong cultural sentiment of acceptance and tolerance of abuse she nevertheless identified barriers such as a high level of dependency on her husband, limited English proficiency, and absence of familial and cultural support system in the USA, all of which could come in the way of her seeking assistance. It is important to note that the barriers identified by Kiku increased her social isolation and which proved to be a significant challenge in her getting connected to institutions of support such as child protection services, animal welfare services, and law enforcement (exosystem). Finally, this case illustrates a situation where the plight of the victims may have been improved had the family friend implemented the steps advised by the professional she consulted. Numerous studies of immigrant women have demonstrated that social isolation is strongly related to a higher risk of family violence [ 100 , 101 , 102 ].

Case 1 Bioecological Map.

3.2. Case 2 Synopsis: The Killing of an Infant in a Family (UK)

An animal protection agency inspector visited a house in February due to reports by neighbors of much yelling. When he arrived, Coco, a 6-month-old puppy, belonging to the young couple Brad and Kate was found to be lame with a bruised eye. Kate reported that Coco had ‘fallen’ down the stairs when her partner Brad beat him for chewing the suitcase which was packed ready for her to go into hospital to give birth. Brad was upset and said that ‘his head was all over the place’. Coco was signed over to the animal protection agency. Brad thought this best due to the imminent birth of the baby. Baby Kyle was born the following month. In May of the same year Brad was charged with his young son Kyle’s murder. Initially, Kate said that the baby had ‘fallen’ down the stairs. Brad later admitted to throwing his young son down the stairs.

3.2.1. Case 2: Contextual Information

An infant boy tragically died when his father (Brad) threw him down the stairs in this case of family violence. Brad’s abusive and violent nature was established 3 months prior to the murder of his infant son when he beat Coco, the family’s puppy over a chewing incident. An officer from an animal protection agency who visited the house to investigate the situation determined that the puppy had been subjected to abuse and Coco was relinquished to the animal protection agency. The animal protection agency conducts private prosecutions, which do not require mandatory reporting to the law enforcement agency. What remains unknown in this case is whether Brad had previously abused Coco, or if he was violent towards his wife Kate.

3.2.2. Case 2: Analysis Using the Bioecological Systems Theory

As illustrated in Figure 3 individuals within the microsystem of Coco the puppy and baby Kyle are parents Brad and Kate and their neighbors. Brad’s abusive and violent nature was established 3 months prior to the murder of his infant son when he beat Coco, the family’s puppy over a chewing incident. Neighbors concerned by the sounds of screaming and yelling called the animal protection agency (exosystem). Although an animal protection officer (exosystem) came to the house, and determined that the puppy had been abused, it is unclear if a report was made to the human health organization in view of the fact that Kate was heavily pregnant. Often it has been found that animal abuse has been treated as an isolated incident and not deserving of a police report [ 103 , 104 ]. Furthermore, some investigators are not yet aware of the interconnectedness between child abuse, animal abuse, and family violence and of the need for cross-reporting.

Case 2 Bioecological Map.

The fact that Brad’s abusive behavior was established, an early report to social services could have provided Brad with an opportunity to get early intervention and support such as counselling and/or anger management to help avert recurring abusive behavior. At that time, there was no evidence that Brad was violent towards Kate. This case is a typical example of a scenario where violence towards animals could have been used as a significant indicator for later family violence [ 105 , 106 , 107 ]. Such scenarios should prompt attending professionals to alert appropriate agencies, in this case, the social services and mental health agencies (exosystem).

Awareness of the Link could have prompted several actions. These include reporting the abuse to the police for their input, separately interviewing the pregnant woman about her situation and that of the puppy, talking with neighbors to obtain additional information as well as seeking information from Coco’s veterinarian. The information gathered could have provided clearer insights about the actual situation, and subsequently alerted social services and other relevant services in providing support to the victims and to the perpetrator.

It is important to consider the very short time interval between the abuse of Coco and baby Kyle’s death. Even if cross-reporting was undertaken there would have been insufficient time for effective intervention. This case demonstrates the correlation between the incident of Brad abusing Coco and the murder of his infant 3 months later (chronosystem).

3.3. Case 3 Synopsis: A Lack of Timely Intervention in a Troubled Youth Who Brutally Killed a Kitten and Continued Violence a Decade Later (The Netherlands)

A police officer was called by neighbors to an apartment where a young father named Tim had beaten Jill, his ex-wife, and threatened to beat their baby as well. Tim had been violent before and was legally forbidden to come near Jill’s house. The police officer recognized Tim as one of the youngsters in a mall ten years ago who had kicked a male kitten and thrown him against a wall to his death. At the time of the kitten’s abuse, the police reported the incident to Tim’s parents in his presence. Tim’s parents were not concerned with what he had done; instead, they consoled him with a reward.

3.3.1. Case 3: Contextual Information

This case describes how a police officer (Bob) recognizes a young man (Tim) from a previous violent situation. The first time that Tim was confronted by the police was when he was fourteen years old. On that occasion, Bob was the police officer on duty and was called to a mall where a group of 14- to 16-year-old boys had been kicking a kitten. Witnesses reported that the kitten had stroked their legs, which irritated them. When the kitten did not stop looking for attention one of the boys (Tim) took the kitten into an alley, where he smashed the kitten several times against the wall. An older lady tried to stop the abuse, picked up the dying kitten, and called the police. Bob went with his colleague to meet Tim’s parents to report the incident. He stated that he “never forgot the reaction of Tim’s mother and father.” Tim’s parents were not concerned about what Tim had done and gave him money to buy an ice cream as a means of consolation. The police officers did not inform Social Services (which is now an obligation in The Netherlands).

Ten years later, a police officer was called by neighbors of a young mother (Jill), whose ex-husband Tim had come to her house and beaten her. Tim also threatened to beat their infant named Ned. Jill had divorced Tim because of his severe violence towards her. Tim was convicted for his violence towards his wife and legally forbidden to come near the house. Coincidentally the police officer who responded to the incident was Bob. Bob recognized Tim and looked through his files for earlier cases of violence. The abuse and killing of the kitten in the mall was filed in Tim’s police record.

3.3.2. Case 3: Analysis Using the Bioecological Systems Theory

As illustrated in Figure 4 individuals within the microsystem of Tim as a child were his parents and his friends. Tim along with his friends was involved in a merciless act of violence when he abused and brutally killed a kitten in a mall, that was witnessed and reported by an older lady (exosystem). When viewed through the ecological systems lens, several individuals in Tim’s ecological system failed to take appropriate action for his egregious act of cruelty. These included the investigating police officer Bob (exosystem) who did not file charges against Tim and did not report the killing of the cat to animal welfare services (exosystem). Furthermore, Bob did not inform social and health services (exosystem), which resulted in Tim not being provided with timely and appropriate interventions to help prevent violence in the future. Studies have shown that violence towards animals during childhood can be a warning sign of future abusive behavior as an adult [ 108 , 109 ].

Case 3 Bioecological Map.

In addition, Tim’s family was not investigated about possible family violence. Other individuals who failed to act appropriately when Tim mercilessly killed the kitten were his parents (microsystem) who did not reprimand him or seek social and health support services (exosystem) for him such as mental health evaluation, diagnosis, and targeted counselling. Tim’s brutality towards a kitten years prior can be viewed as a strong predictor of later violence at an older age and his actions causing extreme stressors and effects on the victims. The lack of cross-reporting by the police officer and Tim’s parents, regarding the specific incident in the mall, was a missed opportunity for timely intervention. Targeted support during his adolescence (chronosystem) may have prevented the escalation of his abusive behavior as occurred in his violent relationship with Jill, his ex-wife, and their infant a decade later (adult microsystem).

Traditionally, animal abuse by children has been examined as a separate issue [ 110 ]. Because animal abuse cases may reveal a wider spectrum of behaviors related to the Link, the authors make a compelling argument for the need for cross-reporting as a way to inform the various expressions of violence to their colleagues in other disciplines. Viewed as best practice, cross-reporting requires coordinated and collaborative interdisciplinary efforts with information sharing among animal and child welfare agencies, social and human services agencies, law enforcement departments, and other related disciplines concerned with family violence.

3.4. Case 4 Synopsis: Woman and Dog, Who Had Both Been Subjected to Years of Abuse, Rescued by a Veterinarian and Her Transdisciplinary Team (UK)

A veterinarian on emergency duty, was called to a house early one morning to attend to a dog in pain. The woman named Sarah had been awoken by her dog named Kerry screaming. Her husband who had been downstairs with her dog told her that Kerry had fallen off the settee. Sarah was disheveled and very distressed whilst her husband was smartly groomed and aloof. Something fell from Sarah-a urinary collection bag. As the veterinarian returned this she experienced a “light bulb” moment. Could this be a case of family violence against Sarah and Kerry? The husband left the room briefly and the veterinarian quickly passed her private phone number to Sarah, mouthing “phone me”.

3.4.1. Case 4: Contextual Information

Sarah was seriously physically abused by her husband Blake over many years. Her doctor advised her to leave Blake but offered her no support or referral and did not report the abuse to the police. Sarah had also been frequently admitted to hospital after being battered. Sarah lost one of her kidneys through the injuries and the other was seriously damaged. At the hospital, neither the attending doctors nor other hospital staff questioned Sarah about her injuries. Sarah had contacted local women’s refuges, but none would allow companion animals. Her dog Kerry was also repeatedly abused by Blake and had been presented to a local veterinarian on many occasions. He was puzzled by the case and had not been able to diagnose the cause of Kerry’s repeated pain episodes.

Early on a Sunday morning, an Out of Hours veterinarian who was on emergency duty for three veterinary practices answered Sarah’s call requesting a home visit for her dog. However, on questioning Sarah it did not sound like an emergency situation requiring a home visit since Kerry was already receiving ongoing veterinary treatment for pain. Furthermore, Sarah’s own veterinarian who had been attending to Kerry was available for consultation that morning, so the duty veterinarian suggested that Sarah wait until then. However, Sarah pleaded with her to attend to Kerry and as there was such desperation in her voice the duty veterinarian agreed to visit. Their home was in another town, some miles away.

On arrival at the house, Blake answered the door and led the way to the living room where the veterinarian found Kerry lying on the floor and Sarah sitting on the settee looking very unkempt. Kerry was in discomfort but was receiving the appropriate veterinary medication at the correct dose. The veterinarian felt her presence was neither needed nor warranted. However, as she knelt on the floor in front of the settee to examine Kerry more carefully Sarah provided more history. Sarah had been upstairs in bed when she heard Kerry screaming. Blake who had been downstairs with Kerry told Sarah that Kerry had fallen off the settee. The veterinarian determined that Kerry’s pain was sublumbar, in the renal area.

During the consultation, Blake stood against a wall observing and did not contribute to the consultation. Then something fell off the settee landing just behind the veterinarian who reached back without looking to pick it up and return it to Sarah, thinking this would be a magazine. To her astonishment, it was a urine collection bag. Then came a moment of revelation and things came together—Sarah’s illness, Kerry’s mystery illness, the repeated bouts of pain, the discrepancy between the couple’s attitude, behavior, and demeanor. The history of Kerry falling off the settee didn’t seem right, and only Blake was present when Kerry cried out. The fact that Kerry’s pain was in the sublumbar region and Sarah had a urinary tract problem. The veterinarian considered that this could be a case of family violence. She remained calm and gave no outward sign of her suspicions. She wrote her home number on her business card intending to slip it to Sarah before she left. However, a few minutes later Blake went into the kitchen and the veterinarian passed her card to Sarah whilst silently mouthing “phone me”.

After leaving Sarah’s house the veterinarian, to check if her intuitions were accurate, discussed Sarah’s circumstances with one of her colleagues, a social worker who specializes in family violence. The social worker stated that this was a classic presentation of a family violence situation and advised her to alert the client’s veterinarian of her suspicions. When she called Kerry’s veterinarian later that morning he could not accept that Blake could be battering the dog. Kerry’s veterinarian said Blake was a “nice and caring man who always accompanied his wife to the surgery and who expressed great concern about the dog”.

Later that afternoon Sarah phoned the veterinarian who had visited her home out of hours and talked at length about her abusive situation. She disclosed that Blake was a violent man who spent years in prison for acts of violence where he had undertaken anger management classes in prison. Despite the ongoing abuse and her grave medical condition Sarah was in conflict about leaving her violent husband. She stated that she was a Christian and “had taken her marriage vows.” She felt bound to remain with her husband. She saw no way out of her situation, except death. Sarah made no reference to friends or family. The veterinarian told Sarah that Kerry hadn’t taken any such vows, that she had a duty of care for Kerry and that if she did not leave Blake would likely kill both Kerry and her. She informed Sarah that she would contact Paws for Kids an organization that would place Kerry in a loving foster home until they were reunited.

This veterinarian had created a transdisciplinary community network as part of her bond-centered veterinary practice. With the help of this veterinarian and her transdisciplinary team Sarah agreed to get help. Paws for Kids was contacted and the organization placed Kerry with a foster caregiver. Sarah was admitted to a safe house. A month later this veterinarian received a letter from Sarah expressing heartfelt thanks and stating she would soon be reunited with Kerry in a new home.

3.4.2. Case 4: Analysis Using the Bioecological Systems Theory

As demonstrated in Figure 5 , individuals and interactions with them in Sarah’s immediate surroundings are her husband Blake and her dog Kerry (microsystem). Sarah was severely battered by Blake over many years. Throughout this time Sarah was in repeated contact with her local physician and with medical staff in a hospital for treatment of her life-threatening injuries. She was also in contact with her veterinarian for treatment of Kerry’s recurrent and unexplained pain (microsystem). Furthermore, Sarah also contacted local women’s refuges (exosystem) but their ‘no-companion animals’ policies meant that she could not take Kerry with her, and so Sarah decided to remain at home for fear of Kerry’s safety. Sarah’s decision to remain in her dangerous situation is consistent with results from previous research about battered women’s concerns for their companion animals’ safety affecting their decision about leaving for a family violence refuge or remaining in an abusive relationship [ 44 , 58 , 111 ]. This situation calls for local refuges to consider allowing companion animals on their premises as a matter of urgency.

Case 4 Bioecological Map.

The above-mentioned professionals in Sarah’s micro and exosystems, with whom she had interacted with during the course of her abuse, could have played a key role in eliminating the one component (viz. husband) in her “system” by informing the police and ending the trauma for her and Kerry. Informing the police would have led to uncovering the knowledge that Blake had a prior police record for acts of violence, had been imprisoned for many years for violence against another individual, and had undertaken anger management sessions in prison (chronosystem of Blake). These professionals could also have provided resources and services that could have been instrumental in helping Sarah and Kerry escape the abuse and move to a violence-free environment. Additionally, had the family veterinarian been aware of the Link, he too could have put an end to Kerry and Sarah’s trauma by seeking human and animal welfare services for the dyad. Intake policies in refuges that are inclusive of companion animals could have altered Sarah’s decision to remain in her abusive home situation with Blake, leaving them both vulnerable to abuse. An additional factor that played a role in Sarah’s hesitation to leave her husband was her religious belief (macrosystem) about her marriage vows. The factors indicated above collectively left Sarah and Kerry in continuous peril. Lastly, the chronosystem of the dyad illustrates the non-normative events in Sarah and Kerry’s life such as the abuse they endured over time and the lack of actions by professionals during the period of trauma that significantly impacted their prospects of a violence-free life. Sarah and Kerry’s situation remained unchanged until the duty veterinarian visited. She had, a priori, conceived and formed a transdisciplinary network of colleagues from other health and social care professions and organizations [ 19 , 112 ], and this proved to be pivotal in helping Sarah and Kerry leave their abusive situation.

4. Conclusions

This article introduces the Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems model (1973–2006) to understand the complex psychological problems of animal abuse, child abuse, and family violence, and its potential to aid professionals in the identification of strategies for animals and humans caught in family violence situations.

The catastrophic effect of violence to animals and violence to people underscores the need for transdisciplinary and collaborative interventions between animal welfare agencies and human services organizations to help lives trapped in family violence. A large and growing body of scientific research demonstrates the correlation that can exist between animal abuse, child abuse, and family violence, otherwise known as the Link. Therefore, animal and human agencies must work together to ensure integrated, thorough, and effective interventions. The old way of working in silos within one’s profession and using piecemeal approaches has clearly demonstrated its limitations and ineffectiveness as evident in cases 2, 3, and 4 in this article. The bioecological systems model offers more comprehensive effective ways to understand the complexity of animal cruelty and family violence.

Shared training is one way of helping professionals to understand their respective roles and responsibilities, build relationships, and gain insight into each other’s points of view and decision-making processes. The experience of learning from each other and learning together in both formal and informal ways can be a good basis for building trust and respect, empathy being one of the key interpersonal skills that support successful relationships and collaborative efforts [ 113 ].

The benefits to animal and human health and welfare professionals of being a member of a transdisciplinary network will become fully apparent when such complex cases arise and professionals are encouraged to keep the Bronfenbrenner model in mind. By alerting the appropriate agencies to cases of suspected abuse of their clients these professionals can play an important role in client protection and in enhancing their safety. Greater protection from violence and neglect would then be provided to children, women, vulnerable elders, and animals and preventive measures can be taken.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the police officers and other informants for the cases provided during fieldwork.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.J.; Methodology, B.J., M.-J.E.-S., E.O., and P.B.; Analysis, B.J., M.-J.E.-S., E.O., and P.B.; Investigation, B.J., M.-J.E.-S., E.O., and P.B.; Writing—original draft of theoretical model and integration of model in animal abuse and family violence preparation, B.J.; Writing—case studies, and contribution to writing the manuscript, B.J., M.-J.E.-S., and E.O.; Writing—reviewing and editing, B.J., M.-J.E.-S., and E.O.; Final approval of manuscript, B.J., M.-J.E.-S., E.O., and P.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interests.

📕 Studying HQ

150+ argumentative essay topics about animal abuse, bob cardens.

• July 31, 2022
• Essay Topics and Ideas , Samples

When it comes to argumentative essay writing, there are many different topics that you can choose from. However, one topic that always seems to be popular is animal abuse. Argumentative Essay Topics About Animal Abuse can be about anything related to animal abuse, Here are some good animal abuse essay topics and research topics you can write about

What You'll Learn

Argumentative Research Paper Topics About Animal Abuse with prompts

Ethics- use of animals in the process of testing non-medical products.

Essay prompt: poisoning, shocking, burning, and murdering animals has become a common practice for various companies producing non-medical products such as cosmetics, cleaning, storage, pharmacy, and office supplies among others, according to people for the ethical treatment of animals (PETA).

Delegate your Paper to an Expert

Owning exotic pets

Essay prompt: having pets could make the owners to experience enrichment and joy. There are so many benefits associated with keeping pet animals.

Argumentative essay thesis: owning exotic animals can cause an endangerment to the animal, to the owner, and to the community.

• Close reading: human-animal relations

Essay prompt: the utilitarian perspective involves the idea that animals are simply sources of food and have no added value.

• Argumentative essay about animal models in scientific research

Essay prompt: this paper argues that the use of animal models in scientific research is more beneficial compared to its drawbacks and that all animal experiments strictly adhere to the ethical principles of scientific research

• Aspca animal abuse and adoption
• Essay prompt: before human beings walked the face of the earth, there were already inhabitants that are years ahead of us, and these were animals. Animals have been through many natural phenomena and disasters, evolved, and adapted to what we know of them nowadays, but their fight for survival is still not over.
• Should animals be used for medical research
• Techniques of propaganda in animal farm
• Describe why animal research and testing ought to stop

Essay prompt: while there are benefits to humans from animal research, the researchers claim that they try to minimize pain and discomfort, but fail to show how they achieve this.

• Animal cruelty laws: suffering or premature death

Essay prompt: this paper discusses various animal cruelty laws that fight for animal rights to avert their suffering or premature death. Globally, animals have continuously become subjects of litigation.

• Developing spare parts for humans

Essay prompt: undergraduate essay: developing spare parts for humans. Animals are being experimented with and used to create tissues, organs and medicines for humans. Do you believe that using certain animals for this?

• Commercial animal farms: animal rights research assignment

Essay prompt: what do you think would happen to commercial animal farms if regan’s ideas are adopted?

• Subtle relationship between elephants and humans
• Treating animals humanely personal essay

Essay prompt: this article seeks to make the argument that animals deserve to be treated humanely because it is wrong to advance a single species at the expense of others, some fundamental rights extend to all species.

As you continue,  thestudycorp.com  has the top and most qualified writers to help with any of your assignments. All you need to do is  place an order  with us.

Argumentative Essay Topics About Animal Abuse

• What are the things one should consider before adopting a pet?
• Should the law be harsher for animal cruelty?
• Should the conditions in a farm factory be improved?
• Human lives are more important than living creatures’ ones
• Should hunting be banned?
• Should we propose alternatives to animal experiments?
• Animal rights as an indicator of a civilized society.
• Do animals have rights?
• Is it important to protect endangered animals?
• Can humans fully protect endangered species?
• Testing cosmetics products on living things should be banned
• Are some animals more beneficial to the ecosystem than others?
• Should animals be subjected to captivity?
• All of us need to respect living creatures and their role
• Should wild animals be kept in reserves?
• Should animals be used in research studies?
• Can animal testing be justified?
• The efforts of various international conventions on animal rights are irrelevant as they are incapable of checking injustice to animals.

Here are  130 + Best Research Topic About Nursing – Types & How To Choose A Nursing Research Topic

• Animal fashion needs to be banned globally
• Lots of people don’t really care about animals
• Can you keep animals caught in the wild as pets?
• Is taking animals to a zoo an inhumane act?
• Is it right to use animals for cosmetics testing?
• Many of the animal species are about to extinct because of the chemicals applied to them during the test.
• The dangers that farms expose animals to.
• Are developed countries less cruel towards animals compared to underdeveloped states?
• Is hunting for rhino’s horns leading to their extinction?
• Punishments for animal abuse are still too mild
• Should animal testing get banned for medicine?
• Is animal dissection a useful learning tool for students?
• Forest cutting has terrible consequences on wildlife
• The moral aspects of keeping animals in captivity for entertainment and commercial reasons.
• Should we ban animal fashion?
• Animals are subjected to human cruelty in various testing labs nowadays?
• What impact do people on wild animals?
• Explore the scope of animal rights; should animal rights be increased?
• Alternatives to animal experimentations
• Should we enforce rules to protect animals against inhumane cruelty on legal grounds?
• Is it right to give dairy cows drugs to boost their milk production?
• The punishment for poaching wild animals should be increased.
• International conventions on animals is completely irrelevant
• Are companion animals efficient for lonely people?
• Animal testing is a must but can be improved
• Is it right or acceptable to use higher animals like chimpanzees and monkeys in laboratory research?
• We should never take medicine if we must save animals from medical experiments
• Is animal health child’s play
• Do lab technicians subject animals to inhumane treatment in laboratory experiments?
• Should deer hunting be banned?
• Should animal keepers encourage the genetic modification of livestock
• Biotechnology poses serious threats to animals
• Which conditions should an aquarium have before immersing gold fish?
• What are some of the ways that people who live in cities tend to abuse their pets?
• Bullfighting: to be or not to be?
• Should animals be killed for food?
• How has the advancement of technology lead to increased animal cruelty
• Most of the animals spread infectious diseases once they are subjected to chemical tests in several experiments.
• Is the genetic modification of domestic animals potentially dangerous for humans?

These are just a few ideas to get you started – there are endless possibilities when it comes to writing about animal abuse. No matter what angle you take, make sure to back up your argument with evidence and reason, and be respectful of other people’s opinions. With a little effort, you can write an essay that will spark discussion and debate – and maybe even change some minds!

Writing on health, here’s a sample Argumentative Essay On Universal Healthcare

Animal Topics For Essays

• The tribal people harm animals for their meals and other needs in several ways.
• The advancement in technology and coming of the biotechnology in the past couple of decades pose a serious threat to animals.
• How expensive is veterinary care?
• Should people have exotic pets?
• The moral responsibility of eliminating animal abuse.
• Making policies to prevent animal cruelty is not enough, they should be enforced on the ground
• Are the wild animals reserves safe for all species?
• Living things shouldn’t be used for entertaining humans
• Should the government continue testing antibiotics on animals?
• Are animals facing cruelty in testing labs?
• Which ways are people in the city advancing animal cruelty
• Is it justifiable to sell products made from animals?
• Should the production of garments from mink be allowed?
• Should we ban use of primates in animal testing?
• Is it right to use animals for medical studies and scientific experiments?
• What methods are implemented on animals during induced helplessness tests?
• Is the factory farm treatment of animals an inhumane act?
• The principles of saving exotic animals from human intervention.
• Should there be a higher penalty for poaching?
• Can medics justify the concept of animal testing?
• Should euthanizing stray animals be banned? (Animal Topics For Essays)
• Animal cruelty
• Is hunting inhumane?
• Epidemiology and animal experimentation: which one is more successful?
• Why animal health should be properly maintained.
• Teaching kids to care for animals.
• Can humans improve the lives of captive animals?
• Are monkeys the most advanced animals?

Here’s a list of  Good Argumentative History Essay Topics

Veterinary Argumentative Essay Topics

• The dangerous effects of humans on beings’ life
• Developed countries are less cruel towards animals as compared to developing and underdeveloped nations.
• Is animal health just a way of making money?
• The challenges encompassing the adoption of pets.
• Is the tether of dogs outside an act of neglect and therefore inhumane?
• Particular species that must be used for testing and experimentation
• Do animals spread infections once subjected to chemical tests in laboratory experiments?
• Why performance animals are exposed to higher risks.
• Should stray animals be euthanized?
• People should not use animals for the purpose of entertainment
• Should foxes be domesticated?
• Apart from making strict rules for saving cruelty to animals, it is also important to enforce them on the real ground.
• Whaling should be outlawed globally.
• Should people pet exotic animals?
• Should pets be controlled to prevent overpopulation?

Find out more on  Argumentative Essay Topics About Social Media [Updated]

Animal Rights Essay Topics

• Opposing position: animals should be protected and death penalty

Essay prompt: there has been controversy on the use of animals in experiments and research, but the practice has been used over time and ethical principles adopted to minimize risks .

• Effect of global warming on certain species of animals (Animal Topics For Essays)

Essay prompt: today, the sea level has gone down, the temperature of the atmosphere has increased, and rains do not fall normally. All this is because of man-made things and unwanted human activities that have contributed to an increased level of global warming.

• Animal captivity: animals live in environments

Essay prompt: animals in captivity are on a daily basis, forced to endure conditions of physical as well as psychological pain. This hampers their development and changes the way they should live and develop.

• Animals should be used for medical research : should animals be used for medical research?
• Discuss the use of animals for sports and entertainment

You can also check out  150+ Top-Notch Argumentative Essay Topic Ideas

Essay prompt: the use of animals for entertainment has been a practice done for over twenty centuries dating back to the time of the gladiator and the coliseum.

• Using animals in psychological research (Animal Topics For Essays)

Essay prompt: the practice of using animals in research has been a common phenomenon for decades since findings from these studies have had a big impact on the development of medicine.

• Letting wild animals remain in the wild, and refraining people from supporting zoos

Essay prompt: conclusively, wild animals should not be kept captive, which is common in most parts of the world. Human beings are the superior species, which gives them the mandate to rule and protect other animals.

• Is it better for animals to not be kept in zoos

Essay prompt: the debate of whether keeping animals in a zoo or letting them wander in their natural habitat is a controversial issue. Notably, all the animals we see in zoos are wild animals.

• Why animals have no right research assignment paper (Argumentative Research Paper Topics About Animal Abuse)

Animal Topics For Research Papers

• Are factory farms responsible for the active spread of influenza diseases among chickens and other domestic animals?
• Humans should be banned from poaching
• Scientists should not use primates and sophisticated vertebrates in lab research
• Tribal people harm animals more for their personal needs
• Are zoos good or bad for animals?
• Is it lawful to keep ocean marine in captivity? (Animal Topics For Essays)
• The advancement of protection culture for fauna.
• Animals don’t have feelings
• What is the impact of water pollution on aquatic life?
• Animal fashion should be illegalized.
• We care for beasties selectively, and that’s a problem
• The ethical aspect of euthanizing stray animals.
• Global warming is destroying different animal ecosystems
• The relevance of conserving the giant panda
• Is animal testing for medical and cosmetic purposes morally justified?

Lastly here are bonus argumentative Essay Topics About Animal Abuse;

• Is it justifiable to sacrifice animals for religious purposes?
• Is companion animal good for people who are lonely?
• Should we report people who are cruel to animals?
• Should chimpanzees and monkeys be used in animal testing?
• Is chemical application on animals the reason for their quick extinction?
• Is it right to breed foxes into companion animals?
• The urgency of protecting endangered animals.
• Do humans have the responsibility to protect the animals they use for medical or experimental tests?
• Should people treat poisonous animals with kindness?
• Should people be afraid of animals?
• Are dolphins the friendliest animals? (Animal Topics For Essays)
• Should bullfighting be banned?
• You can wear leather or fur provided the animals were raised in humane conditions.
• Can the cross-breeding of animal be a sustainable business in the long-term?
• Should animals be respected?
• Trends and public opinion towards animal rights
• Are there conditions in the farm that foster the spread of avian influenza amongst chicken?
• Do you support tethering of dogs and other animals outside?
• Argumentative Research Paper Topics About Animal Abuse

Start by filling this short order form order.studyinghq.com

And then follow the progressive flow. 

Having an issue, chat with us here

Cathy, CS. 

New Concept ? Let a subject expert write your paper for You​

Have a subject expert write for you now, have a subject expert finish your paper for you, edit my paper for me, have an expert write your dissertation's chapter, popular topics.

Business StudyingHq Essay Topics and Ideas How to Guides Samples

• Nursing Solutions
• Study Guides
• Free Study Database for Essays
• Privacy Policy
• Writing Service 
• Discounts / Offers 

Study Hub: 

• Studying Blog
• Topic Ideas 
• How to Guides
• Business Studying 
• Nursing Studying 
• Literature and English Studying

Writing Tools  

• Citation Generator
• Topic Generator
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Conclusion Maker
• Research Title Generator
• Thesis Statement Generator
• Summarizing Tool
• Terms and Conditions
• Confidentiality Policy
• Cookies Policy
• Refund and Revision Policy

Our samples and other types of content are meant for research and reference purposes only. We are strongly against plagiarism and academic dishonesty. 

Contact Us:

📧 [email protected]

📞 +15512677917

2012-2024 © studyinghq.com. All rights reserved

January 22, 1963 One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich By HARRISON E. SALISBURY ONE DAY IN THE LIFE OF IVAN DENISOVICH By Alexander Solzhenitsyn. ew York -- Two or three weeks ago Leonid F. Illyiehev, the Soviet propaganda boss, made a rather plaintive speech to the young writers of Moscow. Please, he said, in effect, there are other subjects besides "the camps" to write about. Suddenly, in Moscow, it would appear, everyone wants to write about life in the Stalin concentration camps. The reason for this is a rather short, sparsely told, eloquent, explosive, work by Alexander Solzhenitsyn which today reaches the American public in English translation. Solzhenitsyn is a 44-year-old mathematics teacher in the old Russian town of Ryazan who spent eight years in Stalinís concentration camps. "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" is his first literary work, the simple story of one day in a Soviet concentration camp. There is hardly a detail in Solzhenitsyn's story which, in itself is new. The cruelty, the falseness of the charges, the animal fight for survival, the debasement, the cynical grafting, the brutalizing, the sentences stretching into infinity (or death), the hunger, the suffering, the cold--all this is familiar. Changes Perception But the same might have been said of conditions in Russian prisons before Dostoyevsky wrote his "Notes, from the House of the Dead." The story of political prisoners in Siberia was well known before George Kennan wrote his famous "Siberia and the Exile System" in 1891. Yet, each of these works changed our perception of the known facts. So it is with Solzhenitsyn's remarkable tale. In the Soviet Union, of course, it has been a sensation. Until the November issue of the literary journal, Novy Mir, appeared with Solzhenitsyn's story, no Soviet writer had tackled this most terrible and characteristic feature of the Stalin era. (It took Premier Khrushchev's personal okay to get the story published.) Small wonder that all 95,000 copies of Novy Mir vanished almost before they hit the newsstands and that they now sell for $10 a copy. Solzhenitsyn has written no mere propagandistic expose. He has created a small, almost flawless classic employing the eloquence of reticence and understatement in a manner which even the fumbling of hurried translation cannot obscure. Ivan Denisovich Shukov, his central figure, is a simple peasant. His "crime" was to escape from the Germans who took him prisoner in 1943 and return to his own lines. Had he not said he had been in German hands he would have gotten a medal. By telling the truth he was sentenced to a concentration camp as a "spy." Had he not confessed being a "spy" he would have been shot. Neither he nor his NKVD interrogator had ingenuity enough to figure out what kind of "spying" he was supposed to do. Now in a prison camp resembling one of the Karanga camps where Solzhenitsyn himself was confined, Ivan strives to keep alive in a milieu-ruled, as an old inmate says, "by the law of the taiga," or as we would put it, the law of the jungle. Who are the other prisoners? One is a Soviet Navy captain. His misfortune was that a British admiral sent him a Christmas present. One man is a Baptist. His crime? Being a Baptist. A youngster took a pail of milk to some Ukrainian outlaws--and drew a 25-year sentence. In every labor gang of 20 to 30 men there are at least five or six "spies." There is even one "genuine spy" in the camp, a Moldavian who actually worked for the Germans. One man was drummed out of the Red Army as the son of a kulak or rich peasant. Later, the officers who drummed him out were shot in the purge. Everyone cheats. Everyone steals. But there are rules of the game. Only by observing the rules with skill can a man hope to survive. If he fights back like the Naval captain he'll be thrown into the sub-zero guardhouse for 10 days. If he survives his health is ruined. Not more than a year or two of life will remain. Surviving Is a Triumph It is not an easy world for Americans to comprehend. As Ivan muses: "How can you expect a man who's warm to understand a man who's cold?" It is a world in which to live through one more day is an achievement. When Shukov has gone through his day he falls asleep in a glow of contentment. It has been a lucky day. He has not been put into the punishment cells. He has not been sent to the open steppe to work in the 20-below zero wind. He's gotten an extra bowl of mush for supper. He's worked at building a wall and gotten pleasure from it. Heís gotten a hacksaw blade into camp without being caught. Heís bought some good tobacco. And he hasn't gotten sick. And the book closes: "A day without a dark cloud. Almost a happy day. There were three thousand six hundred and fifty-three days like that in his stretch.... "Three thousand six hundred and fifty-three days. "The three extra days were for leap years." This quiet tale has struck a powerful blow against the return of the horrors of the Stalin system. For Solzhenitsyn's words burn like acid. Of the two translations neither comes close to reproducing the rough vigor of the author's concentration camp slang. Each has been done with too much haste. Each relies on standard four-letter words rather than the author's salty idiom. However, Ralph Parker's version in the Dutton edition is superior to the patchwork thrown together by Max Hayward and Ronald Hingley for Praeger. The most striking blooper of the Hayward- Hingley translation is to put in the mouths of the prisoners the phrase "Comrade Warder." The prisoners were forbidden, as Solzhenitsyn notes, to call the guards "comrade," which is the customary Soviet greeting. They had to address the guards as "Citizen," removing their hats five paces away and keeping it off two paces beyond the guard. Return to the Books Home Page

The Moscow Trials and the "Great Terror" of 1937-1938: What the Evidence Shows

Grover Furr July 31 2010

[To be added at the end of Part One of "Stalin and the Struggle for Democratic Reform" ]

Since my two-part essay "Stalin and the Struggle for Democratic Reform" was written in 2004-5, a great deal more evidence has been published concerning the Opposition, the Moscow Trials of 1936, 1937, and 1938, the Military Purges or "Tukhachevsky Affair", and the subsequent "Ezhovshchina", often called "the Great Terror" after the title of the extremely dishonest book by Robert Conquest first published in 1968.

The newly-available evidence confirms the following conclusions:

* The defendants at the Moscow Trials of August 1936, January 1937, and March 1938, were guilty of at least those crimes to which they confessed. A "bloc of Rights and Trotskyites" did indeed exist. It planned to assassinate Stalin, Kaganovich, Molotov, and others in a coup d’�tat , what they called a "palace coup" ( dvortsovyi perevorot ). The bloc did assassinate Kirov.

* Both Rights and Trotskyites were conspiring with the Germans and Japanese, as were the Military conspirators. If the "palace coup" did not work they hoped to come to power by showing loyalty to Germany or Japan in the event of an invasion.

* Trotsky too was directly conspiring with the Germans and Japanese, as were a number of his supporters.

* Nikolai Ezhov, head of the NKVD from 1936 to late 1938, was also conspiring with the Germans.

We now have much more evidence about the role of NKVD chief Nikolai Ezhov than we had in 2005. Ezhov, head of the NKVD (People’s Commissar for Internal Affairs), had his own conspiracy against the Soviet government and Party leadership. Ezhov had also been recruited by German intelligence.

Like the Rights and Trotskyites, Ezhov and his top NKVD men were counting on an invasion by Germany, Japan, or other major capitalist country. They tortured a great many innocent people into confessing to capital crimes so they would be shot. They executed a great many more on falsified grounds or no grounds at all.

Ezhov hoped that this mass murder of innocent people would turn large parts of the Soviet population against the government. That would create the basis for internal rebellions against the Soviet government when Germany or Japan attacked.

Ezhov lied to Stalin, the Party and government leaders about all this. The truly horrific mass executions of 1937-1938 of almost 680,000 people were in large part unjustifiable executions of innocent people carried out deliberately by Ezhov and his top men in order to sow discontent among the Soviet population.

Although Ezhov executed a very large number of innocent people, it is clear from the evidence now available that there were also real conspiracies. The Russian government continues to keep all but a tiny amount of the investigative materials top-secret. We can’t know for sure exactly the dimensions of the real conspiracies without that evidence. Therefore, we don’t know how many of these 680,000 people were actual conspirators and how many were innocent victims.

As I wrote in 2005, Stalin and the Party leadership began to suspect as early as October 1937 that some of the repression was done illegally. From early in 1938, when Pavel Postyshev was sharply criticized, then removed from the Central Committee, then expelled from the Party, tried and executed for mass unjustified repression, these suspicions grew.

When Lavrentii Beria was appointed as Ezhov’s second-in-command Ezhov and his men understood that Stalin and the Party leadership no longer trusted them. They made one last plot to assassinate Stalin at the November 7, 1938 celebration of the 21 st anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution. But Ezhov’s men were arrested in time.

Ezhov was persuaded to resign. An intensive investigation was begun and a huge number of NKVD abuses were uncovered. A great many cases of those tried or punished under Ezhov were reviewed. Over 100,000 people were released from prison and camps. Many NKVD men were arrested, confessed to torturing innocent people, tried and executed. Many more NKVD men were sentenced to prison or dismissed.

Under Beria the number of executions in 1938 and 1940 dropped to less than 1% of the number under Ezhov in 1937 and 1938, and many of those executed were NKVD men, including Ezhov himself, who were found guilty of massive unjustified repression and executions of innocent people.

Some of the most dramatic evidence published since 2005 are confessions of Ezhov and Mikhail Frinovsky, Ezhov’s second-in-command. I have put some of these on the Internet in both the original Russian and in English translation. We also have a great many more confessions and interrogations, mostly partial, of Ezhov, in which he makes many more confessions. These were published in 2007 in a semi-official account by Aleksei Pavliukov.

Anticommunist Scholars Hide the Truth

All "mainstream" – that is, anticommunist – and Trotskyist researchers falsely claim that there were no conspiracies. According to them, all the Moscow Trial defendants, all the military defendants, and all those tried and sentenced for espionage, conspiracy, sabotage, and other crimes, were innocent victims. Some claim that Stalin had planned to kill all these people because they might constitute a "Fifth Column" if the USSR were attacked. Other anticommunists prefer the explanation that Stalin just tried to terrorize the population into obedience.

This is an ideological, anticommunist stance masquerading as an historical conclusion. It is not based upon the historical evidence and is inconsistent with that evidence. Anticommunist historians ignore the primary source evidence available. They even ignore evidence in collections of documents that they themselves cite in their own works.

Why do the anticommunist "scholars", both in Russia and the West, ignore all this evidence? Why do they continue to promote the false notions that no conspiracies existed and that Stalin, not Ezhov, decided to execute hundreds of thousands of innocent people? The only possible explanation is that they do this for ideological reasons alone. The truth, as established by an examination of the primary source evidence, would make Stalin and the Bolsheviks "look good" to most people.

Collectivization of Agriculture Saved The World from Nazis and Japanese…

We have an example of this ideological bias in the way anticommunist scholars and writers treat the Bolshevik collectivization of agriculture. Anticommunists have long attacked it as immoral and unjustified. Yet collectivization provided the capital for the crash industrialization of the USSR. And only industrialization made a modern Red army possible.

Without a technologically-advanced modern army the Nazis would have conquered the USSR. Then, with the resources and manpower of the USSR and the rest of Europe behind them, the Nazis could have invaded the British Isles. Nazi armies would have been a far more formidable foe against all Allied powers. Meanwhile the Japanese, strengthened by the petroleum of the Soviet Far East, would have been a far more formidable enemy for the USA in the Pacific war.

Millions more Slavs and Jews – "Untermenschen" to the Nazis – and millions more Europeans and American soldiers – would have been killed. That this did not occur can be attributed, in large part, to the Soviet collectivization of agriculture. This is an obvious conclusion. There was simply no other way than by collectivizing agriculture that the USSR could have industrialized, and thus stood up to the Nazis and Japanese.

The only alternative was the one promoted by the Right and Trotskyite conspirators: to make peace with the Germans and Japanese, even if that meant granting them huge trade and territorial concessions. That would have greatly strengthened the Axis powers in their war against the U.K. and the USA.

For purely ideological reasons anticommunists cannot admit that collectivization made it possible for the Axis to be defeated.

… And So Did The Defeat of the Conspirators in 1936-1938

Whether they were able to seize political power through a "palace coup", or whether they would have to rely on a German and/or Japanese attack as they only way they might be able to overthrow the Stalin government, the Opposition conspirators were planning some kind of alliance with the Axis.

In fact they would have had no choice, as they realized themselves. A USSR weakened by internal revolt, with or without an invasion from abroad, would have had to make trade, territorial, and ideological concessions to its major potential adversaries simply in order to avoid invasion and inevitable conquest.

At a minimum, a USSR led by some combination of conspirators would have made treaties with Germany and Japan that would have provided the Axis powers with huge natural resources, possibly with manufactured goods as well. The military conspirators were contemplating going much farther than mere trade with the Axis. They were contemplating an outright military alliance with Germany. That would have meant millions more soldiers to fight alongside the German Wehrmacht.

Therefore, in foiling the machinations of the Rights, Trotsky and his supporters, and the Military conspirators, Stalin saved Europe from Naziism – again!

No doubt this is why anticommunist "scholars" insist, in the face of all the evidence, that there were no conspiracies in the USSR and no collaboration with the Germans and Japanese. Once again they refuse to admit these truths on purely ideological grounds because doing so would seem to justify Stalin’s actions.

Bukharin, Not Stalin, To Blame for the Massive Repressions

One interesting aspect of this is that Nikolai Bukharin, leading name among the Rightists and one of its leaders, knew about the "Ezhovshchina" as it was happening, and praised it in a letter to Stalin that he wrote from prison.

It gets even better. Bukharin knew that Ezhov was a member of the Rightist conspiracy, as he himself was. No doubt that is why he welcomed Ezhov's appointment as head of the NKVD -- a view recorded by his widow in her memoirs.

In his first confession, in his now-famous letter to Stalin of December 10, 1937, and at his trial in March 1938 Bukharin claimed he had completely "disarmed" and had told everything he knew. But now we can prove that this was a lie. Bukharin knew that Ezhov was a leading member of the Rightist conspiracy -- but did not inform on him. According to Mikhail Frinovsky, Ezhov's right-hand man, Ezhov probably promised to see that he would not be executed if he did not mention his own, Ezhov's, participation (see Frinovsky's confession of April 11, 1939 ).

If Bukharin had told the truth -- if he had, in fact, informed on Ezhov -- Ezhov's mass murders could have been stopped in their tracks. The lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent people could have been saved.

But Bukharin remained true to his fellow conspirators. He went to execution -- an execution he swore he deserved "ten times over" * -- without revealing Ezhov's participation in the conspiracy.

This point cannot be stressed too much: the blood of the hundreds of thousands of innocent persons slaughtered by Ezhov and his men during 1937-1938, are on Bukharin's hands.

Objectivity and Evidence

I agree with historian Geoffrey Roberts when he says:

In the last 15 years or so an enormous amount of new material on Stalin … has become available from Russian archives. I should make clear that as a historian I have a strong orientation to telling the truth about the past, no matter how uncomfortable or unpalatable the conclusions may be. … I don’t think there is a dilemma: you just tell the truth as you see it. ("Stalin’s Wars", Frontpagemag.com February 12, 2007. At http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/35305.html )

The conclusions I have reached about the "Ezhovshchina" will be unacceptable to ideologically-motivated people. I have not reached these conclusions out of any desire to "apologize" for the policies of Stalin or the Soviet government. I believe these to be the only objective conclusions possible based on the available evidence.

I make no claim that the Soviet leadership was free from error. Stalin’s vision of a socialism leading to communism was obviously faulty in that it did not come to pass. During Stalin’s time, as during the short period of Lenin’s leadership, the Soviets made a great many errors. Error is, of course, inevitable in all human endeavor. And since the Bolsheviks were the first communists to conquer and hold state power, they were in unknown waters. It was inevitable, therefore, that they would make a great many mistakes – and they did.

However, any objective study of the evidence and the historical record shows that there was simply no alternative to forced collectivization and industrialization – except defeat at the hands of some combination of capitalist powers. Likewise, the fact that the Right, Trotskyite, and Military conspiracies really did exist but were snuffed out by the Soviet leadership, which managed to out-maneuver Ezhov and foil his conspiracy as well, proves that once again the USSR – "Stalin" – saved Europe from Naziism and all the Allies from an immense number of additional casualties at the hands of the Axis powers.

* Bukharin's two appeals for clemency, both dated March 13, 1938, were reprinted in Izvestiia September 2, 1992, p. 3. They were rejected, and Bukharin was executed on March 15, 1938. I have put them online in English here.

Additional Bibliography

Ezhov’s interrogations: I have translated all of Ezhov’s interrogations available to me as of July 2010 and put them online here:

http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/ezhovinterrogs.html (Russian original: http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/ezhovpokazaniia.html )

Lubianka. Stalin I NKVD – NKGB – GUKR "SMERSH". 1939 – mart 1946 . Moscow, 2006.

• Frinovsky confession of April 11, 1939, pp. 33-50. http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/frinovskyeng.html (Russian original here: http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/frinovskyru.html )
• Ezhov confession of April 26, 1939, pp. 52-72. http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/ezhov042639eng.html (Russian original: http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/ezhovru.html )

Petrov, Nikita, Mark Jansen. "Stalinskii pitomets" – Nikolai Ezhov . Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2008, pp. 367-379.

• Ezhov confession of August 4, 1939. http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/ezhov080439eng.html (Russian original: http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/ezhov080439ru.html )

Furr, Grover and Vladimir L. Bobrov, "Bukharin's Last Plea: Yet Another Anti-Stalin Falsification." http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/bukhlastplea.html - translation of Russian original published in Aktual’naia Istoriia for February 2009 at http://actualhistory.ru/bukharin_last_plea

Furr, Grover and Vladimir L. Bobrov, "Nikolai Bukharin's First Statement of Confession in the Lubianka" in English translation, Cultural Logic 2007 - http://clogic.eserver.org/2007/Furr_Bobrov.pdf

Furr, Grover and Vladimir L. Bobrov, "Pervye priznatel'nye pokazaniia N.I. Bukharina na Lubianke." Klio No. 1 (2007). http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/furrnbobrov_klio0107.pdf

Furr, Grover and Vladimir L. Bobrov, eds. "Lichnye pokazaniia N. Bukharina." Klio (St. Petersburg), No. 1 (2007). http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/furrnbobrov_klio0107.pdf

Furr, Grover. "Evidence of Leon Trotsky's Collaboration with Germany and Japan." In Cultural Logic for 2009. http://clogic.eserver.org/2009/Furr.pdf

Holmstr�m, Sven-Eric. "New Evidence Concerning the 'Hotel Bristol' Question in the First Moscow Trial of 1936". Cultural Logic 2008. At http://clogic.eserver.org/2008/Holmstrom.pdf

Furr, Grover.Khrushchev Lied: The Evidence That Every "Revelation" of Stalin's (and Beria's) Crimes in Nikita Khrushchev's Infamous "Secret Speech" to the 20th Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on February 25, 1956, is Provably False. Kettering, OH: Erythros Press & Media LLC, 2011. At Amazon.com ; at Erythros Press & Media : at Abebooks.com ; at Abebooks.co.uk (United Kingdom)

Furr (‘Ferr’), Grover Antistalinskaia podlost’ ("Anti-Stalin Villanies"). Moscow: Algoritm, 2007. Home page: http://www.algoritm-kniga.ru/ferr-g.-antistalinskaya-podlost.html Brief summary in this interview: "The Sixty-One Untruths of Nikita Khrushchev" (Interview with Grover Furr). http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/litrossiainterv0608_eng.html (original here: http://www.litrossia.ru/article.php?article=3003 )

Pavliukov, Aleksei. Ezhov. Moscow: Zakharov, 2007.

105 Cruelty to Animals Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

🏆 best cruelty to animals topic ideas & essay examples, ⭐ simple & easy cruelty to animals essay titles, 💡 interesting topics to write about cruelty to animals, 👍 good essay topics on cruelty to animals, ❓ essay questions about animal cruelty.

• Causes and Effects of Animal Cruelty Therefore, it is vitally important to understand the negative impact of animal maltreatment on society, particular individuals, and the animals to realize the seriousness of the problem and take decisive actions.
• Animal Testing: Should Animal Testing Be Allowed? — Argumentative Essay It is crucial to agree that animal testing might be unethical phenomenon as argued by some groups; nonetheless, it should continue following its merits and contributions to the humankind in the realms of drug investigations […] We will write a custom essay specifically for you by our professional experts 808 writers online Learn More
• Should Animals Be Used in Medical Research? It is therefore possible to use animals while testing the dangers and the toxicity of new drugs and by so doing; it is possible to protect human beings from the dangers that can emanate from […]
• Cosmetic Testing on Animals The surface of the skin or near the eyes of such animals is meant to simulate that of the average human and, as such, is one of easiest methods of determining whether are particular type […]
• Animal Cruelty, Its Causes and Impacts In the second part of the body, I will be more specific on the effects of animal cruelty in respect to ethics.
• The Debate on Animal Testing The purpose of this paper is to define animal testing within a historical context, establish ethical and legal issues surrounding the acts, discuss animal liberation movements, arguments in support and against the act of animal […]
• Animal Cruelty: Inside the Dog Fighting In most cases the owner of the losing dog abandons the injured dog to die slowly from the injuries it obtained during the fight. The injuries inflicted to and obtained by the dogs participating in […]
• Animal Testing and Environmental Protection While the proponents of animal use in research argued that the sacrifice of animals’ lives is crucial for advancing the sphere of medicine, the argument this essay will defend relates to the availability of modern […]
• Animal Cruelty as an Ethical and Moral Problem It is due to the fact that this paper stresses that actions related to the needless and non-progressive act of animal cruelty should be considered a felony with the appropriate amount of incarceration put into […]
• On Animal Abuse and Cruelty In these cages, the animals are confined indoors for the whole year denying them their right to roam and feel the heat of the sun.
• Negative Impacts of Animal Testing In many instances it can be proofed that drugs have been banned from the market after extensive research on animal testing and consuming a lot of cash, because of the dire effects that they cause […]
• Animal Testing in Medicine and Industry Animal testing is the inescapable reality of medicine and industry. However, between human suffering and animal suffering, the former is more important.
• Program for Addressing and Prevention of Animal Cruelty While it is unreasonable to expect that a larger number of people will be interested, ensuring that at least 5% of the population is invested will help to promote knowledge actively and target the remaining […]
• Using Animals in Medical Research and Experiments While discussing the use of animals in medical research according to the consequentialist perspective, it is important to state that humans’ preferences cannot be counted higher to cause animals’ suffering; humans and animals’ preferences need […]
• Animal Testing: History and Arguments Nevertheless, that law was more focused on the welfare of animals in laboratories rather than on the prohibition of animal testing.
• Laboratory Experiments on Animals: Argument Against In some cases, the animals are not given any painkillers because their application may alter the effect of the medication which is investigated.
• Animal Testing From Medical and Ethical Viewpoints Striving to discover and explain the peculiarities of body functioning, already ancient Greeks and Romans resorted to vivisecting pigs; the scientific revolution of the Enlightenment era witnessed animal testing becoming the leading trend and a […]
• Laws that Protect Animal Cruelty The softening of boundaries of the self is of paramount importance for they are too tight as one sees the other as separate, different, and apart from oneself which can lead to conflict and violence.
• Negative Impacts of Animal Testing To alter these inhumane laws, we should organize a social movement aiming at the reconsideration of the role of animals in research and improvement of their positions.
• Animal Testing: Long and Unpretty History Nevertheless, that law was more focused on the welfare of animals in laboratories rather than on the prohibition of animal testing.
• Animal Abuse Registry Justification Due to the extensive unfairness to the animals, the Veterinary department of most developed countries has established laws concerning the treatment care and support that animals have to be accorded with.
• Animal Testing as an Unnecessary and Atrocious Practice Such acts of violence could be partially excused by the necessity to test medications that are developed to save human lives however, this kind of testing is even more inhumane as it is ineffective in […]
• Richmond Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals In order to safeguard its mission, the organization runs several services, all of which aim at promoting the value of life and enhance the well-being of animals.
• Animal Experiments and Inhuman Treatment Although the results of such a laboratory may bring answers to many questions in medicine, genetics, and other vital spheres, it is frequently a case that the treatment of such animals is inhumane and cruel. […]
• Animal Testing for Scientific Research Despite the fact that the present-day science makes no secret of the use of animals for research purposes, not many people know what deprivation, pain, and misery those animals have to experience in laboratories.
• Animal Testing and Ethics I believe it is also difficult to develop efficient legislation on the matter as people have different views on animal research and the line between ethical and unethical is blurred in this area.
• Animal Testing: History and Ethics Moreover, in the twelfth century, another Arabic physician, Avenzoar dissected animals and established animal testing experiment in testing surgical processes prior to their application to man. Trevan in 1927 to evaluate the effectiveness of digitalis […]
• Dealing With Animal Cruelty One of how animal cruelty is exercised is in the way they are used to obtain meat and eggs. Various strains of diseases arise in these areas and have the potential of becoming lethal to […]
• Animal Testing Effects on Psychological Investigation In this context, ethical considerations remain a central theme in psychological research.”Ethics in research refers to the application of moral rules and professional codes of conduct to the collection, analysis, reporting, and publication of information […]
• Animal Abuse as a Public Health Issue As we have seen, the problem of animal abuse, being linked to interpersonal violence, is directly related to the sphere of public health.
• Animal Testing: Why It Is Still Being Used The major reason for such “devotion” to animal testing can be explained by the fact that alternative sources of testing are insufficient and too inaccurate to replace conventional way of testing.
• Effects of Animal Testing and Alternatives Another challenge to the proponents of animal testing is related to dosage and the time line for a study. Animal rights values rebuff the notion that animals should have an importance to human beings in […]
• Ethics Problems in Animal Experimentation In spite of the fact that it is possible to find the arguments to support the idea of using animals in experiments, animal experimentation cannot be discussed as the ethical procedure because animals have the […]
• Animal Testing: Ethical Dilemmas in Business This means that both humans and animals have rights that need to be respected, and that is what brings about the many dilemmas that are experienced in this field.
• Ethical Problems of the Animal Abuse Given that humans depend on animals and plant products for their survival, Angier’s arguments would not hold in the contemporary world unlike Steiner’s arguments.
• The Debate About Animal Rights Some people oppose the use of animals in medical research because they say that violates the rights of the animals and amounts to animal cruelty.
• Use of Animals in Research Testing: Ethical Justifications Involved The present paper argues that it is ethically justified to use animals in research settings if the goals of the research process are noble and oriented towards the advancement of human life.
• Ethical Problems in Animal Experimentation The banning of companies from testing on animals will force the manufacturers to use conventional methods to test their drugs and products.
• Utilitarianism for Animals: Testing and Experimentation There are alternatives in testing drugs such as tissue culture of human cells and hence this is bound to be more accurate in the findings.
• Use of Animals in Biological Testing Thus, these veterinarians have realized that the results that are realized from the animal research are very crucial in the improvement of the health of human being as well as that of animals.
• Medical Research on Animals Should be Forbidden by Law Vaccines and treatment regimes for various diseases that previously led to the death of humans were all discovered through research on animals.
• Experimentation on Animals However, critics of experimenting with animals argue that animals are subjected to a lot of pain and suffering in the course of coming up with scientific breakthroughs which in the long run may prove futile.
• Are People Superior to Animals? However, it is possible to claim that Giacomo Leopardi is the greatest supporter of the idea that animals are superior to people.
• An Analysis of the Advertisement of The British Columbia Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (BC SPCA)
• Animal Abuse and Cruelty to Animals
• Animal Research Unnecessary Cruelty To Animals
• Animal Rights Advocates Sought to Eliminate Cruelty to Animals in Scientific Research
• An Overview of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) and Its Organizational Management,
• Environment, and Culture
• An Overview of the Organization, History, Issues and Solutions of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
• Cruelty To Animals By Use Of Fur Farming And Trapping
• Cruelty to Animals and Humane Society
• Industrialized Cruelty To Animals, Influenced By Humans
• Royal Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals
• The Fur Industry and Its Cruelty To Animals
• The Major Issue of Cruelty to Animals
• The Mauritius Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act
• The Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals
• The Responsibilities of Human Beings to Prevent Cruelty to Animals
• The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
• Agricultural Animal Abuse – Change Is Needed
• A Terrifying Experience of Animal Abuse and Accidents
• Connection Between Animal Abuse And Other Violence
• Domestic Animal Abuse
• How Can Animal Abuse Be Prevented?
• Impulse Purchasing Is One Cause For Animal Abuse
• The Arguments on Why Thanksgiving Turkey is a Case of Animal Abuse
• The Duty of Humans to Stop Animal Abuse
• The Extent of Animal Abuse in the World
• The Issue of Animal Abuse of SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment
• The Issues of the Animal Abuse and the Animal Welfare Act of 1966
• The Misunderstanding of the Sport of Rodeo as an Animal Abuse
• The Psychological Relationship Between Animal Abuse & Adolescents in the Judicial System
• The Role of the Lebanese Government and Its Citizens in Combating Animal Abuse
• Types And Prevelence Of Animal Abuse
• Unveiling the Global Issue of Animal Abuse and its Impact on the World
• Why There Should Be Stricter Punishments For Animal Abuse
• Yes To Animal Abuse Registry
• What Is Considered to Be Animal Cruelty?
• What Are the Effects of Animal Cruelty?
• What Are the Two Types of Animal Cruelty?
• Is Animal Cruelty a Big Issue?
• What Is the Main Problem With Animal Cruelty?
• Is Animal Cruelty a Crime?
• Why Should We End Animal Cruelty?
• How Do We Stop Animal Cruelty?
• How Does Animal Cruelty Affect Humans?
• What Is the Difference Between Animal Abuse and Animal Cruelty?
• Does Gucci Use Animal Cruelty?
• How Do You Fight Animal Cruelty?
• What Does the Bible Say About Animal Cruelty?
• What Are the Consequences of Animal Cruelty?
• What Kind of Issue Is Animal Cruelty?
• Why Is Animal Cruelty an Ethical Issue?
• How Can America Efficiently Solve the Problems of Animal Cruelty?
• How Does Animal Cruelty Affect the Society?
• What Is the Connection Between Animal Cruelty and Human Violence?
• How Is Animal Cruelty Affecting the Environment?
• Where Is Animal Cruelty Happening Most?
• When Was the First Animal Cruelty Law Passed?
• How Would You Describe Animal Cruelty?
• What Is the Most Common Form of Animal Cruelty?
• Which Country Has the Highest Animal Cruelty Rates?
• What Is the Punishment for Animal Cruelty in the U.S.?
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, September 26). 105 Cruelty to Animals Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/cruelty-to-animals-essay-examples/

"105 Cruelty to Animals Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 26 Sept. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/cruelty-to-animals-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '105 Cruelty to Animals Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 26 September.

IvyPanda . 2023. "105 Cruelty to Animals Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." September 26, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/cruelty-to-animals-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "105 Cruelty to Animals Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." September 26, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/cruelty-to-animals-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "105 Cruelty to Animals Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." September 26, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/cruelty-to-animals-essay-examples/.

• Animal Abuse Research Topics
• Animal Testing Topics
• Extinction Research Topics
• Animal Ethics Research Ideas
• Humanism Research Ideas
• Animal Rights Research Ideas
• Bioethics Titles
• Animal Welfare Ideas
• Cloning Questions
• Zoo Research Ideas
• Hunting Questions
• Vegetarianism Essay Ideas
• Wildlife Ideas
• Suffering Essay Topics
• Environment Research Topics