"I help You, You help Me"

“I help You, You Help Me”

            Unconditional, non-judgmental, non-prejudice, non-racist, innocent, loving, protector and companion; all of those listed are what animals bring to someone’s life.  Anyone who has ever owned a pet would know and understand that those factors are characteristics of the animal that a person owns.  Animals do not judge humans because they are not capable of judging.  Animals however, do have the capacity to love, care for, protect and be loyal to humans.  Many individuals who end up incarcerated, on probation or parole have not had a proper and loving home to grow up in.  A lot of inmates have not experienced unconditional Love that a parent is supposed to have for their child.  Many inmates, probationers, and parolees have never experienced emotions involving acceptance, care, love and responsibility because no one has given them a chance to do so.  Animals can give a prisoner and parolee a fighting chance at a successful and productive citizenship within our society.

            According to the Department of Corrections in New Zealand, a correctional facility in Milton, New Zealand has a farm on the grounds of the property.  This farm consists of thousands of animals, including cows, pigs, and boars; the inmates are expected to care for and raise the animals.  This facility has proven that the animals being raised on this farm are not being treated inhumanely, and are being well cared for.  “Corrections Inmate Employment (CIE) Piggery in Christchurch has recently passed the Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) for the third consecutive year.” (News, 2011).  Meaning that, these animals are actually being looked after, well cared for, and properly treated by prison inmates. Furthermore, helping the inmates learn responsibility, empathy, and love from the animals, rehabilitates the inmates as well.  These inmates have proven to be successful at their duties to care for the animals; one inmate already has a job lined up at a piggery in New Zealand upon his release (News, 2011).  Moreover, when the inmates begin working on the farm, they are first expected to take specific classes.  The classes teach the inmates about raising cattle, first aid, forklift and chainsaw training and other various courses involving farm and cattle ranches.  This program is successful because it allows the inmates to feel a sense of belonging, and also it enhances their pride because they are given the opportunity to become successful at a job.

            In becoming more prideful about a meaningful job, the inmate becomes calmer and more relaxed; this may lead to a less aggressive prison inmate within the walls of incarceration.  That being said, there is a program in Lincoln County, Oregon that is based around the same concept.  The inmates travel to an animal rescue facility that is operated by the county sheriff’s department; the inmates are to socialize, exercise, feed, clean up after and care for the animal.  A lot of times, according to the Oregonian, the inmates become attached to the animals. With this attachment, the inmate feels accepted and loved; thus, the inmates gain the desire to be successful (Tobias, 2009).  Furthermore, animals are also being rehabilitated simultaneously; animals are trained and rehabilitated for another chance at life.  Rehabilitated animals become adoptable into a loving and caring home, instead of the alternative which would be euthanasia.  On another note, even aggressive animals or dogs can be helped through the use of animals in corrections.

            Another program based right here in the Bay Area of California is using similar concepts of rehabilitating animals and inmates together.  The Peninsula Humane Society has paired troubled, aggressive dogs with inmates incarcerated in the Maple Street Correctional Facility in San Mateo, CA.  These aggressive dogs are integrated into the prison for eight weeks; there at the facility, a single inmate is responsible for the dogs training (Schwartz, 2011).  The inmate is supposed to socialize, exercise, train, and care for the dog in all ways during their stay in the prison.  On top of the inmate taking sole responsibility for the dog, there are training classes that both the inmate and the dog will attend.  Professional dog trainers are to teach the inmate how to train the dog and offer obedience training for them (Schwartz, 2011).  This program allows the inmate once again, to feel important because they are contributing to the welfare of another living being.  The inmates are literally giving these dogs another chance at life because they can be adopted by people that have loving homes.  Even better, some of the inmates have adopted the pet they rehabilitated upon their release (Schwartz, 2011).  This could prove to be extremely successful at lowering recidivism rates because having that pet will give the parolee or ex-con that sense of need.  When an inmate knows that he or she is needed, and the animal depends on them for care, food, and shelter, it is less likely that the inmate will let that animal down.  In result, the love and the bond the animal grows to share with the inmate will develop the sense of responsibility the inmate needs to become successful.

            Animal rehabilitation can be a great asset to our country, and the programs need to start within the prisons and juvenile facilities.  Bringing rescue animals, and animals that have been abused into the correctional facility with inmates can offer rehabilitation on both sides.  Criteria should be met among the inmates however, in order for them to be given the opportunity for this type of rehabilitation.  In other words, a domestic abuse offender would not qualify to rehabilitate animals on any level.  However, the teenager that stole a car and smoked marijuana because his friends dared him may be introduced to his new best friend.  The animals offer a calm, non-aggressive relationship within the bars of a facility where nothing but violence exists.  Following the integration of animals into the facilities, we can offer the inmates the privilege of traveling to the animal shelter to help the shelter.  As a volunteer worker, the animal shelter will not have to spend time and money hiring people.  With the inmates working in the facility, the animal shelter employess gain the opportunity to work on funding foster care and adoption programs for the animals once they are rehabilitated.

            It is my strong opinion and suggestion for local corrections facilities to become aware of the programs mentioned in this blog; and understand that animal and prison rehabilitation can and will work.  The opportunity for successful animal adoptions, lesser recidivism rates and higher morality within the prisons are all available through animal and prison interaction.  This also can possibly lead inmates into jobs, internships, and educational programs in order to become successful working in the animal business.  Giving animals and prisoners another chance can really change and uplift prison life in regards to violence and aggression toward other inmates.  Following that, animals in the prisons will not be so feared by inmates because the animals will not be there to sniff out their drugs.  Quite the opposite, the animals will be living with the inmates offering their love, acceptance, and companionship.   Only success can come from bringing animals into the correctional facility.

References

Corrections- New Treatment: Prisoners and Animals. (2011, November 29). Retrieved November 29, 2011, from law.jrank.org: http://law.jrank.org/pages/12053/Corrections-New-Treatment-Prisoners-Animals.html

News, C. (2011, September 2). Prison Farm Animals Well Looked After. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from Department of Corrections in New Zealand: http://www.corrections.govt.nz/news-and-publications/magazines-and-newsletters/corrections-news/2012/corrections_news_sept-oct_2011/prison_farm_animals_well_looked_after.html

Schwartz, C. (2011, July 12). SPCA TAILS Program: Peninsula Humane Society Pairs Problem Pups with Prisoners. San Francisco, CA, United States.

Tobias, L. (2009, October 30). Lincoln County Shelter Offers Second Chance to both Pets, Inmates. Retrieved November 29, 2011, from The Orgonian: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/10/lincoln_county_shelter_offers.html

Fighting for Life

Fighting for Life

            As of 2007, according to the Humane Society of the United States, over 250,000 dogs were forced into dog fighting in our country (Services, 2011).  Although this number may not seem huge, it continues to grow as time passes.  Furthermore, this number does not include other animals used in the animal fighting world, such as cockfighting, bait animals (Bait animals are animals used to train dog’s how to fight, or strengthen their fighting skills) and other various small animals (Services, 2011).  It is unfortunate to explain that dog fighting happens everywhere, and all walks of life can be involved.  It is a known fact among experts that dog fighting is not prone to a certain socio-economic status, race, religion and/or culture.  Many different types of people are involved in the world of dog fighting (Campbell, 2003). 

            In terms of the type of people involved with dog fighting, experts have split individuals involved in this underground world into three categories: street level, hobbyists and professionals.  The street level of dog fighting is what usually occurs in the lower socio-economic neighborhoods; a lot of the times gangs, children and teenagers partake in the event.  When street level dog fighting occurs it is most likely unstructured and unplanned, and most importantly, the worst abuse is inflicted on the animals.  The abuse is worse than the other two levels because the care for the animal is not in any type of structured environment.  The people involved in the street level dog fighting world will often beat, burn, torture and kill their dogs or someone else’s.  Usually the abuse is the result of a dog losing a fight, or the dog not continuing a fight (Campbell, 2003). Furthermore, on the street, children will participate in their own illegal dog fighting. Without any understanding of the implications and injuries it can cause animals, children become involved because their parents’, friends or siblings are involved (Campbell, 2003).  As the level of dog fighting progresses, the operation becomes more structured, and planned.

            Hobbyists are the type of people who are involved in dog fighting as a major hobby.  These people will likely own multiple dogs; shelter them within their homes, and yards (Campbell, 2003).  The owners of the dogs often breed fighting dogs in order to make profit.  In result of their multiple dog ownership, the owners will travel within their hometown and surrounding towns to participate in dog fighting.  This environment is more structured, planned out, and often times, will feature a referee, and rules to abide by.  When the hobbyists are hosting dogfights, more often than not, other illegal activities will be involved such as, substance abuse and distribution, gambling, homicides, violence among the humans and other illegal acts.  Similar to the street level dogfighters, hobbyists are involved with gangs, or gang members will be present during the fights in order to participate in gambling (Animals, 2011).  As we move onto a more sophisticated level of dog fighting, we see that the structure and environment is more “professional,” and careful.

            Professional dogfighters will travel throughout the country and sometimes even outside the country in order to fight their dogs (Animals, 2011).  Professionals are breeders of dogs that have fighting bloodlines; meaning that the parents, grandparents, and so on, all have been successful fighters in the ring.  Breeders can make a profit of over $500 from one puppy that is bred from an established bloodline (Campbell, 2003).  Moreover, professionals are usually harder to detect because the operation will travel, be in different areas, and hold such underground status that detection is merely impossible.  In this setting, the fights are structured according to the weight of the dogs, planned out and scheduled; the fights will always feature a referee. Unfortunate to mention, professionals make their living off of dog fighting and breeding more dogs into this horrific and abusive world (Animals, 2011).  Studying the types and levels of dog fighting, more discussion of how the dogs and other animals are treated is necessary; the abuse that these animals suffer is sickening and horrific.

            All dogs are physically and emotionally abused, neglected and unloved on all levels of dog fighting.  A lot of the times, the dogs are abused for no reason; however, when this happens, it usually because of children abusing the dogs on the street level of fighting.  The abuse that is inflicted by hobbyists and professionals is more likely due to the dog showing no signs of aggression towards other dogs during puppyhood, not continuing the fight or losing the fight.  Consequently, the dogs will be “disposed” of in an unconventional and inhumane way.  Different “techniques” people use to “get rid” of the dogs are, shooting, burning, stabbing, beating, starving, or neglecting the injuries that occurred during a fight (infections, blood loss…etc).  The abuse also occurs in how the humans prepare the dogs to fight; most of time the dogs are given vitamins and illegal drugs (ASPCA, 2011).  In order for a dog to not feel pain, the owners will inject heroin; to strengthen the dog and make them faster, the owners will distribute steroids.  Even more disturbing, the owners will give dog’s doses of PCP to ensure the dog shows no fear before and during the fight; other types of drugs and vitamin supplements are given to the dogs as well. (ASPCA, 2011).  The owners will also intentionally dehydrate the dogs because they ignorantly think that it helps with less blood loss when injuries occur (Campbell, 2003).  That being said, the detection and investigation must be improved in order to stop, or at the very least, significantly lessen the occurrence of dog fighting.

            In order to lessen the statistics and occurrence of dog fighting, it must start in the community.  The dog fighting world is an underground operation, making it extremely difficult for police and animal services to detect.  The documentary, Out of the Pit: Dog Fighting in Chicago, directed by Butch Campbell shows the Chicago Police attempting to take a stab at the detection of dog fighting.  The Chicago Police has put together a task force of only two officers to investigate dog fighting in Chicago (Campbell, 2003).  Although it is an excellent idea to have a specific task force for dog fighting, two people is not enough; especially in such a city as Chicago.  If police organizations funded more programs to put together task forces to investigate dogfights within communities, it may help.  A task force featuring multiple officers can give police a chance to patrol the communities, and talk to the members in order to investigate possible dog fighting arenas.  When the police are out in the community, specifically asking and communicating with people, more results occur in terms of investigation and detection. 

            Overall, dog fighting happens everywhere and anyone can be involved.  Dogs and other animals suffer each and every day due to dog fighting.  It is up to the community members and citizens to raise awareness in their neighborhoods.  When dog fighting occurs in neighborhoods, it jades morale, and community values.  Furthermore, it not only effects the animals, it has impacted children, and teens; and making it okay for kids to be involved in such terrifying acts is a detriment to the future generations.  And so, ending this portion of my Animal Rights blog; if you or anyone you know who may have knowledge or even a hunch that dog fighting is occurring in yours or their community, please get in touch with your local Humane Society.  Sacramento, California’s Humane Society is located on Florin Road, the phone number is: (916)383-7387.

References

Animals, A. S. (2011, November 15). Dog Fighting FAQ. Retrieved November 15, 2011, from ASPCA: Animal Legal and Historical Center: www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/dog-fighting-faq.aspx

ASPCA. (2011, November 15). Dog Fighting Detailed Discussion. Retrieved November 15, 2011, from Animal Legal and Historical Center: www.animallaw.info/articles/ddusdogfighting.htm

Campbell, B. (Director). (2003). Out of the Pit: Dog Fighting in Chicago [Motion Picture].

Services, O. C. (2011, November 22). Animal Cruelty and Dogfighting National Statistics. Retrieved November 22, 2011, from Orange County Animal Services: Pet Rescue and Adoption Center: http://www.orangecountyfl.net/Portals/0/Resources/Internet/DEPARTMENTS/CEsrvcs/animal/docs/AnimalCrueltyNationalStatistics.pdf

Animal Abuse = Domestic Violence

Animal Abuse = Domestic Violence

            Animal abuse and neglect are some of the most horrific and terrifying acts that someone can do to an animal.  It is unfortunate that people abuse their animals, and the abuse can occur in similar fashions as domestic violence and abuse.  Abuse is defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary as, “A deceitful act; language that condemns or vilifies usually unjustly, intemperately, and angrily; physical maltreatment” (Merriam-Webster, 2011).  However, abuse can also be sexual abuse and emotional abuse as well; animals and humans alike have the capacity to feel neglect, abuse, and emotional damage.  Furthermore, there is a link to be considered when domestic abuse occurs, and that link lies between the victims, the abusers, and the animals that are a part of the family as well.  In other words, when domestic abuse happens, and animals are in the home, more than likely, the domestic abuse will be inflicted on the animals as well.

            According to a study conducted in New Jersey, fifty-three families were observed and interviewed who were connected to the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services.  Among the fifty-three families the majority who endured physical abuse within the human family also had evidence of animal abuse within the household.  Even more interesting, are the facts about abusers themselves; in more than half of the households where the father was the abuser of the human family, he was also the abuser of the animals.  However, in the rest of the households where the father was the abuser, a child was the abuser of the animal/s (French, 2004).  The children or child who is abusing the animal is attempting to take their frustration out on someone or something that is vulnerable; in these cases a lot of times, the animal is the vulnerable being.  On another note, provided the abuser was the father, there were survivors of child sex abuse victims that were interviewed within the same study as well.

            Survivors of early childhood sexual abuse recounted that their abusers would actually use their animals against them.  In order to continue the abuse upon the child and to ensure secrecy, the life of the animal was threatened (French, 2004).  The use of animals as a threatening and coercive tool to control has not been unheard of; the abuser is more likely to use the pet as the coercive power and control over the human victims.   Becker and French also found that in the accounts of battered women, the women would remain in the abusive home in order to prevent the animal from being abused or attempt to protect the animal.  Several women who were observed gave testimony that they would have left to a shelter sooner if they had not owned a pet (French, 2004).  Furthermore, women who are abused, use their pets as emotional and comforting support to help cope with the abuse.  According to the American Humane Association, the majority of women who are abused think of their pet as a member of the family, and a lot of times are the only source of support for the women (Association, 2011).

The abuse that is happening everyday around the country and even around the world is horrendous and the only way to help prevent the abuse is to raise awareness. The issue here is the abuse itself, however the issue needs to become more than the abuse.   The problem we face today is the numbers that exist among domestic violence victims and the animals being abused.  The number of animals being abused in home environments have been growing and are still growing; communities need to come together to confer with each other and find out who is being victimized .  Programs that involve animal abuse awareness should be in place at local rescues and adoption centers in order for people to come out and get help.  Many victims of the violence are too scared for themselves, their children and their pets.  Therefore, if rescues began to come forward and start helping the human victims as well as the animals, we might be able to save some of the victims.  Furthermore, it would be ideal if rescues were to get involved with domestic violence shelters in order to secure the lives of the animals that may still be in the abusive environment.  All in all, animal rescues need to get in touch with family services in order to raise awareness that animals get abused within the domestic violent home.

References

Association, A. H. (2011, November 1). Facts About Animal Abuse and Domestic Violence. Retrieved November 1, 2011, from American Humane Association: http://www.americanhumane.org/interaction/support-the-bond/fact-sheets/animal-abuse-domestic-violence.html

French, F. B. (2004). Making the Links: Child Abuse, Animal Cruelty, and Domestic Violence. Child Abuse Review , 399-414.

Merriam-Webster. (2011, November 1). An Encyclopedia Britannica Company: Merriam-Webster Dictionary Online. Retrieved November 1, 2011, from merriam-webster.com: http://www.merriam-webster.com

United States vs. European Union

Animal cruelty as defined by law includes, “Acts of violence or neglect perpetrated against animals.” (USLegal, 2011)  Considering that we have the definition of animal cruelty in our legal dictionary we should have a more thorough law that protects animals from such acts.  Coincidentally, our government can learn from others in how to go about having laws in place at the federal level rather than a state-by-state basis.  In learning from others on what laws are in place we should examine the laws drafted by the European Union regarding animal welfare.  Specifically, the United States needs to take the laws in place under the European Union and implement them into United States federal law.

             “The European Union is a supranational organization currently composed of 25 European countries who have decided to cooperate on a number of issues (economic, monetary, security, etc) and adopt uniform laws” (Library, 2011).  The European Union has been around for a long time and has a credible history of laws and economical improvements including but not limited to the Animal Welfare Act.  Within this act there are several detailed explanations of how animals should be treated on a farm.  Guidelines for the farm under the E.U’s Animal Welfare Act include laws and minimum standards for housing, transportation, humane slaughtering (involving treatment before, during and after slaughter), animals used for fur (specifically dogs and cats), wild animals in zoos, animals used for experimental and scientific purposes, as well as guidelines set forth for the trade of seal products (Union, 2010). 

The Animal Welfare Act was entered into the European Union on Dec. 1, 2009 and has taken the place of the older and out-of-date amendments, treaties, and laws for animal welfare.  This act is new and improved because it states species specific regulations for each amendment, furthermore, each member of the union is expected to abide by all minimal standards stated within this treaty.   An example of how specific the minimal standards are in this treaty we will discuss the requirements laid out in the “transportation of animal’s” (Union, 2010) article. Within this amendment the specifications for transportation of animals includes the sizes of containers that shall be used.  Specifically written in the document, “Sufficient floor area and height is provided for the animals to their size and the intended journey” (Union T. C., 2004).  Other standards include ventilation, breathability, air quality, all the down to the types of construction materials that should be used on the containers (flooring, roofing, etc).  Furthermore it has detailed explanations of the type of records that must be reported including who is transporting, what is being transported, the number of animals and much more ( (Union, 2010).  Given that this amendment is a full 22 page document, we will not go further in detail.  The subject of what laws the U.S government does have in place for the protection of animals will be examined next.

Our federal government has a law in place regarding animals referred to as “the Animal Welfare Act.”  Perhaps one may consider it an animal welfare act if that person never read the amendment, however, the agenda for this amendment is anything but animal welfare.  This law has been revised and updated as of February 1, 2010 and still does not include farm animals.  The only animals this law protects are the humans, the companion animals and animals used for testing, research, and science (Government, 2010).  In fact, most of the language within this act is regarding the sale, auctions, licensing dealers and handlers of animals within the testing, science and research industry.  Very little is explained in this amendment that animals should be given proper housing, food, water, etc (anything regarding the actual welfare of the animal).  The United States Welfare Act states several times, “to insure that animals intended for use in research facilities or for exhibition purposes or for use as pets are provided humane care and treatment; and to assure the humane treatment of animals during transportation in commerce…etc” (Government, 2010). The problem with this language is that it can be interpreted many different ways by many different people.

When the European Union’s Animal Welfare Act is put up against the United States Animal Welfare Act, it is obvious that our government’s laws and amendments regarding animal safety, protection and welfare are not up to par.  As one can see it is important that laws are defined, with specific guidelines and standards.  Considering the fact that our country has no laws regarding farm animals and other specifications in regards to testing, research, and companion animals (and all other types of animals) further action should be made.  It would be a start for our government to study foreign laws in regards to this matter because the European Union is more up to date with today’s expectations and humane treatment of animals.  One must realize however, that both our United States and the European Union still does not recognize poultry as an animal that should be protected under law.

Unfortunately, under the European Union’s Animal Welfare Act it does specifically exclude chickens, or “poultry.”  Chickens are also animals which mean they are sentient beings; the chicken does suffer from pain, it can feel pain, furthermore the chicken does have the capacity to suffer from emotional and violent distress and abuse.  The fact that chickens are not included in the E.U’s Animal Welfare Act leaves us with one similarity to that of the United State’s Animal Welfare Act.  Consequently, though, it still leaves us with the biggest difference in our laws to that of the European laws.  The United States government must begin to make their laws regarding animal welfare for the actual welfare of the animals, not for the welfare of humans. (Tomaselli, 2003) 

 

Works Cited

Government, U. S. (2010, February 1). National Agriculture Library: Animal Welfare Information Center. Retrieved October 4, 2011, from United States Department of Agriculture: http://awic.nal.usda.gov/nal_display/index.php?info_center=3&tax_subject=182&topic_id=1118&level3_id=6735&level4_id=0&level5_id=0&placement_default=0

Library, G. L. (2011, September 23). Georgetown University Law Center. Retrieved October 4, 2011, from Georgetown Law Library: http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/guides/internationalanimallaw.cfm

Tomaselli, P. M. (2003). Animal Legal & Historical Center: International Comparative Animal Cruelty Laws. Retrieved October 4, 2011, from Michigan State University College of Law: http://www.animallaw.info/articles/ddusicacl.htm

Union, E. (2010, December 1). Animal Welfare main Community Legislative References. Retrieved October 4, 2011, from Food Safety-From the Farm to the Fork, European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/references_en.html

Union, T. C. (2004, December 22). Official Journal of the European Union. Retrieved October 13, 2011, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2005/l_003/l_00320050105en00010044.pdf

USLegal. (2011, October 4). USLegal. Definitions. Animal Cruelty Law and Legal Definition. Retrieved October 4, 2011, from USLegal.com: http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/animal-cruelty/