Although there is a growing body of literature documenting the co-occurrence of animal abuse and intimate partner violence (IPV), only a few studies have examined the relationship between animal maltreatment, types of IPV, and abuse severity. The results of those studies have been inconclusive and in some cases even contradictory. The current study contributes new findings to that specific segment of the literature and sheds some light on the inconsistent findings in previous studies. Data were gathered from 86 abused women receiving services from domestic violence shelters across Canada via a structured survey about pet abuse and the level and types of IPV perpetrated by abusive partners. Type and severity of IPV was measured using subscales of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2) and the Checklist of Controlling Behaviors (CCB). Animal maltreatment was measured using the Partner's Treatment of Animals Scale (PTAS). Participants were divided into three groups: women who did not have pets during their abusive relationship ( n = 31), women who had pets and reported little or no animal maltreatment ( n = 21), and women who had pets and reported frequent or severe animal maltreatment ( n = 34). Examining within-group variations in experiences of IPV and pet abuse using a series of one-way between-groups ANOVA tests, this study provides evidence to support the conclusion that women who report that their partner mistreated their pets are themselves at significantly greater risk of more frequent and severe forms of IPV, most specifically psychological, physical, and sexual abuse. The findings point to the urgency of better understanding and mitigating the unique barriers to leaving an abusive relationship faced by women with companion animals.

No abstract

A growing body of research has highlighted the significant co-occurrence of violence against women and companion animals in abusive households. Collectively, this work has also documented that sizable proportions of women with pets sampled report that they delayed leaving their partner due to fear for their pets’ safety. Using data from 86 residents of 16 battered women’s shelters in Canada, this study begins to tease apart the relationship between five types of animal maltreatment (emotional abuse, threats to harm, neglect, physical abuse, and severe physical abuse) and women’s deliberations to leave violent relationships. The findings indicate that while the specific types of animal maltreatment are significant motivators for leaving an abusive partner, the length of the relationship and the physical abuse experienced by the woman better explain the degree to which concern for the well-being of the pet kept them from leaving their abuser earlier.

Rational choice theory proposes that spousal violence survivors engage in a cost-benefit analysis when determining whether to contact the police in the aftermath of violence. Feminist intersectional frameworks contend that the perceived costs and benefits of police intervention differ among survivors based on their intersecting social identities. Normative theory further posits that it is not solely individual factors but also social norms derived from one's neighborhood context that may be related to reporting practices. Consistent with these perspectives, this study assessed the association between spousal violence survivors' sociodemographic, violence, and neighborhood characteristics and (a) police contact, (b) pathways to police contact, (c) motivations for contacting the police, and (d) motivations for not contacting the police. Data were drawn from the 2009 Canadian General Social Survey-Victimization main file, and included male and female survivors ( N = 890). Survivors most commonly contacted the police to stop the violence (89.4%) and most commonly did not contact the police because they did not believe it was important enough (35.3%). Results of multivariate regression analysis indicate that survivors who were visible minority, those who feared for their lives, and those who were injured were significantly more likely to self-report violence to police. Survivors were more likely to say the violence was not important enough to report if there was a police station in their neighborhood, and were less likely to say that violence was not important enough to report if they had experienced multiple incidents of violence. Implications for policing and criminal justice system engagement with spousal violence survivors are provided.

This article empirically examines the extent to which the co-occurrence of the maltreatment of companion animals and intimate partner violence (IPV) previously documented in samples of women accessing services from domestic violence shelters extends to a nationally representative sample of the general Canadian population, with a specific focus on emotional and financial abuse. Using data from the intimate partner victimization module of the 2014 Canadian General Social Survey ( n = 17,950), the authors find that reporting one’s intimate partner threatened or abused companion animals in the home increased the probability that one had experienced at least one form of emotional abuse or financial abuse by 38.6% ( p ≤ .001) and 7.5% ( p ≤ .001), respectively, net of several key control variables. Moreover, the findings indicate that those who identify as women are significantly more likely to report their partner emotionally or financially abused them and threatened or mistreated their pet(s); the connection between animal maltreatment and IPV is particularly pronounced for emotional IPV when compared with other forms of IPV; challenge the commonplace conceptualization of animal abuse as a form of property abuse; and suggest a need for a more nuanced understanding of IPV perpetrators vis-à-vis animal maltreatment. This is the first study to use nationally representative data to assess the co-occurrence of animal abuse and IPV, and as such, it makes significant contributions to the interdisciplinary literature on animal abuse and IPV.