Comparison of object and animal hoarding

Abstract

Recent research has highlighted the prevalence and harmful consequences of hoarding,[1] and investigators have proposed inclusion of hoarding disorder in DSM-5.[2] An unanswered question about the proposed disorder is whether people who hoard animals would meet diagnostic criteria for it. This paper discusses the similarities and differences between object and animal hoarding. People who hoard animals appear to meet the basic diagnostic criteria for hoarding disorder. Their homes are cluttered, disorganized, and dysfunctional. They have great difficulty relinquishing animals to people who can more adequately care for them, and they form intense attachments (urges to save) that result in significant impairment. However, they differ from people who hoard objects in several ways. These differences are significant enough to warrant comment in the text description accompanying the diagnostic criteria and consideration as a subtype of hoarding disorder. More research is necessary to determine the exact relationship between object and animal hoarding.

Frequency and spatial distribution of animal and object hoarder behavior in Curitiba, Paraná State, Brazil

“…Animal hoarders appear to live in more squalid conditions, they tend to have only one species of animal, and cases are more prevalent among women, with higher rates of recidivism than object hoarders 22 . However, both types of hoarders presented a chronic condition that involves intense emotional attachment to objects or animals and poor insight about the problem 22 .…”

Hoarding disorder: a new diagnostic category in ICD-11?

“…100 Furthermore, it has been suggested that patients with animal hoarding may exhibit particularly high rates of dysfunctional personality traits and dissociative symptoms, which could, at least theoretically, explain their puzzling indifference to severe domestic squalor. 100 Animal hoarding seems to be more prevalent in women and to appear later than object hoarding, whereas object hoarding is probably more prevalent in men (reviewed by Frost et al 101 ). Finally, animal hoarding may lead to criminal prosecution, as most patients with animal hoarding have made a series of deliberate choices and acts, placing their interests above the interests of animals, and leading to foreseeable suffering and neglect.…”

“…100,102 Therefore, animal hoarding could be addressed within severe domestic squalor. Although there seem to be some particularities related to animal hoarding as compared with the traditional concept of object hoarding, 101 the evidence base is still too scarce to provide a definitive answer with regard to the status of this phenomenon.…”

A case of digital hoarding

“…The specific phenomenology and development of hoarding justified a classification separate from obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) 2. Hoarding disorder is defined as the extensive collection of objects followed by difficulty discarding them for aesthetic reasons, or because of an object's emotional value or consideration of its possible usefulness in the future 3. The consequence of hoarding objects is accumulation of objects in living spaces, leading to limited space, poor hygiene and feelings of embarrassment 4.…”