1999
DOI: 10.1163/156853099x00121
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Loving Them to Death: Blame-Displacing Strategies of Animal Shelter Workers and Surrenderers

Abstract: This article examines how shelter workers and individuals who surrender their companion animals to shelters manage guilt about killing previously valued animals. Researchers used an ethnographic approach that entailed open-ended interviews and directobservations of workers and surrenderers in a major, metropolitan shelter. Both workers and surrenderers used blame displacement as a mechanism for dealing with their guilt over euthanasia or its possibility. Understanding this coping strategy provides insights int… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
51
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(54 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
2
51
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Nonetheless, they learn to live with this unpleasant task as an inevitable feature of their jobs by relying on various institutional coping devices that reduce the stress and normalize killing (Arluke 1994b). Typically, shelter workers see themselves as compassionate people who put animals out of misery in a humane way while blaming the general public for causing the killing (Frommer and Arluke 1999). Most shelter workers deny that their killing or "euthanasia" is cruel and do not see it in the same light as harm rendered to animals in laboratories or farms, even when they euthanize animals that might be adoptable, let alone those that are young, attractive, and healthy.…”
Section: Finding Authenticitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Nonetheless, they learn to live with this unpleasant task as an inevitable feature of their jobs by relying on various institutional coping devices that reduce the stress and normalize killing (Arluke 1994b). Typically, shelter workers see themselves as compassionate people who put animals out of misery in a humane way while blaming the general public for causing the killing (Frommer and Arluke 1999). Most shelter workers deny that their killing or "euthanasia" is cruel and do not see it in the same light as harm rendered to animals in laboratories or farms, even when they euthanize animals that might be adoptable, let alone those that are young, attractive, and healthy.…”
Section: Finding Authenticitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To reduce their own guilt and uneasiness, workers turned around and blamed society for euthanasia because it created the pet overpopulation problem (Frommer and Arluke 1999). Workers complained that they had to "clean up" after irresponsible pet owners who "surrendered" their animals without good reason, overburdening and overcrowding shelters that were then forced to euthanize animals for reasons of space or economy.…”
Section: Finding Authenticitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further to this, it has been demonstrated in the United States that high euthanasia rates are linked to high staff turnover ) and moral stress for employees (Rollin 1986). The detrimental health effects of stress include depression, high blood pressure, sleeplessness, mental health issues, substance abuse and decreased emotional response (Arluke 1991, Frommer and Arluke 1999, Rohlf and Bennett 2005). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Past research has focused on the damaging psychological impact animal workers that must euthanize animals on a regular basis experience (Arluke 1991, Arluke 2003, Frommer and Arluke 1999, Rohlf and Bennett 2005. Workers are at risk for PTSD, sleep disruption, chronic illness, high blood pressure, depression and anxiety (Rohlf and Bennett 2005).…”
Section: Gender Differences On the Mmomentioning
confidence: 99%