Pets, Social Participation, and Aging-in-Place: Findings from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess whether pet ownership contributes to social participation and life satisfaction for older adults. We used baseline data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) for this purpose, and logistic regression models to estimate associations between social participation and life satisfaction for pet owners and non-owners. One third of all older adults (≥ 65 years, n = 7,474) in our sample reported pet ownership. Pet owners were less likely than non-pet owners to report life satisfaction and to participate frequently in social, recreational, or cultural activities, but pet owners were no less satisfied than were non-owners with their current levels of social participation. For pet owners experiencing barriers to social participation, pets appeared protective of life satisfaction in some circumstances. Both individual characteristics and structural factors linked to the World Health Organization's age-friendly communities framework were relevant to understanding these findings.

Pet Ownership Patterns and Successful Aging Outcomes in Community Dwelling Older Adults

“…Regular contact with pets was related to happiness and to psychological wellness, after controlling for age, but not among current pet owners. This contrasts with the findings of lower life satisfaction overall in pet owners, but higher satisfaction of pet ownership with barriers to social participation (59). In the current study, comparable analyses were not meaningful as social support per se was not measured.…”

A Scoping Review: Social Participation as a Cornerstone of Successful Aging in Place among Rural Older Adults

“…Globally, pets are playing a more and more important role in people’s lives, with many considering them family [69]. Research has documented that the human–animal bond can have a health-protective effect for older adults [70,71], and can facilitate social participation for some people [72,73]. For example, an older adult said, “We’ve got a cat.…”

“…Social participation with animals can also support successful aging [71,72]. For example, data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study (CLS), which includes telephone interviews with over 20,000 rural and urban Canadians, showed that “pet ownership was reported by 39 per cent of participants aged 65–69 years, 35 per cent of those aged 70–74 years, 27 per cent of those aged 75–79 years, 22 per cent of participants aged 80–84 years, and 19 per cent of participants 85 years or older” [72] (p. 205).…”

“…Social participation with animals can also support successful aging [71,72]. For example, data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study (CLS), which includes telephone interviews with over 20,000 rural and urban Canadians, showed that “pet ownership was reported by 39 per cent of participants aged 65–69 years, 35 per cent of those aged 70–74 years, 27 per cent of those aged 75–79 years, 22 per cent of participants aged 80–84 years, and 19 per cent of participants 85 years or older” [72] (p. 205). They found that people with pets were not uniformly happier or more satisfied with life than people who did not have pets; however, pet owners who engaged in the most social participation had higher levels of life satisfaction than people who had no pets, but were also engaged in an equivalent level of social participation.…”

“…They found that people with pets were not uniformly happier or more satisfied with life than people who did not have pets; however, pet owners who engaged in the most social participation had higher levels of life satisfaction than people who had no pets, but were also engaged in an equivalent level of social participation. Unfortunately, the CLS did not ask about species of pet or record social participation activities that are unique to pet owners, such as dog walking [72] or going to the vet or groomer. These researchers point out that “levels of social participation for the dog owners in our sample, therefore, may have been inadvertently underestimated” [72] (p. 211), as well as the quality of the bond.…”