1. ( /
Social Work Practice and Human-Animal Interaction Survey: A Canadian Prairie Provinces Study
Darlene Chalmers PhD, Betty Rohr PhD, Colleen Anne Dell PhD, Trisha Dowling DVM, MSc
Background: The beneficial role of companion animals, or pets, in human health across the life cycle is well documented in the literature1,2,3. Animals are also being included in animal assisted interventions (AAIs) as part of social service agency supports4. Social Workers are health professionals that are increasingly likely to work with people that have companion animals5, 6. They are also likely to use AAIs7. There is little literature about social workers’ experiences and theoretical knowledge on the inclusion of animals in their practices8. An integrative approach that spans animal, human and social concerns is needed to address this area9.
Study Purpose: To examine social workers’ experiences, knowledge, views and practices with human-animal interactions in the prairie provinces of Canada (MB, SK, AB).
Introduction
Conclusion
Social workers have a fair degree of information on animals, knowledge about the HAB and use of animals in their treatment. However, there is also a significant need for specialized education and training on companion and other animals in their social work practice, as the vast majority do not have any. This finding was similar across provinces. This has implications for social work education curricula. It also warrants exploration of practice approaches and support at the organizational level to incorporate the HAB.
Limitations: The 8% response rate suggests that generalizability may be limited. There may be several reasons why people did not respond to the survey. It was determined that a small effect may have resulted from a higher response from those with an interest in animals; however, no meaningful bias would have been introduced into the sample population (for example, ‘animal lovers’ variable had a small positive effect and could explain 1% to 4% of the variation within question 1: ‘exposure to information on animal’ items [Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) ranged from .11 to .21]).
Holistic Approach
Staff and
Peer Leader
Engagement
Empowerment
Findings
Children,
Families &
Community
Community
Partnerships
Exposure to Information on Animals (N = 804):
Knowledge of the Human-Animal Bond (N = 727)
Animals in Assessment and Treatment
27% of 804 respondents indicated they do include questions about animals in their intake assessments which was similar across the three provinces. Of which:
87% ask if their clients have companion-animals
57% ask if they have other animals (e.g., farm animals)
40% ask if anyone in the family has hurt their animals
64% ask about what place the animals have in the client family
20% "other" - included family issues around care and responsibility of animals
22% of 792 respondents reported including animals in their interventions
35% employ animal-assisted activities, such as, visiting the elderly
56% do animal-assisted therapy (i.e., animal is part of treatment plan)
20% include animals in inpatient residences
42% “other” - included referring clients to animal assisted therapists or equine therapy programs, incorporating St. John Ambulance dog or SPCA, bringing their personal pets, allowing clients to bring pets; activities, and walks with dogs; or discussing the potential benefits of companion-animals like pet adoption.
158 respondents answered the question - “what type of animals do you include in your practice?”
85% - Dogs; 35% - Cats; 30% - Horses; 11% - Farm animals (e.g., goats, pigs, cows); 5% - Reptiles;
16% “other” including fish and rabbits
Main reason for including animals in interventions (n = 157)
Top five themes
Main reasons for prevention from using animals in practice (n = 754)
Top four themes
Community Support
How much have you heard or read about
None
A Little
Some
A Lot
1. A link between animal abuse and child abuse.
12%
24%
40%
2. A link between animal abuse and domestic violence.
16%
22%
38%
3. A link between animal abuse and elderly abuse.
42%
23%
11%
4. A link between animal abuse and criminal behaviour.
10%
18%
41%
32%
5. Positive influence of animals on adults' health and well being. 2% 6%
34%
58%
6. Positive influence of animals on childrens' health and well being. 1% 8%
36%
55%
7. Positive influence of animals on the elderlys' health and well being. 3%
31%
56%
8. Treatment of clients who have abused animals.
29% 4%
9. Treatment of clients who have experienced loss of a companion animal.
28% 7%
Holistic Approach
Research Question: What is the degree of social workers’ experiences, knowledge, views and application of human-animal interaction to a range of social work issues?
Methods: An on-line survey was made available, administered by Surveymonkey©.
Data Collection: Purposive sample from the 2014 membership lists of the Saskatchewan Association of Social Workers, Manitoba College of Social Workers, and Alberta College of Social Workers (~ 9500 members).
Data Analysis: 804 surveys were completed. IBM SPSS (Version 23) was used to analyze descriptive statistics. Qualitative analysis was used for the written text. Group tendencies were examined and reported in aggregate for each geographic survey, and for the three provinces combined.
Methods
Future Steps
Rank using 5-point Likert scale
Strongly Disagree/Disagree
Do not know
Agree/Strongly Agree
1. More than half of Canadian households have at least one dog or cat. 5%
11%
84%
2. One of the two least common fears of young children is of animals.
26%
25%
48%
3. Bonds with companion animals are simply substitutes for human relationships
78% 6%
17%
4. People who repeatedly and intentionally harm animals are more likely to use violence. 3%
91%
5. The elderly are the population least likely to benefit from animals in their lives. 2%
The outcomes of this study are informing a current CIHR/CRISM funded project. This will involve a series of webinars on AAIs in mental health and addictions. From this virtual gathering, we will bring together interested affiliates in the area of AAIs to develop research questions for the development of a CIHR grant that will contribute to the development of accessible resources for interventions in mental health and addictions.
Project Team
One Health is fundamentally supported in this project by the researchers representing the disciplines of sociology/public health, veterinary medicine, and social work, alongside the expertise of the project supporters. Their innovative work has merged these disciplines, ranging from how their research is approached to how it is disseminated.
Demographics
Gender
Participants by Province (N=804)
Average Age
43 years
References
1.Perrin, T. (2009). The business of urban animals survey: The facts and statistics on companion animals in Canada. The Canadian Veterinary Journal, 50(1), 48-52; 2. Stats, S., Pierfelice, L., Kim, C., & Crandell, R. (1999). A theoretical model for human health and the pet connection. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 214(4), ;
3. Wells, D. (2009). The effects of animals on human well-being. Journal of Social Issues, 65(3), ; 4. Hodgson, K. & Darling, M. (2011). Zooeyia: An essential component of “One Health”. The Canadian Veterinary Journal. 52(2), ; 5. Risley-Curtiss, C. (2010). Social work practitioners and the human-companion animal bond: A national study. Social Work, 55(1), 38–46; 6. Hanrahan, C. (2013). Social work and human animal bonds and benefits in health research: A provincial study Critical Social Work, 14(1), 63-79; 6. Tedeschi, F., Fitchett, R., & Molidor, L. (2005). The incorporation of animal-assisted interventions. in social work education. Journal of Family Social Work, 9(4), 59-77; 7. Hanrahan C (2014) Integrative health thinking and the one health concept: Is social work all for ‘one’ or ‘one’ for all?. In: Animals in Social Work: Why and How They Matter, Ryan T (editor), New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, pp 32–45; 8. Evans, N. & Gray, C ). The practice of ethics of animal-assisted therapy with children and young people. Is it enough that we don’t eat our co-workers. British Journal of Social Work, 42, ; 9. Chalmers, D. & Dell, C. (2015). Applying one health to the study of animal-assisted interventions. Ecohealth. doi: /s
34% Positive Impact
25% Relaxation/Mental health
25% Relationship building/Companionship
25% Therapeutic tool/Rapport
19% Holistic/Support client well-being
Primary Client Populations Served
Non-elderly adults 51%
Families 43%
Adolescents 34%
Children 33%
37% Policy restrictions/not permitted/building codes
17% Lack of training and knowledge/Not considered
17% Not appropriate/Workplace setting/hospital
13% Allergies/Fears/Client disinterest
12% No access to therapy or companion animals/Lack of resources
Major Areas of Practice
Mental Health 32%
Child Protection 16%
Health 14%
Ethnicity
Education & Training: 95% of no special training in including companion or other animals in practice; however, 88% of 727 would like to know more about human-animal bond
Appreciation for funding support: Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse (CRISM ) – Prairie Node & U of S One Health Research Development Grant Program