Animal hoarding

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Animal hoarding (also: Tiersammelsucht , English animal hoarding ) is the pathological collecting and keeping of animals . As Animal Hoarder or animal hoarders used to describe people who hold a variety of animals without the minimum requirements for food, hygiene or veterinary care to ensure. Affected people are no longer able to react to the poor posture and the negative effects on the health and well-being of themselves or household members.

In the United States, there are over 3000 cases with hundreds of thousands of animals annually. A survey in German veterinary offices in 2011 listed over 500 cases with more than 50,000 animals.

According to the underlying motivation, a distinction is made between four types of animal hoarders : the exaggerated caretaker , the rescuer type , the breeder type and the exploiter type . Apart from the breeder type, animal hoarders often suffer from mental disorders, but animal hoarding cannot be assigned to a specific disorder. The animal foraging addiction is particularly problematic for the animals kept, which often show diseases, parasites, malnutrition and behavioral disorders. The prosecution of such violations of animal protection law is the responsibility of the veterinary authorities in Germany. However, conditions and penalties are often circumvented or only have a short-term effect. The insight of the animal hoarder and, if necessary, psychological support are usually indispensable for solving such problem cases.

definition

Hoarding of domestic rabbits

Animal hoarding is the gathering of animals with four basic characteristics:

  1. Failure to meet the minimum requirements for hygiene, space, nutrition and veterinary care for the animals
  2. Inability to see the effects of these deficiencies on animal health, household members and the environment
  3. the obsessive attempt to maintain or even increase the number of animals in spite of increasingly worsening conditions
  4. Denial or trivialization of the problems for the animals and possibly also for the people in the household.

Animal hoarding was first scientifically described in 1981 on the basis of 31 cases in New York City . Previously, the French writer Paul Léautaud (1871-1956) described his pathological compassion for animals in his diaries, which eventually led to his living in his house with 38 cats, 22 dogs, a goat and a goose.

In 1997, the Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium (HARC) was founded in Massachusetts . This interdisciplinary working group deals with the research of psychological and sociological aspects, the frequency of occurrence and the development of action strategies. In 2008, the Academy for Animal Welfare of the German Animal Welfare Association set up an interdisciplinary working group on animal hoarding.

causes

In 2006, Patronek and colleagues attempted to classify the animal hoarders into four types according to their underlying motivation :

  • About Requested Pfleger (Overwhelmed Caregiver) : He usually collects passive animals at first in a manageable number. Most of them are people who, because of personal problems such as job loss, loss of life partner or health problems, begin to collect animals that they consider family members. They tend to have axis 1 mental disorders according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV). The exaggerated carer is usually able to recognize the incipient excessive demands and the resulting problems. The problems are being played down rather than ignored. He is mostly socially isolated and lives withdrawn. He is usually insightful and cooperative with authorities.
  • Savior type (Rescuer Hoarder) : He has a missionary urge to rescue animals, for example, before a euthanasia , which eventually lead to a compulsive disorder is. Rescue types tend to actively collect animals, also in a number that can initially be controlled. This later grows so overwhelming that the minimum required care can no longer be maintained. They are mostly people who are not socially isolated. The rescuer behaves in a negative manner towards authorities and tries to disguise his actions.
  • Breeders type (Breeder Hoarder) : First he breeds animals for sale or for exhibitions. The number of animals then increases to such an extent that adequate husbandry is no longer guaranteed. Animals are usually not kept in the home and the living conditions of the person and their family are not impaired. The insight into the emerging problems is usually moderate.
  • Exploiters type (Exploiter Hoarder) : He collects animals solely to satisfy their own needs and feels empathy for either animals or humans. The exploiter is a sociopath or has a personality disorder . He feels like an expert and has a strong need to control . Problems of hoarding animals are not recognized or deliberately ignored, he behaves in a very negative manner towards authorities and is therefore the most difficult to look after.
Beginning of hoarding: Hygiene and nutrition are largely maintained here, but the cage is clearly overcrowded.

From Patronek and employees nor the "incipient hoarders" is (incipient Hoarder) described. He still has a minimum of care for the animals, he recognizes deficiencies and actively tries to remedy them. However, there is a risk that animal husbandry will suddenly derail and conditions will worsen dramatically. This classification shows that various psychological disorders, but also other causes, can lead to animal foraging. So it is more of a symptom than a mental illness in its own right. Therefore, animal hoarding is not explicitly listed in the disease codes of the DSM-IV and the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10). Although various psychological models have been used to explain animal hoarding, research on this phenomenon is still in its infancy. There are parallels to collecting inanimate objects ( Messie syndrome ) and to litter syndrome ( Diogenes syndrome ). Up to a third of the hoarding cases involve animals, but animals can be of considerable material value and some of the hoarders even consider them family members. This close bond with the hoarded animals, partly paired with a missionary urge to save, as well as the interactions between hoarders and their animals, distinguish him clearly from a "messie". Many animal hoarders perceive themselves positively as Samaritans, which speaks for an ego-syntonic disorder . In the recent literature, the animal hoarding is stronger than side effect of self-neglect adult (adult self-neglect) understood.

In a survey of German veterinary offices, according to the assessment of the official veterinarians, the rescuer type and the type of the exaggerated carer were represented most frequently with about 40% each. The breeder type was assigned in 35% of the cases, the exploiter type in 13% of the cases. Multiple answers were possible here, as it is entirely possible that an animal hoarder shows characteristics of several types. In contrast to other forms of cruelty to animals , the suffering of the animals in hoarding arises from a loss of awareness of the deteriorating conditions; the real intention of the hoarder is not to harm the animal.

Type and extent of problematic animal husbandry

Affected animal species and the extent of animal hoarding have so far been systematically investigated in two studies, whereby a significant number of unreported cases must be expected, since on the one hand only cases that have come to the attention of the authorities can be recorded and, on the other hand, concerns about data protection on the part of the authorities make scientific processing more difficult .

The hygiene deficiencies in this budgie farm extended to the living area of ​​the animal hoarder.

A study presented in 2011 based on interviews with German veterinary authorities lists over 500 cases with a total of over 50,000 animals. About half of the cases were holdings of up to three animal species, in extreme cases 20 animal species were kept. The range of animal species included all domestic animals , but also birds , reptiles , amphibians and wild animals. The keeping of domestic cats was particularly noticeable, followed by domestic dogs . The average herd size was 105 animals, in extreme cases 3000 animals. The highest numbers of animals were found in populations of rodents , which grow rapidly due to the high rate of reproduction . In about half of the cases, the animal owners had no knowledge of the exact number of animals and the identity of the animals. In North Rhine-Westphalia alone, the veterinary offices have registered 354 cases with almost 10,000 animals in 10 years up to 2020.

A retrospective study in the United States could evaluate 54 cases from the years 1992 to 1996. The number of annual cases in the United States was estimated from the data at 700 to 2000. The median number of animals was 39 and the number exceeded 100 in only four cases. In the United States, too, cats and dogs are most frequently affected. Current case reports show a significant increase in animal hoarding. A five-fold increase was observed between 2000 and 2006, and in the USA about 3,000 people are currently diagnosed each year, affecting hundreds of thousands of animals.

Sociological Aspects

The majority of the animal hoarders are female, around three quarters in the USA and almost two thirds in Germany. The largest numbers of animals in Germany were mainly observed in men, with this mainly affecting farm animals, rodents, birds and reptiles.

Most of the time, animal hoards belong to the older generation. In the US study, almost half of the animal hoarders were over 60 years old. The German study showed a tendency towards a somewhat younger age: the average age was 50 years, the majority of those affected were between 40 and 50 years old. This difference is explained by the fact that the transition from the post-war era to the baby boomer generation in the United States happened about 10 years earlier.

While 72% of the animal hoarders in the USA lived alone, in Germany it was only about 45%. In 39% of the German cases there was a life partner, in around a quarter of the animal hoards children lived in the household. The majority of the animal hoards lived in homesteads or single-family homes. Three quarters of them did not have a job (pensioners, unemployed). A connection with the level of education could not be determined.

Animal health and hygienic conditions

Parasite infestation (here a mouse with mange ) is observed in about half of the animal hoards.

About 80% of the reported cases showed significant hygiene and health deficiencies. The most frequent deficiencies in Germany were illnesses (60%), parasite infestation (50%), malnutrition (42%), injuries (28%) and behavioral disorders (27%, especially deprivation disorders ). Dead animals were found in almost a third of the herds, in the US study even in 60% of the cases.

In the German study, floors contaminated with faeces and urine and unpleasant odors were the most common hygiene deficiencies, which in 45% of cases extended to human living quarters. A major renovation or even a building demolition was necessary after the evacuation, especially in the case of cats keeping. In two thirds of the cases there was not enough space for the animals.

In the USA, unpleasant odors and poor hygiene are by far the most common reasons for reporting animal hoardings to the authorities. In more than half of the cases it is done by neighbors, in about a fifth by social services. In Germany, it is mainly excessive numbers of animals (52%), followed by odor nuisance (35%) and uncleanliness (31%) that lead to reports. In more than a third of the cases, it is worried neighbors who file the complaint. Advertisements rarely come from close relatives and friends.

Dangers for the animal hoarder and possibly his family are diseases that can be transmitted to humans ( zoonoses ) and parasites as well as the high ammonia pollution in the air.

Official measures

Legal bases

The keeping of animals is subject to legal regulations in most countries, especially animal welfare law . The keeping of farm animals is also subject to animal disease legislation . According to Section 2 of the German Animal Welfare Act (TierSchG) and Article 6 of the Federal Animal Welfare Act, every animal owner must feed, care for and house his animal appropriately. Similarly, the Austrian Federal Act on the Protection of Animals in Section 5 prohibits any form of cruelty to animals, including insufficient housing, nutrition and care. In addition, various federal and state ordinances with specific provisions for keeping and breeding animals apply in Germany. These include the Animal Welfare Farm Animal Husbandry Ordinance and the Animal Welfare Dog Ordinance . Violations of the Animal Welfare Act are to be prosecuted in any case by the responsible veterinary office . According to § 16a TierSchG, the competent authority has the right to eliminate animal husbandry violations through orders or measures and to take the necessary measures to avert future violations. Every keeping of farm animals in Germany has to be registered with the animal disease fund of the respective federal state.

Officially initiated measures and success rates

In the German study, the official veterinarians were only granted voluntary access to the corresponding locations in 54% of the cases, a quarter of the animal hoarders only allowed access to partial areas. The remaining cases could only be viewed with a court order.

In almost 87%, written orders or conditions were issued in accordance with Section 16a TierSchG. In two thirds of the cases, the maximum number of animals was limited, in 41.5% of the cases a mostly temporary ban on keeping animals in accordance with Section 20a (1) TierSchG provisionally or judicially ordered. Further requirements were the surrender of part of the animal population, measures to improve the condition of care, nutrition and hygiene, veterinary treatment, the disposal of animal carcasses, pest control measures and quarantine requirements . In almost 44% of the cases, legal proceedings had to be initiated, of which only a fifth resulted in a judgment. Fines were imposed here, in severe cases also imprisonment of up to eight months with suspension on probation , in repeat cases also imprisonment of up to eleven months without probation. In half of the cases, the animal population was seized or confiscated.

Only in 45% of the cases did the measures taken lead to at least a temporary improvement in conditions. A fifth of the animal hoarders took in more animals despite conditions. Animal keeping bans were partially undermined by hoarding other animal species. A quarter of the animal hoarders evaded the requirements and controls by moving to another official area, with a fifth the new whereabouts could not even be determined. Over 43% of the animal hoarders had previously become suspicious at least once, so that there is a high risk of relapse .

A similar repertoire of requirements and procedures is practiced in the USA. Around a quarter of the animal hoards were placed under official supervision, 17% were convicted in court, and 24% were assessed psychiatrically. Temporary bans on keeping animals or requirements to limit the number of animals are often pronounced, but also in the USA by some animal hoarders cleverly bypassed. In severe cases, prison sentences are also imposed. Patronek sees this rather critically, because an actual social or mental problem is criminalized and detention is not only expensive, but also unsuitable for solving the problem.

These results show that coercive and punitive measures have only limited success. Coercive measures bring about a quick improvement for the animals, but neither eliminate the mental causes in the hoarder nor prevent a relapse. Encouraging self-knowledge, a dedicated consistency - i.e. accepting the personality of the animal hoarder, but not tolerating animal welfare violations -, regular follow-up checks, individual procedures and the cooperation of the veterinary offices with other authorities, social institutions and animal welfare organizations are necessary in order to permanently solve problem cases .

costs

The costs of animal hoarding cases can usually only be roughly estimated. In addition to the expenses of the veterinary offices, other authorities (in almost 40% of German cases the police) often have to be involved. When such animal holdings are closed, there are also costs for accommodation in animal shelters , whose capacity is rarely sufficient to accommodate larger numbers of animals, as well as costs for veterinary treatment, pest control, legal proceedings, etc. In the German study, an average of EUR 8,863 was spent per procedure. The total costs across Germany are estimated to be in the double-digit millions. In the United States, uncomplicated cases can cost several thousand US dollars, and complicated procedures can cost more than 100,000 US dollars.

Psychosocial care

Failure to assign the animal hoard to one of the recognized mental disorders often leads to a delay in the involvement of social, psychotherapeutic or psychiatric institutions. Due to the strong affection towards the animals, it is problematic to have the animals removed immediately.

However, the initiation of care and therapy measures requires the consent and will of the animal hoarder. In the German study, 88% of the cases showed at least a willingness to talk. In more than a third of the cases, the official veterinarian suspected a mental disorder. Most of the animal nurseries refused to take care of them by the social psychiatric service , and only in 18% of the cases did those affected agree to such a measure.

The complexity of the causes makes support and problem solving difficult and is responsible for the high relapse rates. First of all, any existing psychological or psychiatric underlying diseases must be identified and treated if necessary. The motivational interviewing is one of the ways of solving Tierhortungsfällen. However, each case must be analyzed individually and impartially; special options for intervention and therapy for animal hoarding have not yet been published.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ A b c d e Gary J. Patronek, JN Nathanson: A Theoretical Perspective to Inform Assessment and Treatment Strategies for Animal Hoarders. In: Clinical Psychology Review. 29, 2009, pp. 274-281. PMID 19254818 .
  2. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Tina Susanne Sperlin: Animal Hoarding. The morbid gathering of animals. Current situation in Germany and importance for veterinary medicine . Dissertation . University of Veterinary Medicine, Hanover 2011.
  3. ↑ a b c d e f g h G. J. Patronek et al: Animal Hoarding Structuring interdisciplinary responses to help people, animals and communities at risk. In: Proceedings of the Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium. 2006, pp. 19-20. ( online ; PDF; 1.1 MB)
  4. ^ D. Worth, AM Beck: Multiple ownership in New York City. In: Transactions and Studies of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia. 3, 1981, pp. 280-300. PMID 7043819 .
  5. ^ Paul Léautaud: literary diary 1893-1956 . A selection. Edited and translated by Hanns Grössel . Rowohlt, Reinbek near Hamburg 1966, ISBN 3-499-25117-5 .
  6. ↑ The Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium
  7. ↑ Animal Hoarding - The addiction to hoard animals Information on tierschutzbund.de.
  8. ^ T. Meier: On phenomenology and classification of hoarding: a review. In: Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 110, 2004, pp. 323-337.
  9. ↑ Randy Frost: People Who Hoard Animals. In: Psychiatric Times. April 17, 2000.
  10. ↑ Randy O. Frost et al.: Hoarding: a community health problem. In: Health and Social Care in the Community. 8, 2000, pp. 229-234.
  11. ↑ Randy O. Frost et al .: Comparison of object and animal hoarding. In: Depress Anxiety. 28, 2011, pp. 885-891. PMID 21608085 .
  12. ↑ Veterinarians freed almost 10,000 animals in NRW. Westfalenblatt, February 4, 2020
  13. ↑ a b c d e f g h G. J. Patronek: Hoarding of Animals: an underrecognized public health problem in a difficult-to-study population. In: Public Health Rep. 114, 1999, pp. 81-87. PMID 9925176 , PMC 1308348 (free full text).
  14. ↑ Amanda I. Reinisch: Understanding the human aspects of animal hoarding. In: Can Vet J. 49, 2008, pp. 1211-1214. PMID 19252714 , PMC 2583418 (free full text).
  15. ↑ Swiss Animal Welfare Act (PDF; 515 kB).
  16. ↑ Animal Welfare Act Austria .
  17. ↑ Saarlouis Administrative Court , order of February 8, 2012, Aktz. 5 L 48/12 ; Rejection of temporary legal protection against animal welfare orders (prohibition of dog breeding and keeping of 50 dogs, 6 cats, 4 horses, 1 lama, 1 raccoon).
  18. ↑ a b Tina Sperlin among others: Animal Hoarding: The pathological collecting of animals. In: Deutsches Tierärzteblatt. 60, 2012, pp. 1220-1228.
  19. ↑ AM Fleury: An Overview of Animal Hoarding. In: PRACTICE. 7, 2007, pp. 58-64.

literature

Web links

Commons : Animal hoarding  - collection of images
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on November 25, 2012 .