From the Feature Article:
The Healthy Pleasure of Their Company: Companion Animals
and Human Health
Karen Allen, School of Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo
In a survey of U.S. families (Cain, 1985) respondents identified the importance of pets at various times in their lives. The majority (68%) reported that their pets were extremely important when they were sad, lonely, or depressed. In addition, 52% said pets were of great importance during personal or family illness or death of friends and family members. Half of the owners reported that their pets were also important during a family crisis such as divorce. In another survey (Voith, 1985) 99% of 1500 respondents considered their pets as family members and more than 90% believed that pets were aware of their moods. Such results suggest that common, everyday interaction with pets in a family setting is worthy of serious consideration.
Voith has observed people with a wide variety of pets and suggests an interesting theory of explanation for the enduring relationship between pets and people. Voith speculates that just as mingling or close association between different species of animals in a naturalistic environment is very common and adaptive, the presence of different species within a family environment can be equally advantageous. In the wild, animals serve as mutually reciprocal sentinels for danger. In our homes, as long as the animals remain serene, everything is going well. In this interpretation of the role of animals in families, the presence of pets means we can reduce our perceptions of threat and need for vigilance. Other researchers have studied pets as they relate to family functioning and dynamics and have reported that pets increase family adaptability (Cox, 1993) and reduce stress over the family life cycle (Davis, 1991). Such findings support Voith's hypothesis regarding the beneficial roles of pets.
For some people pets are the only family members. Through observations and interviews in streets and parks Kidd & Kidd (1994) studied benefits and liabilities of pets for people who are homeless and found strong attachments to pets among such people. Although commitment to companion animals was so extreme that people without homes frequently would not accept shelter that excluded pets, the researchers reported that it was clear that the pets were important to the physical and mental well-being of their owners. Similar findings were noted by Singer, Hart, & Zasloff (1995) who found that although people without homes who responded to their survey desired shelter, more than 90% said housing in which pets were not allowed was unacceptable. The authors suggest that, although being homeless with a pet is associated with many challenges and responsibilities, for many people a pet can buffer the stress of being homeless. The results of this study emphasize the importance of creating shelters and more permanent living situations for people and pets together.
Animals are repeatedly described as valued family members, but although many agencies worldwide respond to the needs of people who are the victims of natural disasters such as floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and storms, pets are usually not rescued with their owners. In the United States, for example, hurricane disaster victims with pets have been left on roadsides because they would not abandon their beloved pets, and as a consequence some have died. Partially in recognition of the health benefits of pets the consequences of separation from pets have begun to be considered, and public policy about rescue of pets with their owners is beginning to change. Disaster plans in several regions of the U.S. have begun to include provisions for care of pets. To emphasize the importance of pets as family members in one such area, hospital employees were asked if they would remain in the hospital to help during natural disasters. Although initially fewer than 30% said they would, in a follow-up questionnaire 50% said they would stay if their families could be with them, and 90% said they would stay if their pets could come too (Ferguson, 1997).
