PROTECTION IS PARAMOUNT.

I’ve just finished listening to a BBC programme concerning the protection of animals and the alleged heavy handed approach followed by a well known British charity set up to investigate cases of animal cruelty and to ensure that animals have a voice to speak for them since, like children in the face of adult authority, they are powerless.

My view is that however sad things are for particular individuals who keep and care for animals, if they are no longer in a position to do so for whatever reason then they should arrange for the animals to be cared for by others. Animals are sentient beings and not inanimate possessions and as such, because they are vulnerable they need protection and to be cared for in accordance with the requirements of their particular species. Failure to do this ought to result in the animal’s removal.

It was suggested that a link exists between child neglect and cruelty and animal cruelty and I feel the charity concerned was unfairly criticised for cross reporting cases where there may well be a link between the two. Common sense would dictate, I feel, that anyone sadistic enough to hurt a helpless defenceless animal or child is unlikely to discriminate between the two – Child and animal – Simply because it’s the feeling of power and the possession of power which plays a large part in abuse cases as well as the thrill obtained from carrying out acts of violence. What human being in their right mind would go into a house where there is found to be cruelty to a dog or cat and, whilst there, notice a child who is bruised and looking neglected and then only follow up on the animal cruelty without bringing to the attention of the appropriate authorities the evidence of suspected child cruelty? Someone suggested that there is no proven link between acts of domestic violence and animal cruelty and cruelty towards children. To assume there is not a link defies logic, flies in the face of human nature when exhibited at its worst and shows a breath taking degree of naïve stupidity on the part of the contributor. Damaged, cruel, sadistic, evil or unbalanced people do not discriminate between groups of vulnerable people or animals. Yes there are people who prefer animals to humans, such as those who find it hard to relate to other adults and find animals more “accepting” of them and, no, they wouldn’t necessarily be unkind to children and kind to animals as probably they would find children more accepting too. However, where empathy and compassion are missing from someone’s character they will beyond doubt indiscriminately harm and abuse both children and animals. Maybe they won’t sexually abuse the children in their care but emotionally and psychologically and physically they may well do.

At present I’m unable to walk my guide dog Esme because of my foot problem. I arranged with the Guide Dogs Association that someone else should take care of her until I return to normal. When I asked if I could have her back when I found someone to walk her during the day but would still need to walk her at night and early morning, they quite rightly refused this request in the kindest possible way, telling me they’d rather see me fit first before I assumed responsibility for her again. This wasn’t an act of callousness on their part nor did it demonstrate a lack of compassion for me, instead it safeguarded Esme’s welfare, ensured that I get the rest I need so I can recover from what is a long term problem and will hopefully ensure that I will have dogs when I can.

We’re so arrogant a species that we think our needs, rights and wants are paramount and come before those of every other species on this planet which is precisely why we’re in the mess we’re in. The fact is that if any animal owner is too ill, frail or old to look after it properly then they need to face up to that and put the animal’s welfare first. My guide dog owning days will one day come to an end just as everything does and, sad though it will be I shall have to accept that for the sake of the dogs which I would be no longer capable of looking after.

Incidentally, the only fault I could find with the conduct of the charity concerned, was its bringing to court the case of a fifteen-year-old girl whose cat had been injured and needed veterinary treatment. After seeking the advice of her father who thought it didn’t need treatment, someone from the charity called, found it did and held the girl as responsible as her father and brought a prosecution against her. She may not have had the money to pay for its treatment and is subject to her parents’ authority and the blame should be and indeed was placed firmly at the father’s door. He admitted being at fault anyway.

In this ever more sadistic, violent and “my rights first and foremost” society, someone has to speak up for those who cannot, either because they literally don’t have a voice as is true of animals, or because they are powerless, as are children and while any of us can be wrong, heavy handed at times and be too zealous when carrying out whatever role we have, it’s important that every effort is made to ensure the vulnerable of whatever species are protected, cared for and not abused and neglected. Otherwise we cannot begin to call ourselves civilised, compassionate and humane.