Improving understanding of practitioner perspectives and approaches towards case management of animal hoarding cases: a mixed methods approach

Abstract

Importance of the research
The literature relating to animal hoarding is limited, but spans a range of disciplines including veterinary, social care, psychology, public health, human geography, and social sciences. Research about animal hoarding is lacking, particularly in England; this research explored the phenomenon, and provided a thorough explanation of case management, with implications for policy and professional practice. This is the first empirical research outlining the characteristics of animal hoarding in England and the challenges facing professionals dealing with such complex cases.

Research Design
The research was conducted using a mixed methods Convergent Parallel Design, comprising four studies. Study one explored extent of animal hoarding in England via prosecutions reported in the media. Study two evaluated retrospective case reports from practitioners directly involved with managing cases across Northeast England. Study three explored the experiences, behaviours, and opinions of five animal welfare inspectors with first-hand experience of animal hoarding via a group interview. Study four explored the experiences, behaviours, and opinions of nine practitioners with first-hand experience of animal hoarding via one-to-one interviews. The findings from studies one – four were compared, interpreted, and discussed in relation to international literature.

Main research findings
Characteristics of animal hoarders were predominantly female, middle to older aged, living alone, socially isolated, and hard to engage, with many dogs and /or cats. Living conditions were described as chaotic and squalid, presenting public health and safety risks, and often triggering nuisance and welfare complaints. All animal hoarding subgroups namely, ‘rescuers’, ‘exploitative’, ‘over-whelmed’ and ‘incipient’ were identified, supporting that these terms are internationally recognisable.

Cases impacted on both human and animal services with investigations led by the service(s) or organisation(s) responding to a specific problem, rather than addressing the wider context. The rarity of cases meant that practitioners often had limited experience, confidence, resource, or reference points to determine the best course of action. Multidisciplinary working was acknowledged, although this research identified real and perceived barriers and challenges, particularly around data sharing, disinterest in involvement, low trust between services, poor coordination of services, lack of resources or service capacity, difficulty understanding partner objectives, priorities, powers, and thresholds for engagement leading to frustration and fragmented approaches. This was compounded by public services not being in a robust position following a challenging decade of austerity measures and a global pandemic.

Examples of harm reduction approaches negotiated with the individual included accessing specialist support to clean, reduce clutter, property maintenance, negotiated clearance, animal neutering, voluntary surrender of some / all animals, and installing fire prevention and detection measures. This research found that whilst the judicial system provided short term respite, it does not effectively deter or manage embedded animal hoarding behaviours, and may make the situation worse, breaching trust and rapport and retraumatising the individual.

Practitioners require higher order communication skills, an empathetic approach, strong social justice values and personal resilience. Small specialist teams, of skilled individuals, used to dealing with complex (non-hoarding) cases, appeared better able to manage cases. Adoption of person-centred approaches underpinned by social justice, and using trauma informed, systemic and motivational interviewing, as well as therapeutic interventions revolving around relapse prevention seem to have the most potential but require further investigation. An animal welfare and home environment risk assessment tool has been developed to assist professionals in undertaking a more refined assessment where animals are a particular concern.

Original contribution to knowledge
Animal hoarding is a complex and novel phenomenon that is poorly understood. It is therefore important to document any first-hand accounts to contribute to the emerging evidence base. Practitioners require assistance interpreting law, procedures, models, methods, research, and theories and how to incorporate these into their practice. Policy development, implementation, and effective responses to animal hoarding relies on a strong evidence base to ensure successful and cost-effective interventions. Experiential knowledge embedded in the first-hand practice of managing animal hoarding cases can generate significant practical insight, reducing the gap between theory and practice, unifying the two and thereby leading to knowledge translation. This research will enable practitioners, managers, policy, and decision makers to better understand the characteristics of animal hoarding behaviours and contribute to development of better-informed case management.

Date of Award	27 Jun 2024
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	Northumbria University
Supervisor	Nick Neave (Supervisor), Catherine Bailey (Supervisor), Helen King (Supervisor) & Mariyana Schoultz (Supervisor)