Blame-Displacing In Animal Shelter Workers And Surrenderers
Using an ethnographic approach including open-ended interviews and direct observations of workers and surrenderers in a major, metropolitan shelter, this article examined how shelter workers and those who surrender their companion animals to shelters manage guilt about the killing of previously valued animals.
For the purposes of this study, interviews were conducted with ten surrenderers and eight shelter workers. In addition, over a seven month period, researchers spent more than 70 hours in the field making observations, conducting interviews and informally interacting with shelter staff and surrenderers. Collectively, this research showed that both surrenderers and shelter workers experienced guilt over the euthanasia of surrendered animals, and both groups managed their guilt by displacing blame.
Surrenderers presented superficial reasons for giving up their pets, but when interviewed in depth, they blamed someone else or the victim for the relinquishment. In some instances, surrenderers would avoid self-blame by refusing to admit there were alternatives to shelter relinquishment. Further, when displacing blame, surrenderers often pointed to undefined persons or others who did not take responsibility for their animals, i.e. “nobody wants dogs.” Moreover, surrenderers would emphasize the attractiveness of their animal in order to blame the shelter workers if an adoption did not materialize. And finally, surrenderers would also typically blame their pet for the outcome, considering euthanasia to be a better solution for their pet rather than allowing them to live in a poor situation.
Shelter workers also found the need to displace blame in order to manage the guilt over killing animals. Most often, shelter workers blamed surrenderers for the deaths of unadopted animals, believing that the owners were responsible for the behavior problems that ultimately made the animals inappropriate for adoption. In fact, where surrenderers failed to show grief over the relinquishment, shelter works often sought to make them feel guilty. By taking a moral high ground, workers set themselves apart from and above those who surrendered animals. At times, workers also blamed the victims, considering the euthanasia as a necessity for the animals’ sakes, or a better alternative to a bad life or painful death.
Researchers suggest that this information about coping strategies be used in the design of future educational efforts to make pet owners think more seriously about relinquishment of their pets and also to make people consider the long-term commitment needed to care properly for pets more carefully.