When Hurricane Katrina spun through the US in September, it stripped bear two concepts of great importance relative to the survival of companion animals. The first of these deals with leadership, the ideal relationship between human and companion animal, the core of which is the foresight and ability to initiate rather than react to events. I’ve long maintained that one reason it’s so difficult for many Americans to grasp this concept relative to their pets is because such a dearth of leadership examples exists in our society. Any doubts I had about the validity of that observation vanished following Hurricane Katrina as evidence of the failure of leadership from the lowest to highest levels became painfully obvious.
The second concept relates to the emotion- rather than knowledge-driven representation of the companion animals who survived the storm. That they had the wherewithal to survive is, more often than not, shoved aside in favor of portraying them as victims of a horrible fate beyond their control. This saddens me for two reasons.
One is that the more emotion-driven accounts become the norm, the more valid they seem. When some media personality becomes elevated to the level of expert simply by virtue of having access to a camera and/or microphone, that magnifies the effect. (“Oh, that must be true. I heard it on CNN!”) So while Betty Jo Newscreator may opt for a heart-breaking tale of an animal she portrays as an innocent victim because she knows its emotionalism will sell more papers or gain more viewers, naive members of the public may believe such an emotion- rather than knowledge-based assessment of the animal’s condition constitutes the normal way to approach such problems. That, in turn, leads to a population of emotion-driven folks who want to help these animals at a time when these animals need people who understand and respect their needs the most. Simultaneously, those well-meaning, but misguided people may adopt animals they’ve been conditioned to view as pathetic victims rather than survivors of the hurricane (or any natural or manmade disaster).
Although there are times when the specific labels we apply to others have few ramifications—referring to a boy as a lad, for example—that’s not the case when using the terms “victim” and “survivor” to which most people assign a strong emotional charge. The result of this is that the majority of people automatically assign different qualities to victims than they do to survivors. Victims are viewed as weak and helpless, unable to make it without help from others. Survivors, on the other hand, are viewed as having some inner strength, some je ne sais quoi, that enables them to triumph when others fail.
Needless to say, what label one affixes to an animal one adopts will more likely than not affect the way one relates to him or her. The most common response to animals viewed as victims is to baby and spoil them. Unfortunately, and as readers of these commentaries already know, that may not only increase the stress on an animal who has already experienced a great deal of stress, it may set that animal up for serious behavioral and/or stress-related medical problems further down the line. Sadly, when this occurs, people may blame the hurricane or other traumatic event rather than their inappropriate relationship with the animal following it.
As truckloads of shelter animals displaced by hurricanes Katrina and Rita make their way north and as shelters in the hurricane-ravaged regions become filled with strays and unclaimed pets, thousands of Americans fueled by the media will feel the urge to “save” one of those “poor hapless victims.” But regardless how appealing assuming the role of savior may be to our egos, ensuring the physical and mental well-being of these animals demands we not only recognize their strength, but also communicate our strength and confidence in ourselves and them to them.
That means forgoing the babytalk and reactivity in favor of interactions that build animal confidence rather than dependency.
It means focusing on and giving thanks for all the glorious qualities of this animal that enabled him or her to make it when countless true victims died or were euthanized for untreatable problems.
It means joyfully celebrating the survivor and gaining any knowledge necessary to ensure that animal’s success in his or her new home.
It means putting the animal’s needs ahead of our own.
When Hurricane Katrina spun through the US in September, it stripped bear two concepts of great importance relative to the survival of companion animals. The first of these deals with leadership, the ideal relationship between human and companion animal, the core of which is the foresight and ability to initiate rather than react to events. I’ve long maintained that one reason it’s so difficult for many Americans to grasp this concept relative to their pets is because such a dearth of leadership examples exists in our society. Any doubts I had about the validity of that observation vanished following Hurricane Katrina as evidence of the failure of leadership from the lowest to highest levels became painfully obvious.
The second concept relates to the emotion- rather than knowledge-driven representation of the companion animals who survived the storm. That they had the wherewithal to survive is, more often than not, shoved aside in favor of portraying them as victims of a horrible fate beyond their control. This saddens me for two reasons.
One is that the more emotion-driven accounts become the norm, the more valid they seem. When some media personality becomes elevated to the level of expert simply by virtue of having access to a camera and/or microphone, that magnifies the effect. (“Oh, that must be true. I heard it on CNN!”) So while Betty Jo Newscreator may opt for a heart-breaking tale of an animal she portrays as an innocent victim because she knows its emotionalism will sell more papers or gain more viewers, naive members of the public may believe such an emotion- rather than knowledge-based assessment of the animal’s condition constitutes the normal way to approach such problems. That, in turn, leads to a population of emotion-driven folks who want to help these animals at a time when these animals need people who understand and respect their needs the most. Simultaneously, those well-meaning, but misguided people may adopt animals they’ve been conditioned to view as pathetic victims rather than survivors of the hurricane (or any natural or manmade disaster).
Although there are times when the specific labels we apply to others have few ramifications—referring to a boy as a lad, for example—that’s not the case when using the terms “victim” and “survivor” to which most people assign a strong emotional charge. The result of this is that the majority of people automatically assign different qualities to victims than they do to survivors. Victims are viewed as weak and helpless, unable to make it without help from others. Survivors, on the other hand, are viewed as having some inner strength, some je ne sais quoi, that enables them to triumph when others fail.
Needless to say, what label one affixes to an animal one adopts will more likely than not affect the way one relates to him or her. The most common response to animals viewed as victims is to baby and spoil them. Unfortunately, and as readers of these commentaries already know, that may not only increase the stress on an animal who has already experienced a great deal of stress, it may set that animal up for serious behavioral and/or stress-related medical problems further down the line. Sadly, when this occurs, people may blame the hurricane or other traumatic event rather than their inappropriate relationship with the animal following it.
As truckloads of shelter animals displaced by hurricanes Katrina and Rita make their way north and as shelters in the hurricane-ravaged regions become filled with strays and unclaimed pets, thousands of Americans fueled by the media will feel the urge to “save” one of those “poor hapless victims.” But regardless how appealing assuming the role of savior may be to our egos, ensuring the physical and mental well-being of these animals demands we not only recognize their strength, but also communicate our strength and confidence in ourselves and them to them.
That means forgoing the babytalk and reactivity in favor of interactions that build animal confidence rather than dependency.
It means focusing on and giving thanks for all the glorious qualities of this animal that enabled him or her to make it when countless true victims died or were euthanized for untreatable problems.
It means joyfully celebrating the survivor and gaining any knowledge necessary to ensure that animal’s success in his or her new home.
It means putting the animal’s needs ahead of our own.