Creature comfort? Animal assistance in therapeutic work with children and young people

Dogs as Therapeutic Partners, Not Therapeutic Tools: Ethical Considerations for AAT in the Correctional Setting

Although the benefits of animal assisted therapy for people are well established, the ethical considerations for the welfare and safety of the non-human animals involved are not. Without an accrediting body responsible for creating and overseeing national standards, therapy animal organizations are forced to create their own guidelines, creating inconsistencies within the field. Based on interviews conducted with therapy teams who have worked with Parenting, Prison & Pups (PPP), a parenting program provided to incarcerated jailed women that is integrated with the use of animal-assisted therapy (AAT), this article explores the extent of ethics training offered for AAT teams and will examine how agencies and handlers promote and ensure the safety of canine partners, especially in a correctional setting. The research suggests that specific protocols put forth by individual AAT organizations, which can provide for a national model, can afford for the safety and comfortability of canine partners, especially in a corrections environment, but implies that in order to maintain consistency and increase therapy team professionalism, national standards are a necessity. Guidelines are specifically essential for mental health professionals, who lack guidelines from their own accrediting bodies’ code of ethics, and may incorporate non-human therapy partners into their work settings, without proper supervision.