(or how living with a dog when a child can lower the risk of Schizophrenia)
Given my interest in the impact of dogs on human mental health, I was very interested to read a recent study published by John Hopkins Medicine suggesting that living with a dog from an early age can lessen the risk of developing schizophrenia in later life.
I have, long believed that living with a dog can have, significant, beneficial effects on human health, both physically and mentally. This study would appear to support this in the types of cases identified by the researchers.
The potential, impact of living with a dog or a cat in early life was examined. Two, fairly common, mental health issues were considered – schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
Robert Yolken MD and his colleagues at Sheppard Pratt Health System in Baltimore, US looked at how exposure to a pet cat of a dog during the early years of life, up to age 12 impacted upon a later diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Researchers were surprised to find a significant reduction in the risk of a person developing schizophrenia when exposed to living with a dog at an early age. However, there no impact on bipolar disorder. The researchers also noted that living with cats had no impact on either condition.
The study was quite large and the full paper can be found here.
Work such as that described above convinces me that dogs can have a significant impact on human mental health, that is why I developed, with my wife (a mental wellbeing professional – First in the Q) Paw Support, an initiative working with Walnut Tree Health and Wellbeing to bring together rescue dogs and sufferers of mental health conditions that can benefit from canine companionship.
Fearful dogs are of particular interest to me. I see an awful lot of them. Often, owners are making the problem worse. Not deliberately of course, They are, simply doing things that reinforce the fearful behaviour. I saw another example of this today.
I met a very nice lady, again, today with her canine charges. Two were running free and two where on extending leads (a pet hate of mine). One of these dogs on the lead, a small terrier, had a ball in her mouth and was zigzagging, clearly desperate to be anywhere but where she was. The owner explained to me that she was scared of the noise, to be heard in the remote distance, of gunshots or farmers’ bird scarers in the fields.
The first thing to understand here is the acuity of a dogs’ senses. Their hearing is much more keen than humans. So, that distant noise, to her dog was much clearer and appeared closer to her. Her response because of her fear was to try to escape from it (fight or flight).
The extending lead was allowing this dog to try to escape from a perceived threat. As we continued with our walk, this dog continued with its’ efforts to escape, becoming more distressed as it did so. This behaviour had been allowed to persist for a number of years, indeed, sometimes the owner picked the dog up to comfort it (a compassionate, human action); entirely, the wrong response for the dog – this only serves to reinforce the fear this dog was feeling.
So, was there anything that could be done to help this dog? Of course. The thing to understand here is that a behaviour that has gone on for some time, a number of years in this case, can prove a little more difficult to deal with. However, in many cases, this just means it may take a little more time and effort to correct.
Clearly, this little dog, was in a state of distress, one that was being allowed to persist. It was important to interrupt this mindset and behaviour. In this case, I asked the owner to stop at one of the many park benches, sit down and shorten the dogs’ lead and to just relax. The response from this frightened little dog was almost immediate. The pulling on the lead stopped, the tail that had been tucked between the legs started to wag and she started to play with her ball. This took a couple of minutes of just sitting calmly and waiting. Nothing else.
In the future, this owner will be stopping regularly at park benches for a sit down if her dog is distressed. By the way, she had a spray collar alleged to calm her dog; this had zero effect. By, simply, understanding what the dog was doing and why, she was able to start to help her dog with her fearful behaviour.
In these types of cases the most important things for success are understanding and taking time to work with your dog. Often this will achieve good results. But, you have to stick with it.
Remember, if you have dogs with problems such as described here, the person to help is a qualified canine behaviourist. These are not training issues, they are behavioural problems.
I was minded again today while talking with some dog owners of the need for owners to take responsibility for their dogs seriously.
Two, very similar, cases were brought to my attention.
The first was a family with a number of dogs, a small pack, basically. These dogs had been gathered by the family in question to protect the household. They, of course, live in a quiet village where protection is not really needed.
Unfortunately, as is the case with many families I come into contact with, these people did not understand, or perhaps, care about their responsibility to their dogs. The dogs had not, apparently, received any training and were barely in control behind the gates of their home. They did not seem to get much walking or exercise away from their home. So, that is case one.
The second follows along the same lines. This time a family living behind gates again. The husband had bought a powerful dog, again for protection. This dog was young and patrolled his patch, rushing aggressively to its gate in an attempt to get to any passing stranger, be it human of another dog. The people I was talking too were fearful of their and their dog’s safety. Again, this dog did not seem to be taken out for exercise and, clearly had not received much or any training. It sounded to me to be a serious problem in the making.
Both of these cases appear to demonstrate owners who fail to understand their responsibilities regarding their dogs. Indeed, the dogs in these two cases may at some stage represent a danger to humans and dogs alike.
All dogs need basic things, without exception:
Shelter
Safety
Food
Training
Exercise
Socialisation
Responsible owners
Any dog owner or potential dog owner must provide the above as a minimum. If you are unable to provide these basics for your dog, you should, simply, not bring a dog into your home.
I was reminded of the impact dogs can have on our lives recently.
Nearing the end of a walk in one off Ziggys’ (my rescued companion) favourite places and heading back to the car we met a lady with a rather nervous dog. We stopped to chat.
As we talked Sue, my better half was chatting with a lady just within my eye line who did not appear to have a dog. A number of cars started pulling up. These cars brought with them the sound of extremely excited dogs.
The car doors opened and a variety of very happy dogs leapt out and all rushed to the river, closely accompanied by the ‘nervous’ dog, who by now was very happy indeed.
The lady without a dog joined the group of dogs and their owners and of they went for an enjoyable walk together.
Sue told me that the lady without the dog lived alone and this group of dog owners welcomed her for regular walks with the group and their dogs. This lady lived alone and could not accommodate a dog even though she loved to be around them. She told Sue that she got an enormous amount of pleasure from this group and the dogs.
There is a lot written about dogs and their impact on lonely people. This little vignette displayed it admirably. Thank goodness we still have people that appreciate the ‘value’ of canine companionship and are happy too share it.
I was disappointed to note some of the responses and the apparent, lack of understanding relating to dogs and their owners.
The thrust of the reader’s letter was to demand that all dogs should be kept on leads in public places, all the time. The writer of the letter had experienced a few dogs who had approached her small dog, always on the lead, and ‘frightened’ it. The experience for the dog was such that the owners now exercised their dog in the garden. This, of course, denies their dog the life of a dog – no socialisation in the big bad world.
This type of response is common, unfortunately. Keeping a dog away from ‘anything’ that you think might disturb it is detrimental to the wellbeing of your dog and the ability for it to experience life as a dog. It is no good just evading anything that is a little challenging. There is help available to the owners and dogs. An effort is required to help and change the behaviour of dogs in human charge.
The response to some of my legitimate comments from a behavioural point of view demonstrated a lack of understanding about dogs in general. There were demands to ban all dogs from nature reserves because ‘they are not for dogs.’
Views expressed ranged from all Bull Terriers are dangerous, Huskies should be banned, anyone with a physical impairment should not have a dog, etc. None of which are based on any knowledge or understanding of dogs at all.
I could go on for a long period here. That won’t be helpful. I would say that, yes, dog owners should be responsible and consider others. However, the intolerance of people towards dog owners is indicative of the common trend for people to be outraged at anything.
Many breeds are maligned by people, simply, not having the knowledge before they expound their views.
Most dogs can live happy lives alongside the public if the owners take the time to find the right dog for their lifestyle. Once they have done this, they need to take time to learn about their dog, train it and instil in it the way to behave with another species – humans. Those, that seem to be outraged all of the time and, prone to overreacting need to develop some humility and tolerance for others.
This is a subject, I find myself having to return too, all too frequently.
Should we hit our dogs? The simple, unequivocal, answer is no.
I have now met a chap with his two dogs on a number of occasions while out with Ziggy. One dog is off the lead, the other is, permanently, on a long lead. The reason for this is that the dog on the lead ran off once and he had to spend some time getting her back. The first point here is, dog owners must make the effort to train their dogs in the basics. One of these being recall. Not always easy but, essential,
I stray off the point. The dog on the lead is very lively and, jumps up a lot. This, of course, is pure excitement and, a consequence of not being allowed off the lead to exercise and socialise properly.
So, this dog jumps up, the owner shouts at her and then raises his hand to strike her. I, of course, stop him from doing this. I then demonstrate the simple exercise of getting his dog to sit, calmly and, then be rewarded, positively, with a biscuit for its’ behaviour.
Further discussion reveals that this chaps’ wife, regularly, hits’ this poor creature when it gets a little lively. He compounds this behaviour by threatening to put a muzzle on the dog. I have to appraise him on the errors of their approach.
NEVER strike a dog
NEVER threaten a dog
ALWAYS use positive training to influence the behaviour of a dog
Ask the dog to respond as you desire
Reward it, positively, when it does
The owner behaviour described above is all too common, unfortunately. IT is NEVER acceptable to threaten or physically punish a dog to force it to do what you require. This is, simply, cruelty.
All dog owners, HAVE to take the time to learn how to train and socialise their dogs. They need to understand that the ONLY way to train dogs is by positive reinforcement methods. There is no place for the cruel approach outlined in this article.
If you are unwilling to invest the time needed to give your dog the best life possible, free from cruelty and fear, here is my recommendation. DO NOT get a dog. If you already have one – REHOME it.
Following on from my last post about traumatised dogs; my, much better half, Sue ( www.firstintheq.co.uk ) and I, often discuss the parallels that exist between her work, dealing with people with complex mental health issues and, mine – dealing with dogs, often, exhibiting difficult behavioural issues.
Sue has observed me, on many occasions, helping people with their dogs on our frequent walks. I often stop to give a little, impromptu, advice. I realise I should charge people every time; however, that is my nature; I can’t help myself.
For Sue, some of the things I do, naturally, show, exactly the same approach and elements needed to help humans suffering from mental health issues such as PTSD, for instance, from Sues’ own experience and watching me operate. Let me explain.
When dealing with a dog that is showing indications of behavioural issues, of whatever kind, I adopt a common approach. The first aim is to relax the dog (together with its’ owner) and to gain its’ trust. This is mainly done through careful observation and adopting a gentle presence, allowing the dog to relax in my company. I think this is inherent in me and, something that is difficult to teach. Sue does, precisely, the same with the extremely traumatised people she works with. By helping our subjects relax, we foster the feeling of a safe environment. Without this, there is little chance of helping the human or dog in question.
Although it is possible to gain a wealth of qualifications, supported by the membership of ‘august’ sounding organisations, these become less valuable if the individual lacks certain things. These ‘things’ are inherent in an individual and, are difficult to teach. The other ‘things’ I allude to, as well as those already mentioned, are empathy and compassion. These are self-explanatory. However, they are often in short supply. For instance, the doctor who is knowledgeable, but is a cold fish when he talks to you. To achieve the bests results, it is critical for the therapist or behaviourist to be able to empathize and sympathise with the subject they are trying to help.
Therefore, take time to think about the qualities of the individual who is, possibly, able to help you with your dogs’ behavioural of, indeed, training issues.
Throughout the dog community you will see references to ‘reactive dogs.’ Indeed, there are quite a few courses, that offer to help these ‘reactive dogs’ in group sessions. The other, common sight, is a dog wearing a coat that signals it is ‘reactive’ or, has some other problem.
For me, there are two issues with the above. The first is that trying to ‘fix’ a reactive dog in a group session is a difficult thing to do – these dogs may be reactive for any number of reasons; group sessions may not be ideal for dealing with the background cause of the problem. Second is the labelling of dogs with coats – this, on the surface, seems reasonable. The owner is letting other people know that their dog has an issue. That is fine; however, many of these owners don’t seem to understand that these dogs need help in overcoming the background issue that is making them ‘reactive.’ Simply labelling them does not, ultimately, help the dog if the next steps are not taken to help the dog overcome it’s problems.
I think more thought should be given into how we describe these dogs. Their ‘reactivity’ should be viewed as a symptom of their behavioural problem. Many, if not most, of these dogs are, in fact, traumatised. They may have been abused, attacked by other dogs, frightened by something, or may have other, identifiable behavioural issues causing the reactive behaviour.
There is no doubt, in my mind, that the only way to help these ‘traumatised’ dogs is to, clearly, identify the underlying causes of their problems and to work, carefully and in a focused way on these problems. This is the only way to, successfully, deal with ‘reactive’ behaviour in these ‘difficult cases’ in my view.
To illustrate my point, let me describe a case that I dealt with a while ago. While walking with my dog in the forest, we were approached by a very nervous lady with, a very aggressive, snarling whirling dervish of a dog. My wife took my dog, away from the scene. The lady stopped, some distance away. She told me that her dog was a rescue, from abroad and, she had had her for 3 weeks, or so. In that time she had bitten her a couple times, had bitten other dogs and tried to bite other people. During our, brief, conversation, her dog was snarling, barking and lunging towards me. A ‘reactive’ dog, indeed.
I asked her to let the dog of the lead, she did so. Of course, this dog rushed at me, snarling and barking as it came. My reaction? I simply ignored this dog and kept talking to the owner. The dog backed of a little and stopped snarling and barking, now looking at me nervously and, clearly, a little puzzled by my behaviour. I, then, knelt down, with a small biscuit in my outstretched, open hand; still not looking at or acknowledging the dog, at all. The dog, slowly, approached and took the biscuit and dashed away to a ‘safe’ distance. I repeated this a few more times. The dog, relaxed enough, to approach me and to place its’ front paws on my knees to take from my hand. This, whole process, took around 5 minutes.
Of course, I would not recommend an ‘unqualified’ individual doing what I have just described. I, however, had seen this type of behaviour many times. Given the dogs’s history, I was pretty sure I knew why this dog was behaving as it was, and that it was not an aggressive ‘killer.’ My suspicions were proved to be correct. After a couple of sessions, this dog was developed into a more relaxed, sociable creature, happy to be with other dogs and people.
So, the question is, what was ‘wrong’ with this dog. It was, clearly, ‘reactive’ and, apparently, very aggressive. The reactivity was, in fact, a symptom of fear. This dog, no doubt, had suffered cruelty on the streets and had to fight to survive on a daily basis. This was a traumatised dog. By understanding the reasons behind the reactive behaviour, it was possible to approach the dog in the right way and, to help it overcome its’ behavioural problems.
Many ‘problem’ dogs, in my opinion, are exhibiting behaviours as a direct result of traumatising events, somewhere in they’re lives. Therefore, it is essential to understand that a ‘traumatised’ dog will need specific strategies to deal with the behaviours resulting from trauma.
Although, any dog, can be exhibiting behavioural problems because of earlier trauma; I see these types of problems commonly in dogs that have been rescued and rehomed, sometimes on multiple occasions. Of course, most of these dogs can be helped when a clear understanding is reached of the causative factors influencing their behaviour.
I get regular dog information updates emailed to me. The most recent, prompted me to write, again, about attaching dogs to humans and then running with them.
Canicross is a ‘sport’ where dogs, of any breed, are harnessed to idiot humans, who then run in competition with them.
This ignores what is good for your dog and panders to humans desire to force their activities upon them. Dogs, should not be strapped to humans bodies, bikes, or anything else.
If you wish to run, competitively or otherwise, leave your dog at home!
Dogs need proper exercise and socialisation. Attaching them, to whatever, is a bad idea, in my humble opinion.
Exponents of this type of rubbish, always point at that their dogs love being strapped into a harness and forcibly run, often in hot conditions. Trust me – they do not like it. They accept it, because they have no choice. This is, actually, a pretty good example of ‘learned helplessness’ – the poor dog knows it can’t get away from this ‘forced’ activity, it, therefore has to ‘accept’ it. This is not to be confused with the human thinking that the dog ‘enjoys it.’ It does it because it has no choice.
Try doing this activity with the dog ‘not attached’ and see what happens. Most dogs will be stopping to sniff, socialise and be ‘dogs.’
Dogs are sentient beings and their human carers should, really, think carefully about what they do with them.
Using rewards in dog training is an established and effective method for training dogs. However, if used incorrectly it can be counter-productive.
I am seeing an increasing number of videos on Facebook and Youtube showing treats being used in the wrong way by ‘dog trainers.’ These videos show the trainer, or handler, constantly feeding treats to the dog, thereby encouraging it to do what is required. This, of course, is then taken to be the standard for many owners who experience this ‘training.’ In fact, this is ‘bribing’ a dog to do what is asked of it. This ‘method’ demonstrates a, fundamental, lack of understanding of why a dog does something, from a behavioural perspective.
The point of using treats is to REWARD the dog for a job well done. This is done AFTER the dog does whatever is required. Focusing the dog with a continuous supply of treats will not result in the dog learning the new skill or behaviour. As soon as the treat is removed from the equation, most dogs will, simply, not comply. This is bribery – not recommended.
An effective method is to keep a treat out of sight, ask the dog to perform what is required – when it does so, it is immediately rewarded with the treat. This then goes onto an intermittent reward – the dog, sometimes gets a treat, other times it gets just praise. This is rewarding a behaviour not bribing the dog to do something.
Adopting the approach outlined above, is much more effective in helping a dog learn and retain its training.
