OBJECTIVES: To determine attitudes of veterinarians, animal control directors, and country prosecutors in Michigan toward enforcement of state animal cruelty legislation and to identify factors associated with whether veterinarians would report suspected cases of animal cruelty. DESIGN: Survey. SAMPLE POPULATION: Questionnaires were sent to 1,146 Michigan Veterinary Medical Association member veterinarians, 139 animal control directors, and 83 county prosecutors in Michigan. RESULTS: 740 (65%) veterinarians, 70 (50%) animal control directors, and 43 (52%) prosecutors responded. Six hundred forty six of 735 (88%) veterinarians reported having treated an animal that they believed had been a victim of animal cruelty, but only 192 of 719 (27%) had ever reported a case of animal cruelty, and only 217 of 734 (30%) had ever testified in an animal cruelty case. Logistic regression analysis of responses revealed that the only factor associated with whether veterinarians would report cases of suspected animal cruelty was the potential reactions of the involved clients to the accusation of animal cruelty. Veterinarians who rated reaction of the involved client as important, very important, or essential to their decision whether to report a case of animal cruelty were less likely to report such cases than were veterinarians who rated potential client reaction as somewhat important or unimportant. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Concern about potential client reaction was the most important factor in whether veterinarians would report cases of suspected animal cruelty.
OBJECTIVES: To determine attitudes of veterinarians, animal control directors, and country prosecutors in Michigan toward enforcement of state animal cruelty legislation and to identify factors associated with whether veterinarians would report suspected cases of animal cruelty. DESIGN: Survey. SAMPLE POPULATION: Questionnaires were sent to 1,146 Michigan Veterinary Medical Association member veterinarians, 139 animal control directors, and 83 county prosecutors in Michigan. RESULTS: 740 (65%) veterinarians, 70 (50%) animal control directors, and 43 (52%) prosecutors responded. Six hundred forty six of 735 (88%) veterinarians reported having treated an animal that they believed had been a victim of animal cruelty, but only 192 of 719 (27%) had ever reported a case of animal cruelty, and only 217 of 734 (30%) had ever testified in an animal cruelty case. Logistic regression analysis of responses revealed that the only factor associated with whether veterinarians would report cases of suspected animal cruelty was the potential reactions of the involved clients to the accusation of animal cruelty. Veterinarians who rated reaction of the involved client as important, very important, or essential to their decision whether to report a case of animal cruelty were less likely to report such cases than were veterinarians who rated potential client reaction as somewhat important or unimportant. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Concern about potential client reaction was the most important factor in whether veterinarians would report cases of suspected animal cruelty.