The Conversation is an online publication that covers the most recent research and permission to reproduce the essay below.
Are you seeing more cats in strollers these days? You might also see bumper stickers saying, "I love my granddogs." You aren't imagining it. People are spending more time, money, and attention on their pets.
It is very similar to parenting, but with pets.
Is this really parenting? Is there something else?
Anthrozoology is a field that studies the human-animal interaction. I am an anthropologist. Evolutionary science is my approach to understanding pet parenting. Cultural norms and evolutionary biology suggest that people should be able to raise their children themselves, not animals from another species.
More pet owners, less children
This moment is unlike any other in human history. Major changes are occurring in many societies, including the U.S.A., regarding how people live, work, and socialize. People have greater freedom to choose how they live their lives, as well as low fertility rates. These factors can help people define themselves as individuals and improve their education. People can now focus on more complex psychological needs, such as feelings of accomplishment and a sense if purpose.
People can choose to concentrate on their pets and not their children.
To better understand the relationship between pet owners and their pets, I conducted research with 28 child-free pet owners. They shared with me that they chose cats and dogs over children. Many times, the use of parent-child relations terms to call themselves pets moms was merely a shorthand.
They were keen to fulfill the specific needs of their cats and dogs. They might feed their pets using a food puzzle to fulfill their animals' need for foraging, while children eat at the table. Pet owners recognized the differences in nutrition, socialization, and learning needs between animals and children. They did not think of replacing human children with fur babies, but instead treated them as small furry people.
Similar connections were also found by other researchers, indicating that pet owners who are not child-free perceive their companions to be thinking, emotional individuals. This understanding of the mind of an animal can help to develop a parent identity towards their companion animals. Other times, insecure individuals find that their need to care for their pets is sufficient to satisfy their fertility decisions and keep them child-free.
Nurturing others is part and parcel of being human
These findings do not address the question of whether pet owners who choose to have children or pets are really responsible for their pets' care. I looked at the evolution of caregiving and parenting to answer this question.
Sarah Hrdy, evolutionary anthropologist, wrote in 2009 that humans are cooperative breeding agents. It is in our DNA and ancestral history that we are able to care for offspring other than our own. This trait is called alloparenting by biologists and anthropologists. This evolutionary adaptation helped humans who raised their children cooperatively to survive. This ancient environment likely consisted of small foraging communities in which people exchanged child care and other resources.
This evolutionary history is what I believe explains pet parenthood. It makes sense to allow other species into your home to be adopted if people have evolved to alloparent. Companion animals can be a way to satisfy the evolved need for nurturing while also reducing the time and financial investment compared to raising children.
Untangling differences in caring for pets
To better understand the phenomenon of pet-parenting by child-free adults, I conducted an online survey via social networking. I was looking for responses from U.S.-based cat and dog owners over the age 18. I asked questions regarding attachment and caregiving using the Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale. The survey also included questions that I designed to ask about specific human caretaking behavior oriented towards petsthings such as feeding, bathing, and trainingaswell as the level of autonomy enjoyed by companion animals in the home.
917 respondents were selected. This included 620 parents, 254 unparents, and 43 people who weren't sure or didn't answer. The majority of respondents were married (or in a domestic relationship for more than one year) and between 25 and 60 (72%) with at least a bachelor's degree (77%). These respondents were mostly female (85%) or heterosexual (85%), which is a common situation for human-animal interactions research.
Parents and non-parents both reported that their pets received a lot of play and training. This is logical, as all pet owners must help their pets learn to navigate the human world. Respondents to the survey reported that their pets were socialized, trained, and enriched, as well as playing.
It was more common for nonparents to provide general care for an animal than parents. This is because parents often purchase companion animals to teach their children responsibility and how to care for other people. Pet owners who are not child-free invest their time, money, and emotional energy directly into their animals.
Nonparents had higher levels of attachment to their pets than parents. They viewed their pets more as individuals. Nonparents were more likely to refer to their relationship with their pet using family terms like parent, child, and guardian.
This difference combined with evidence from earlier research that they address the specific needs of the pets they care for, suggests that pet parenting is truly about parenting pets. Although the details might look different, providing training classes for dogs rather than school functions or coloring books for children with smell walks for dogs are both fulfilling the same evolved function. People have the same evolved need for love and care, no matter what their animal companions are called.
My colleagues and me continue to collect data about people's relationships with animals from around the globe. This study suggests that humans may not have evolved to be parents, but to nurture animals. As a result, it is possible to be more flexible about when and who we have children.
This article was first published by The Conversation. You can read the original article.
