In children and adolescents, such patterns may meet the criteria for conduct disorder – a psychiatric condition marked by persistent aggression towards others, including animals. If untreated, this may progress into antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) in adulthood.
ASPD presents a clinical conundrum. It is formally recognised as a mental disorder, yet it occupies a liminal space between psychiatry and morality. Many clinicians and ethicists question whether it truly belongs within the domain of medicine, or if it is better understood as a characterological and ethical failure.
Unlike other psychiatric illnesses, individuals with ASPD rarely experience distress about their actions. They seldom seek help, and when they do, treatment outcomes are poor. Often, they are only concerned with the consequences of being caught – not about the harm they’ve caused.
Of course, not all harm to animals is rooted in sadism or conscious malice. A large proportion of animal welfare violations in Singapore arise from ignorance rather than intent.
Poor pet care, abandonment, and neglect often stem from a lack of understanding about animals’ emotional and physical needs.
People may underestimate the responsibility of ownership or fail to comprehend the consequences of neglect. The suffering caused is nonetheless real. In such cases, education is more humane and more effective than punishment.
CAN ABUSERS CHANGE?
Can someone who takes pleasure in cruelty change? In some cases, particularly among the young, yes. Early intervention programmes that combine therapy, empathy-building, and moral education have shown promise.
But for individuals who exhibit chronic, sadistic traits, the path to change is far less certain. In such cases, the priority must be protecting the vulnerable – both human and animal.
Moving forward, meaningful change requires a multi-pronged approach. Empathy education should be a formal part of school curricula, embedded within character and citizenship education. Children must be taught to recognise emotional life not just in people, but in animals too.
The legal consequences for repeated and egregious acts of cruelty must be significantly toughened, not merely to deter would-be offenders, but to affirm, with clarity and conviction, that such inhumanity is fundamentally incompatible with the values of a civilised society.
