Redefining 'aggression' : The reality for RED ZONE dogs.

“FEELING SAFE IS THE TREATMENT, CREATING SAFETY IS THE WORK”

DR. PETER LEVINE : TRAUMA SPECIALIST

A big part of my workload is working with dogs with a bite history, some of them having the potential to be quite dangerous in certain situations. Often, they are dogs referred to me by my vet colleagues and when euthanasia has been considered and other training has failed. These are the dogs that I hear some professionals class as ‘Red Zone’ dogs (I hate these labels as they are reductive and create an assumed battle of wills in order to ‘tame’ and ‘correct’ the other.). They are also often the trainers that say shock collars and aversive methods are justifiable in these ‘extreme’ cases.  I also hear the narrative that somehow only they can ‘save’ dogs from euthanasia because of the way they can ‘correct’ them.

 

I am passionate that we need to challenge this narrative, and change the language and approaches to working with ‘aggression’ cases.

 

In my nearly 15 years working to support dogs and their caregivers, and the last 7 years working with the more complex cases, I can say that EVERY case I have worked on with a dog who bites and who poses the biggest challenge was in pain. Every single one. Sometimes it was physical pain, but could also be emotional pain (including trauma) and social pain (including lacking secure social attachments). Emotional and social pain are no less ‘painful’ or in need of identifying and supporting than physical pain. Sometimes, and sadly all too often in regards to the really complex cases, the poor dog was struggling with all three.

 

All of these dogs could not be screaming louder that they were seeking safety, connection and relief. Relief is such an important concept in relation to the emotional experience. If you experience physical, emotional, or social pain or discomfort you will seek relief. No shock from a collar, no attempts to ‘correct’ a behaviour or outdated attempts to dominate will ever provide that relief or support safe social connections. The ‘best’ outcome for the human is that the dog stops communicating those needs, the worst outcome is a dog who becomes totally desperate and escalates that behaviour to very dangerous levels indeed (often these are the cases we read about with tragic results).

 

It is also important that if we are using a humane approach, that we are also looking at these cases through the right lens and trying to offer, and support, that safety and relief in the work we are doing and not just seeking to change behaviour in an overly arbitrary way.

 

There are 3 universal statements that I believe unite us all, human and dog.

 

1. The need to feel heard – to be able to communicate need without feeling ignored, dismissed or ‘corrected’

2. The need to feel safe – physically, socially (connection) and emotionally

3. The need to get relief – from any pain, physical, social or emotional

 

As the quote from Dr Levine implies, finding safety, on all levels, truly is the treatment, and our job is to help create it. Aversive approaches clearly do the opposite – they put the dog in a situation where they do not feel safe in order to get the behaviour, and instead of offering the relief, punish the behaviour instead.

 

In summary, the ‘bigger’ the behaviour the more we need to listen. The more compassion and empathy we need to bring. Let’s stop seeing aggression as something ‘different’ that needs a different approach. Ensuring physical safety for the dog and those around them is of course important, but a dog who uses potentially dangerous behaviour is loudly screaming a need to find safety and relief. They are often expressing trauma and insecure attachments as well as possible physical pain and discomfort. There is a lot to learn from them in order to help them feel safe, cope better and become less of a risk to themselves and others. They have a deep survival story that we need to bear witness to.

 

Most of all, we must stop excusing the use of these extreme aversive tools as some kind of ‘final solution’ or the only way to deal with dangerous cases. Those who promote and educate this method understand little of the dog’s needs,  just a task focussed ‘battle’ to support a human ego. An ultimate manifestation of 'task at all costs'.

 

Bottom line- you cannot make a dog safer to be around by making them feel less safe !

 

 

Note: If you are a caregiver who has used aversive tools in the past, the fact you do not anymore means you have learnt something important – that guilt you may feel is a sign of that learning. If you are a caregiver that is using them now, but feel differently after reading this post please reach out  to myself or any professional that works with dogs in this way - there is no judgement from this end and together we can find that relief for you and your dog!  Equally, any professionals who use them and want to find a safe space to discuss how we can work these cases in a dog centred way, do reach out and we can talk. With increased awareness comes the opportunity to grow and change. We owe it to the dogs to stay humble and keep finding ways to keep growing in our knowledge and compassion

 

Huge thank you to my dear friend Denise O'Moore at Mighty Dog Graphics for helping create this powerful artwork x x x