If someone is convicted of animal cruelty, would that, or should that, be a flag for CPS (Child Protective Services) to get involved?

YES!!! 100000000000% yes!

I think so too.

It is a flag for Club-To-Death-Angel Dokuro Chan to get involved.

No. That would border on harassment since it requires an assumption that a crime has been committed. If there was probable cause, that would be a different matter.

Should they be tested in some way for psychological, anti social disorders?

Only if it pertains to the conviction of animal cruelty.

And what if the test shows a profound psychological disorder?

The courts would figure that out, no doubt, with the help of trained professionals.

THEN would there be reason to investigate the kids?

I don’t see a connection that one would lead to suspicion of the other. Her disposing of puppies is not indicative of mistreatment of children.

I am not condoning her behavior, but disposing of the puppies is not like torturing or mistreating them. She wasn’t using them as dog fight bait like Michael Vick. And it is not as clean as taking them to the local county animal shelter that euthanizes, but the effect is the same.

@zenvelo starving to death is pretty horrific. It IS a torture.

I hope not. That’s a horrible precedent to set. It makes the person being accused prove that he didn’t do something that never actually happened.

This would be a fascist, sick approach to law enforcement.

They wouldn’t be accused of any specific thing thing. They’d just be investigated. There’s gotta be something wrong with some one who is so carelessly cruel. IMO.

I understand your point though.

“Just being investigated” is a scary thought. That’s what right wing governments do to round up people they don’t like. Dangerous. And without a lick of suspicion.

CPS has its hands full with child mistreatment cases. It doesn’t have the resources to investigate suspicious behaviour. There are other agencies that look into animal cruelty. They might refer a case to CPS if they deem it warranted.

Well the “suspicion” in this case is deliberately leaving 7 helpless newborn puppies to die a horrible, slow death. What kind of person would do such a thing?

No. There is still no probable cause.

I don’t know about the US but that would be a criminal offence over here and could lead to jail time. The police would investigate the background and any child cruelty that came to light would be dealt with by social services.

@Dutchess_lll I am not condoning what that woman did in Coachella. Not at all.

I am worried about jumping from suspicion to suspicion with zero evidence to support it. That’s an illegal overreach waiting to happen. Just the act of ‘being investigated by CPS’ can ruin peoples’ lives even if nothing ever turns up.

Bad idea.

She was arrested @flutherother, and charged. I forget if shev was charged with a felony. I think she was.

I know @elbanditoroso. CPS can be very, very bad.

It is generally considered that persons who will mistreat animals will eventually move on to similar crimes against humans.
Maybe it could be an asterisk?

Or something.

My grand daughter’s half brother, who she lives with half the time, killed an entire litter of kittens when he was about 5.

@Patty_Melt Animal abuse or killing is also an early sign of psychopathic tendencies.

As a former worker of this type, I can assure you the law (at least here) is that the family doesn’t have to talk to the worker at all. If there’s some solid evidence (like physical evidence of abuse), then of course the child can be removed with a court order. Otherwise, the family can tell you to go screw yourself and you can’t do much about it, unless it’s something you can take them to court for, and unless it’s an emergency, that can take months.

If the family is willing to talk to you, what would you say? Also, in the county I work in, the family has the right to veto the worker interviewing the child. You can get a court order for that, too, but again, without any physical evidence, that can take months. So…......

And then when they do get involved it can become a nightmare.

There is increasing awareness to the experience that individuals use animals to control, bully or abuse other people. I completely disagree that there is not a shred of evidence of neglect or abuse in a home when animals have been egregiously neglected or abused.

I agree with @jca (of course, she is an expert here) that the family could refuse to talk to the case worker and that without direct evidence of harm to the children it would not be accepted as an active investigation. However, if the abuse or extreme neglect happened in front of the children, that could have been its own kind of child abuse. That could be extremely traumatic for a child (not necessarily the dumpster example).

Women who are experiencing domestic violence commonly stay because of threats against the children and against the pets. I definitely see a connection between pet abuse and domestic/family abuse.