The trouble with a cuddle: Families’ experiences of supervising interactions between children in middle childhood and the family dog

Abstract

Abstract Background: There is growing scientific interest in the benefits for children of interacting with and engaging with domestic dogs. Since the effects of such pairings on the dog are under explored, this study aimed to explore the lived experiences of family units supervising interactions between children in middle childhood (7–12) and the family dog(s). Methods: Ten families with at least one child aged 7–12 years old (mean 8.6, SD 1.6) and a family dog were recruited via social media to participate in whole family unit face-to-face semi-structured interviews. Experience of the effects of child-dog interaction (CDI) on the family dog was explored through discussion and reflections of CDIs, the dog’s responses, and how these were managed. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis using a semantic approach was used to construct key themes. Results: All families reported that the most positive CDIs were of mutual play or that the dog freely approached the child with the ability to move away. This dynamic is subsequently referred to as dog freedom of choice (FOC). Most discussed experiences of dog aggression or avoidance of the child when FOC was compromised by close physical contact (CPC) from the child, such as cuddling. In most cases, the caregivers and children within the family unit were aware that the dog did not always enjoy such a CPC. However, interviewees recognised that such awareness did not always lead to cessation of the interaction. Conclusions: While shared play where FOC was supported suggested mutual benefits, CDIs perceived as expressions of affection, for example, hugs towards the family dog, may compromise dog quality of life and raise the risk of dog bites. Furthermore, a caregiver or child with conscious awareness of a dog reacting aversely to compromised FOC is not always a mechanism for ending of the interaction. This may raise questions about the efficacy of education programmes intended to raise the recognition of dog body language to change human behaviour.