Nancy Parish-Plass @ 03:29 AM on 11 Apr, 2012

This case illustrates the situation in which many people are so focused on the animal that they forget the client/patient. That is a recurring criticism I have of many people’s understanding of animal-assisted interventions in general. If for that particular student, this is what WORKS – not a service dog, and not pills – but a guinea pig – then – isn’t that what’s important? It’s the RELATIONSHIP that is the important thing here, it’s the relationship between the student and the animal that is helping her – not the animal. Not everyone feels comfortable with a dog. (Obviously, I personally care about the animals, but let’s not lose sight of the purpose of the intervention.) It’s all about the unique, client-centered relationship. In Animal-Assisted Psychotherapy, it is most often the client’s relationship with the animal, and the client’s perception of the animal, that cause the processes to occur – not the animal himself. This is parallel to regular psychotherapy. The therapist uses the therapist-client REALTIONSHIP it institute change, as well as talking with the client about the client’s perceptions of the therapist.

Deborah Dobson @ 02:56 PM on 14 Apr, 2012

If the student was not violating any health/cleanliness/noise(?!) regulations of the university, I think she absolutely has the right to keep her guinea pig in her dorm room. As Nancy pointed out, if this animal is helping the student stave off depression and if she can avoid using medication, then isn’t having a guinea pig in her room a more desirable alternative? It will be interesting to see what happens with this case.