Question: My young daughter was recently diagnosed with autism. She does not function well socially and is extremely introverted, but we have noticed that she reacts very well to small animals. We reported this to her therapist who suggested that we get a dog or cat as a pet. We know that most religious people frown upon having pets, but we hate to see our daughter suffer and want to do anything that would make her happy. Would it be okay to own a pet in the circumstances we described?
Her Loving Parents
(Via E-Mail)
Summary of our response up to this point: Last week, we discussed several clinical studies that supported using animals for therapy.
An article in The New York Times highlighted instances of therapeutic centers employing animals for their children. The Anderson Center has found that their canine therapy program helps construct a bridge between autistic children’s inner worlds and the outside world. One of its students even developed communication skills through the program that he was then able to transfer to relationships with peers and teachers. The dog’s calming presence helped him regain self-control when he became frustrated, too. A professor at Dutchess Community College also found that a prompt-dependent boy with verbal and aggression problems became more functionally independent after working with a dog.
In light of these successes, it seems that a non-dogmatic approach is necessary with regards to families with autistic children. We quoted the Sages (Bava Kamma 79b), “Ein gozrin gezeirah al ha’tzibbur ela im yecholin rov ha’tzibbur la’amod bo – We do not issue decrees on the public that it cannot, by and large, withstand.” Nevertheless, the overwhelming attitude toward pet ownership in our community has always been one of disdain.
* * * * *
We find the following in Mishlei (3:17): “Derachehah darchei no’am vechol netivotehah shalom – The Torah’s ways are ways of pleasantness and all her paths [lead to] peace.” The commentary Metzudat David (ad loc.) interprets this verse to mean that in no way can a danger or stumbling block come about by upholding the Torah’s words. The Ralbag (ad loc.) states that the ways of the Torah are ways that add pleasantness and sweetness to a person because the Torah does not inflict burdens that are too difficult to bear. Indeed, everything originating from the mitzvot and az’harot is sweet and acceptable. Unlike idolatrous cultures, which call for people to sacrifice their children to the gods, the Torah only calls for deeds that are meant for the well-being of both body and soul. The Torah is an etz chayyim, a tree of life for those who cling to it.
Referring to this verse in Mishlei, the Talmud (Sukkah 32b) states: Our Rabbis taught that the words “anaf etz avot – branches of a thick tree” (Leviticus 23:40), allude to a type of tree whose branches cover its trunk completely. What kind of tree is that? You must say that it is the hadas, the myrtle tree. Why, asks the Gemara, can’t it be the olive tree whose branches also cover its trunk? Because a wreath-like formation of leaves is required, it answers. And why can’t it be the plane tree (dulba)? Because the branches don’t cover its trunk. And why, the Gemara continues to ask, can’t it be the oleander whose branches cover its trunk and whose leaves grow in wreath-like formation? Answered Abaye (quoting our verse in Mishlei), “The Torah’s ways are ways of pleasantness,” and this is not the case with the oleander. Rava offers another verse to disqualify the oleander: “Therefore love the truth and peace” (Zecharia 8:19). The oleander tree is both bitter and stinging. Rashi remarks that the edges of its leaves are as sharp as needles and also release poison. Therefore, neither of the verses could be talking about the oleander tree.