Agency denied: PADA and the perils of paternalistic dog care

Dog-Assisted Interventions (DAI) or Dog-Assisted Services (DAS) are commonly regarded as compassionate practices, promoting human wellbeing through interspecies interactions. Recognition and popularity of adjunctive interventions and clinical applications have grown in recent decades. The increasing professionalization, whilst positive with respect to amplified knowledge in terms of the theoretical understanding and focus upon welfare, also poses risks, however, for the canine participants. Increasing classification to identify suitable animals by applying standardized tests and placing dogs into predetermined categories devalues their individuality, their idiosyncrasies, and their unique, authentic worth - the very qualities prized in dog-assisted interventions. This paper offers a critical analysis of the Personality Assessment for Dogs in Animal Assisted Interventions (PADA), a test commonly utilized to evaluate dogs’ suitability for DAIs. The central objective is to evaluate the ethical and welfare implications of the PADA test design. While PADA describes itself as a safeguard for welfare, we come to the result that it produces the opposite effect: by emphasizing predictability, obedience and subservience, it risks undermining dogs’ agency, their emotional autonomy, and their genuine wellbeing, consistent with current positive welfare standards. Furthermore, every DAI/DAS relies on pro-active handler management. Competence, knowledge, mindfulness and attention to the individual dog’s strengths and limits and the commitment to protecting its welfare are the most essential factors determining the quality of any intervention. Only if the handler is empathetic, ensures suitable interaction conditions, and supports the dog through secure attachment - a quality that emerges within the relationship, shaped by the handler’s caregiving behavior and interaction style - can a DAI/DAS be considered truly effective and ethically responsible. Therefore, the core pre-requisite is the competent handler and any assessment must evaluate handler aptitude first. This critical component is entirely absent in PADA. A structured welfare audit of the PADA test was applied, using IAHAIO (International Association of Human-Animal Interaction Organizations) White Paper (2018/2023) ethical guidelines, Mellor’s Five Domains Model (2020) and the Agency-Based Welfare Science paradigm (Špinka, 2019) to examine how each exercise supports or restricts canine agency, autonomy, and affective engagement.