asa-presentation-2005-breed-discrimination.ppt

Libro dedicado a la historia y evolución del perro presa canario, desde sus raíces en las Islas Canarias hasta su reconocimiento como raza oficial. Describe su carácter fuerte, su papel tradicional como perro de guarda y trabajo, y los esfuerzos modernos por conservar su pureza y equilibrio temperamental.

1. An Analysis of Breed
Discrimination of Domesticated
Dogs by Insurance Companies
Pamela Carlisle-Frank Ph.D., Joshua Frank Ph.D.,
The Foundation for Interdisciplinary Research and
Education Promoting Animal Welfare (FIREPAW)
www.firepaw.org, [phone],
[email protected]

2. Discrimination based on dog
breed is common and growing
-Municipal/Regional breed restrictions
(Denver, Cincinnati, Miami,
Lanett, AL, Canada, possibly San
Francisco)
-Public Attitudes, shelters
-Insurance Companies

3. Research indicates there are dog bite rate
differences, but discrimination may still
be based partially on misinformation
-Not all dog bite rate differences associated with
breed are caused by the dog breed
*Training/relationship/role of animal to
guardian/owner
*Dangerous breeds change over time
*Breed labeling not consistent
-Other factors are just as important in driving
bite rates
-Importance of breed may be overused or
overstated
*Case in point: Insurance Companies

4. Breed discrimination by
Insurance Companies
-Many companies refuse to cover or cancel
policies of people with certain breeds (Including
Akita, boxer, chow, Doberman pinscher, Rottweiler, pit bull, Presa
Canario, and wolf hybrid, Airedale, Alsatian shepherd, American
bulldog, American Eskimo, Bull Mastiff/Mastiff, Chesapeake Bay
retriever, Dalmatian, German Shepherd, Giant Schnauzer, Great
Dane, Husky, Kerry Blue Terrier, Rhodesian Ridgeback, and Spitz
(Kirk, 2004; Bertolucci, 2004)
-Many companies discriminate: (Allstate, California
State Automobile Association, Mercury Insurance Group, Hartford
Financial Services Group, Travelers, Nationwide, Selective, Quincy
Mutual and Wawanesa Insurance (Bertolucci, 2004, Kirk, 2004, and
Toutant, 2003)
-Others reportedly do hidden discrimination

5. Existing dog bite research
-CDC research--includes Sacks, et al, (2000) and Sacks,
Sattin, and Bonzo (1989)
*Greatest number of fatalities between 1979 and 1998
were pit bulls, followed by rottweilers and then by
German shepherds
*Most commonly cited source by insurance companies
*Study authors warn not to use for this purpose
*Fatalities only, and has no control to calculate odds
-Other studies without controls include Avner and Baker (1991) ,
Wright (1985), Delise (2002)
*Most dangerous breed varies across time and studies

6. Existing dog bite research
(continued)
-Gershman, Sacks, and Wright (1994) used control
*Data is for Denver
*Most dangerous breeds had about 5 times the bite rate
*Chaining dogs and not having dogs fixed showed risk
similar in magnitude to breed
*Fatalities only, and has no control to calculate odds
-Thompson (1997) also used a control
*Data for Australia
*Most dangerous breed (Doberman pinschers) about 5
times the bite rate

7. Much is made by insurance industry of high cost of
dog bites but a little context changes picture
-Dog bites cost industry $345.5 million in 2002
Context: Property and Casualty made $369.7 billion in 2002
-Dog bites make up a quarter of liability claims
Context: five cents for every dollar of premiums earned went
to liability claims
-Dog bite liability costs have risen 38% between 1995 and 2002
Context: Premiums rose 66.8% in same period
-Dog bite liability risk for dangerous breeds is too high
EVEN A HIGH RISK BREED HAS AN EXPECTED
COST UNDER TEN CENTS PER PREMIUM DOLLAR
THIS WOULD REQUIRE ONLY A MODEST RATE
ADJUSTMENT

8. What about pit bulls?
-Neither the Australia study nor the Denver study had
enough pit bull data to include them
-Using fatality data and estimates of pit bull
population we put pit bull risk at similar to the other
“high risk breed” (5 times normal risk as most likely
case, even in worst case it would be 10 times normal
risk)
*For many reasons we believe this estimate is
upward biased
*Even pit bulls could be insured with a minor
premium

9. More Context
Dog Bites in Perspective:
Major Homeowners Insurance-Related Losses
$15.5
$12.5
$6.4
$5.3
$4.6
$2.0 $1.7
$1.1
$0.3
$0
$4
$8
$12
$16
H
u
r
r
ic
a
n
e
A
n
d
r
e
w
*
N
o
r
t
h
r
id
g
e
E
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e
*
F
ir
e

a
n
d
L
ig
h
t
n
in
g
*
*
M
o
ld
-
r
e
la
t
e
d
lo
s
s
e
s
(
T
e
x
a
s

o
n
ly
,
2
0
0
1
)
W
in
d

a
n
d
H
a
il*
*
C
a
lif
o
r
n
ia
W
ild
f
ir
e
s
*
(
2
0
0
3
)
H
u
r
r
ic
a
n
e
I
s
a
b
e
l*
T
h
e
f
t
*
*
D
o
g

B
it
e
s
D
a
m
a
g
e

(
$

b
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
)
Sources: American Insurance Association and Insurance Information Institute.
* Cost of a one time disaster--cost may also overlap with other general categories.
** Annual Cost for category estimated based on percent of total losses from this category and average annual total losses.

10. More Context
Dog Attack Fatalities in Perspective
Number of Deaths by Various Causes
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
A
c c
i d
e
n
t a
l F
i r e
a
r m
D
i s c
h
a
r g
e
B
i c y
c l e
F
a
t a
l i t i e
s
C
a
u
g
h
t i n
R
u
n
n
i n
g
M
a
c
h
i n
e
r y *
D
e
e
r - V
e
h
i c u
l a
r C
o
l l i s
i o
n
s
F
a
l l i n
g
f r o
m
a
L
a
d
d
e
r *
L
i g
h
t n
i n
g
S
t r u
c k
b
y W
a
t e
r V
e
h
i c
l e
*
S
t r u
c k
b
y R
a
i l V
e
h
i c l e
*
C
a
t t l e
*
D
o
g
A
t t a
c k
s
S
n
a
k e
A
t t a
c k
s
A
n
n
u
a
l

D
e
a
t
h
s
* Occupational Deaths Only
Sources: US Dept of Transp. CDC, NHTSA, BLS, Ntnl Weather Service.

11. Why would insurance companies
overreact?
-Subject to same biases, psychological and sociological influences as
anybody else
-Non-competitive forces insulating insurance industry (monopoly power,
adverse selection leading to “following the pack”, “satisficing”
-Breed discrimination as proxy for other forms of discrimination
(ethnic/neighborhood/aggression)

12. Breed discrimination summary
-Insurance companies likely to be overreacting
-Little attempt to mitigate impact (spay/neuter, chaining)
-Little evidence from interviews of deep analysis of issue
Pamela Carlisle-Frank Ph.D., Joshua Frank Ph.D.,
The Fundation for Interdisciplinary Research and
Education Promoting Animal Welfare (FIREPAW)
www.firepaw.org, [phone],
[email protected]