Animal Abuse Reporting and the Ethical Role of Veterinarians: A Comparative Review of Practices in South Korea, Canada, and the United States

Animal abuse reporting represents a crucial ethical responsibility for veterinarians globally, with cultural, legal, and societal factors significantly impacting practices. This comparative narrative review investigates veterinary reporting practices across South Korea, Canada, and the United States. A narrative review was conducted using systematic searches across PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus databases, employing jurisdiction-specific terms. Additional searches encompassed state-specific legal databases, professional licensing board records, and disciplinary action reports. To investigate reporting systems, enforcement mechanisms, and outcomes, legal documents, policy analyses, and empirical studies from 2010 to 2025 were analyzed. Findings revealed stark contrasts between voluntary and mandatory systems. South Korea’s voluntary framework caused significant underreporting. Canada’s provincial mandatory frameworks exhibited significantly higher levels of compliance, as a result of the strength of their statutory enforcement mechanisms. The United States presented a mixed landscape, wherein approximately 24 states mandated reporting with license revocation penalties, whereas others maintained voluntary systems. Cultural factors, professional autonomy concerns, and enforcement mechanisms shaped reporting behaviors and animal welfare outcomes. South Korea requires legislative changes implementing graduated mandatory reporting systems with legal protections and cultural adaptation strategies. Benchmarking against Canadian and American models demonstrates that mandatory reporting with appropriate enforcement mechanisms shows potential to enhance animal welfare protection through increased reporting rates and systematic intervention pathways, though direct causal evidence linking reporting to measurable welfare outcomes remains limited.