Forensic practitioners’ perspectives on the feasibility and acceptability of implementing dog-based animal-assisted interventions in Scottish custodial and forensic mental health settings: a qualitative study

Background Mental health difficulties are common among people in Scottish prisons. Although animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) have been associated with a range of psychological and social benefits, these interventions are not routinely embedded within custodial care. Little is known about forensic practitioners’ experiences and perceptions of dog-based AAIs across Scottish prisons and secure forensic mental health services. This qualitative study explored the perspectives of 15 forensic practitioners working in Scottish custodial and forensic mental health settings. Participation was open to practitioners with direct experience of incorporating or delivering dog-based AAIs and to those with relevant forensic practice or implementation knowledge. Semi-structured interviews explored practitioners’ perceptions of the acceptability, feasibility, benefits and challenges of delivering dog-based AAIs in custodial and forensic mental health settings. Data were analysed using inductive reflexive thematic analysis within a contextualist framework. Results Practitioners associated dog-based AAIs with a calmer interpersonal atmosphere characterised by emotional settling, non-judgemental connection, disclosure and more constructive group interaction. Some practitioners described or anticipated brief relief from occupational strain among staff and linked direct observation of sessions with greater willingness to support delivery. Practitioners generally regarded the sessions as acceptable to people receiving them. Staff acceptance was more variable and appeared to be shaped by direct experience and perceptions of legitimacy. Feasibility was described as fragile, with delivery dependent on staffing and the stability of daily routines. Practitioners also emphasised the importance of appropriate training, sustainable funding, animal welfare safeguards and careful management of endings. Conclusions Practitioners, most of whom had direct experience of implementing dog-based AAIs, viewed these interventions as having the potential to support health and well-being within custodial and forensic mental health services when delivery was supported by stable operational arrangements and robust welfare safeguards. Future research should include the perspectives of people receiving dog-based AAIs to examine whether the changes described by practitioners extend beyond individual sessions.