90 A Nurse existing non-human animal harm is legal, criminologists, animal activists and policy-makers face challenges in precisely defining animal abuse and cruelty (Agnew 1998; Nurse 2013) and distinguishing between the lawful and unlawful Consequently, defining neglect is problematic given that neglect encompasses a range of acts or omissions that adversely impact on nonhuman animals (with associated harms) As a result, there is no universally accepted offence of animal neglect However, legal systems often define neglect within animal abuse discourse via the term unnecessary suffering, consistent with Ascione’s definition of animal abuse and cruelty which contextualises animal abuse as being ‘socially unacceptable behaviour that intentionally causes unnecessary pain, suffering, or distress to and/or death of an animal’ (1993, p 228) Thus, academic and policy discussions of animal abuse tend to concentrate either on active mistreatment or deliberate neglect where intent to cause animal harm is a significant factor and an indicator of either anti-social personality disorder, mental illness or of other forms of abuse, particularly within domestic contexts (Nurse 2013, p 94) Animal abuse discourse predominantly considers direct harm caused to animals via deliberate action (even a deliberate omission such as intended failure to provide adequate care) In this respect, Agnew (1998) identifies that animal abuse is most likely when individuals: (1) are unaware of the impact or consequences of their behaviour on non-human animals; (2) not consider their behaviour to be wrong; and (3) benefit from their abusive behaviour (Agnew 1998, p 182) Ascione’s definition importantly incorporates the concept of ‘distress’ which, broadly construed, includes non-physical harm, while Agnew’s conception focuses on anthropocentric notions of human calculation and acceptance of the impact of their actions on non-human animals However, the focus of each is still on intentional animal abuse, which this chapter contends is only one part of animal abuse and harm, albeit an important part This chapter distinguishes between deliberate (intentional) neglect where harm to an animal is intended and arguably foreseeable, and neglect which is caused by omissions or failure to act Accidental neglect, although receiving less attention in criminological study, is also a potent indicator of problems within a domestic setting (Linzey 2009) and of wider harm to animals First, of considerable importance is the reality that accidental neglect frequently carries significant consequences for non-human companions Accidental neglect can be serious where, for example, failure to take action or provide care is a byproduct of misunderstanding the appropriate care needs of a non-human companion It can also include the process of non-human companion animals being bought for children who are unable to care for them adequately