Animal Sentience 2019.220: Brooks Pribac on Marino & Merskin on Sheep Complexity 1 Positive sentience is underrated Commentary on Marino & Merskin on Sheep Complexity Teya Brooks Pribac Arcohab, Australia Abstract: My commentary focuses on two aspects of ovine (well-)being considered in the review: the developmental context and (un)fulfilled potentialities. Teya Brooks Pribac holds a PhD in animal grief from the University of Sydney. She works in animal advocacy and care between Australia and Europe. Website I have been following with great interest and appreciation Dr. Marino and colleagues’ articles on farm animals over the past few years. The sheep review (Marino & Merskin 2019) (M&M) is another necessary reminder of the ubiquitous violence routinely inflicted upon sheep and other farm animals, a violence which extends well beyond the more commonly discussed physical pain. My commentary focuses on two aspects of ovine (well-)being considered in the review: the developmental context and (un)fulfilled potentialities. Myron A. Hofer (1984) wrote that ‘[o]ne of John Bowlby’s great contributions has been to place attachment and loss in the perspectives of development and evolution’ (p. 183). For many researchers over the past half century, this has meant that they could study attachment and separation/loss in more or less invasive experiments on nonhuman animals and apply the findings to humans. As has been shown over and over again, including for sheep as some of the works cited by M&M attest (e.g., Napolitano et al. 2008), attachment relations and the quality of the early social environment have important psychobiological value that goes beyond food acquisition and physical protection. Acting as a ‘superstructure’ (Polan & Hofer 2016; see also Bradshaw & Schore 2007), the caregiver and the dynamics of early social exchanges influence the young animal’s organization internally (endocrine and immune functioning, levels of anxiety, etc.) and in relation to the outside world (e.g., social competencies), affecting the animals’ short- and long-term well-being. It is time we cease considering nonhuman animals as mere ‘models’. We must accept that, just like humans, other animals feel very deeply, and that once certain internal patterns are established, they are very difficult to modify (if nonhuman animals are given such a chance at all). Speaking from forty years of experience, rescuer and activist Patty Mark (2014) observed: It may be easier to understand the extent of the violence and deprivation animals face within the industry when you look at these same animals in a sanctuary setting after they’ve been rescued. The damage becomes much more obvious when they are at last allowed autonomy; when they are given the freedom, for example, to not be touched by a human (pp. 106-107).