You either can't read, aren't very intelligent, have zero empathy, or comprehension of empathy. So I will explain it in a way that you should be able to understand the problem, and why it IS a problem. One: The chicken was a PET. Not an animal being raised for food or slaughter- a PET. As in, an animal that one has an emotional attachment to, and is usually very important for the mental health of the owner(s). Two: Not only was the chicken a PET, OP refers to them as "OUR pet"- meaning that it was an animal that both OP and their son considered a pet, and thus a friend or even family member. Three: The husband killed he chicken, knowing that OP and child considered the chicken a member of the family, and is implied to have done so without speaking with OP about it. Four: The husband forced their child to watch him murder what he considered a member of the family. This is considered child abuse, and would be a highly traumatic event that could cause permanent damage to the child, or permanently impair their emotional development. Five: The husband is implied to have done so, again, without discussing it with the OP, and is also implied to have only told OP what he did AFTER he did it. Worse, he likely only finally said what he did because their child wouldn't stop crying and he likely found it annoying.