I read an article today about the fact that pets are becoming more and more valued as family members, and a lot of the time in the event of a divorce or other family breakdown, the ownership of the pets comes into play.
There have already been cases where things like joint custody of pets have been awarded (this is apparently in New York, where the writer of the article was from).
All manner of things are considered when it comes to custody, like who earns more, who brought the pet into the marriage, the relationship of any children to the pet and so forth.
What are your thoughts on this? A necessary evil or a sign of the more litigious times we live in?
I actually know of a case where a couple split up and they went to court for the custody of their dog. I was working at the local animal shelter at the time. The judge ordered that the dog be removed from the home and kept in the care of the shelter under a custody decision was made. It took about a month before the case was settled. The woman ended up getting custody of the dog and the man was given visitation rights. He was allowed to have the dog every second weekend. I think it is just a sign of the times and I believe this will become a more common occurrence.
I'm not surprised at this at all. It's only natural for people to treat animals like their family. There's this post that goes that the worst thing about break-up is that your partner's dog has no idea why you stopped visiting them. I love my dogs dearly and couldn't imagine losing them! They mean the world to me, especially since they're so innocent and dependent on people taking care of them.
It's hard to tell who should get the pet after a breakup. There always should be someone to consider the situation as a whole and come up with the decision. Pets are valued members of the family, along with other members, so I think it should go like it goes with kids - the judge usually tells who can have them. I'm not saying that you should have a different court for dogs or cats; just saying that pets shouldn't be given to any member who doesn't deserve them. Sometimes people are rude and mistreat their pets, and at the end of the day they maybe handed over to the person who doesn't know how to take good care of an animal. It should be checked does any one of the family members have any criminal background and such, to protect the animal. It may sound like much but I've been reading so many articles about animals that have been ended up handed over to that side of the split family that doesn't know anything. It's saddening and we should try to prevent that.
An even worse situation, in my opinion, is when the dog (or any pet) is used as a tool to hurt the other person. I have seen several ads in the lost pets section that said their soupse had either given away their beloved pet, or even that the person had disposed of the pet in someunknown way.
All the person can do to try and find their pet again is to post these ads in the lost and found, or in a pet rescue group, and hope that someone has their dog and will see the ad, or maybe at least have seen the dog somewhere, like at the dog pound.
I am sure that it has to be as confusing to the dog as it would be to a ssmall child , as to why they are being aken away from the home and family that they love.
Sometimes, when a move is involved for both people in the divorce, then they can't even find a place where they can take the pet with them, and the pet has to be given away to a friend, or maybe a rescue organization.
In all cases, this has become a tragic part of families breaking up all over, and there is not much of a good solution for it. I think that keeeping it out of a court's jurisdiction is a good idea when possible.
It is a tricky situation, isn't it to determine who gets a pet after a break up. Precedents are rare so the presiding judge has to apply solomonic wisdom in such cases. My take is that a pet should go with one who is given custody of the children who are usually closer to the pet than other family members. Other considerations like the primary caregiver and who purchased the pet in the first place should also count.
I am very glad pets are being more recognized as important family members. When I lost my dog, I was very depressed for months because grieving over him was just like grieving for a human family member. Pets enrich our lives and make us happier, they teach us more about the world and ourselves. They really aren't objects, so I'm glad that people can fight for custody in order to ensure the pet is in the best home. Not only that, but maybe split custody can come into play so that the owners can share the animal. I don't think anyone should have to experience the horror of having their beloved pet snatched form them. Everyone deserves a chance to fight for their loved ones.
