Divorce: Is My Pet Part of Custody or Property Distribution?
Divorce law in Pennsylvania, as in most states, treats animals and pets as property, not family members. So, when it comes to deciding who gets the dog, this conversation falls under the laws of Equitable Distribution, not Custody. In other words, the dog is treated the same as furniture in discussions of asset division.
Alaska just became the first state to require divorce judges to consider “the well-being of the animal” when addressing pet issues in divorce. The landmark change in divorce law for Alaska, which took effect January 17, 2017, sets a new precedent for legal discussion of pets as living beings with needs in a divorce. Not surprisingly, animal rights activists, like the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF)hail the first ever divorce legislation as representing “significant progress for animals in the legal system.”
Currently in Pennsylvania, the topic rarely even enters written Property Settlement Agreements, unless the divorcing couple feels so strongly that they insist it warrants inclusion. Obviously, Americans feel strongly about their pets – pet products constitute a multi-billion dollar industry – and it can be assumed that discussions as to who gets a beloved dog or cat might also evince strong emotions during divorce. Most couples currently work out such issues quietly and informally between themselves, though joint ownership and even custody schedules can be worked out as part of the Agreement, or as a separate (NAME OF LEGAL DOCUMENT HERE). I have helped several divorcing couples negotiate a schedule of responsibilities for and joint custody of pets post-divorce.
In an article in the Washington Post about Alaska’s new law, a Michigan State University law professor was quoted as saying this was the first time any state law has grappled with animal needs in divorce and “that the court may award custody on the basis of what is best for the dog, not the human owners,” said David Favre.
Should other states follow Alaska’s lead, we could look forward to animated (pardon the pun) discussions of whether pets should stay with the kids, or the spouse who purchased them, or the primary animal caretaker in the home. Evidence might be required to show exceptional and key relationships between one spouse or the other with the pet, or of egregious neglect.
Perhaps a larger area of impact of the Alaska law might be in influencing consideration of pets as having legally defendable, concrete feelings and needs that are, if not equal to, at least similar to that of humans. The progress of recent decades in protection from animal cruelty laws most certainly is the background for this evolution of divorce law.
Pennsylvania is not likely to be such a battleground soon; according to the ALDF, our state ranks 44th out of 56th U.S. states and territories for progressive or protective animal rights laws. Where does that leave YOUR pet as you walk through your divorce? Call my office for more information on ways to manage legal ownership of your pets through the divorce process.