“Multispecies family” is a term you may start hearing more often.
“I think it’s kind of a recognition of a new status.”
David Favre is a professor with the Michigan State University College of Law. He says Americans consider their companion animals part of the family and increasingly name them as beneficiaries of trusts, but the law still treats them as property which was the topic at a recent conference at MSU.
Take for instance custody of a pet in divorce.
“What the judge has to do when faced with two people asking for custody of the dog is to ask the question who bought the dog? Because whoever bought the dog then gets the dog because they have property interest.”
But acknowledging the changing status of companion animals would mean:
“Now a judge can say who should the dog stay with? What’s best for the dog? It’s a whole different mind-shift.”
Favre says in cases where a pet is killed or injured, an owner can seek civil reimbursement for that loss but is limited to the monetary value of the pet as property.
“Most people assume it should be more like if someone hurts a member of the family. Yes, I have that emotional trauma, and I should be compensated for that but all you get is the value of the dog.”
Legal professionals also discussed issues around companion animals belonging to the homeless or those escaping domestic violence.
“The problem of shelters not accepting pets or companion animals is really a big deal because that means they’ll be on the streets somewhere; they’ll leave with the dog.”
Favre says it’s not really about animal rights, it’s about understanding the family has changed and the law needs to accommodate that.
