Continuing our series on pets and the law, family law specialist Michael Tiyce shares everything we need to know about pets being involved in family dispute matters.
In today’s article, Michael tells us how pets are increasingly being used as pawns in the family law court, and how our outdated legal system is allowing it to happen.
In the emotional whirlwind of family law disputes, pets often find themselves at the centre of intense battles between separating couples.
But, despite their undeniable role as beloved members of the family, Australian law continues to treat pets as property, leaving them vulnerable to being used as leverage in negotiations.
According to family law specialist Michael Tiyce, this legal oversight is creating opportunities for pets to be used as emotional pawns in an already challenging process.
“The Family Law Act 1975 primarily focuses on divorce, property settlements, and parental arrangements; pets, however, are not specifically mentioned in the Act,” explains Michael.
“As a result, they fall under property law, much like a car or a piece of furniture.
“This then creates a grey area where disputes about pets can become bitter and drawn-out, with little regard for the animal’s well-being.”
Pets as leverage in legal battles: deciding pet custody during a separation
Because pets are legally considered property, one party in a family dispute can use them to negotiate more favourable outcomes, particularly when emotions are high.
So, deciding who gets pet custody during a separation often results in a decision that is not in everyone’s best interest, including the pet.
Michael says it’s not uncommon for a pet to become a bargaining chip, with one-person demanding custody of the animal or emphasising the pet’s importance to children to manipulate the situation.
“Outside of children, people fight hardest over pets,” Michael says.
“We’ve seen cases where one party knows the other is deeply attached to the family pet and uses that emotional connection as leverage.
“This tactic can delay proceedings and make settlements far more difficult.”
In high-conflict cases, mediation can be an effective way to resolve pet-related disputes, provided both parties are willing to participate in good faith.
However, the current system often leaves much to be desired.
“Without clear legal guidelines on how to handle pets in family law disputes, people can get litigious, and things get nasty,” says Michael.
Calls for legal reform to recognise pets as family members, not property
To prevent pets from being used as pawns in these emotionally charged situations, Michael advocates for legal reforms that would treat pets as more than mere property.
“Introducing legislation that recognises pets as sentient beings, rather than just assets, would be a huge step forward,” he says.
“We need a framework that considers the emotional role pets play in a family and looks at how separation impacts them, much like how we assess children’s welfare in family law cases.”
Such reforms could include clear guidelines on how pets are to be shared or alternated between parties, with considerations such as who has been the primary caregiver and the pet’s relationship with each family member.
For families currently navigating these difficult situations, the best course of action may still be mediation, but Michael stresses the importance of considering the pet’s welfare throughout the process.