The question of who gets the dog after a breakup can be fraught. In the context of domestic violence, it can move beyond distressing to downright dangerous.
Animals are commonly weaponised by perpetrators as a tool of coercive control. They can also be a key factor for victim-survivors in deciding whether to stay in the home or leave without their beloved pet, as many emergency shelters and rental properties do not allow animals.
In September, the Albanese government introduced new legislation to treat pets as “a special form of property” and consider domestic and family violence (DFV) when determining ownership as part of broader reforms to the Family Law Act.
Australians spend more than $33bn a year on their pets, a 2022 survey by Animal Medicines Australia found. A third of households own at least one cat, while almost half of all households have at least one dog – in some Sydney suburbs, dogs outnumber children two-to-one.
But there are questions over how ownership is defined. RPSCA Australia wants specialists to be able to study the human-animal bond to work out who the animal really belongs to, who it loves and who it is afraid of.
The legislation is now before a parliamentary inquiry.
In its submission, RSPCA Australia welcomes the proposed amendments but says they should go further.
“There is an increasing body of evidence which demonstrates that animals are used by perpetrators to control and [manipute] victims of DFV,” it says.
“It is also recognised that sentient animals experience mental distress, fear and anxiety if living in a violent or abusive environment.”
It also says that the criteria for “ownership” of an animal do not consider the human-animal bond. Perpetrators might claim ownership in a situation where the victim often lacks financial independence.
“The law must consider ownership/custody of the animal based on the human-animal bond as well as the safety and welfare of the animal,” it says.
It recommends that the law require an “independent behavioural assessment” of the animal interacting with each person in the ongoing or former relationship.
“In our experience, animals may display behavioural signs consistent with fear and anxiety in the presence of someone who has abused them,” it says.
RSPCA Australia also recommends all species – including horses, birds, fish and farm animals – be considered companion animals that can be surrendered to another person or charity if neither person in the ongoing or former relationship cared for it.
Lucy’s Project, a charity working to make people and animals safer in DFV situations, similarly recommends prioritising animals’ safety and attachment to family members over “ownership”.
In April this year, the Australian Institute of Family Studies released a paper on violence against family animals in intimate family violence.
Its findings include that many victim-survivors stay with, delay leaving or return to perpetrators because of fears for their animals. The paper also says it is “common” for perpetrators to threaten, harm or kill family animals to control victim-survivors.
Such violence can include deliberate neglect, physical or sexual abuse or threats of harm.
With one in four women experiencing abuse by their partners and seven in 10 households including pets, there is often a crossover, the paper says.
Jayla Sainty is an RSPCA Tasmania community awareness officer working in its Safe Beds program that cares for homeless DFV victim-survivors’ animals, including providing vaccinations, desexing and microchipping.
Under the current legislation, she says, pets “have the same rights as a piece of furniture”.
She concedes it can be hard to tell where an animal’s loyalty may lie but says that typically there are clues in the animal’s behaviour – a dog might put its ears back or urinate when a perpetrator approaches a victim, for instance.
In the aftermath, a dog can be traumatised from its former life in an abusive household, she says, and they might remain wary – particularly of men – for a while.
But they can recover.
“They still have a lot of faith in people,” Sainty says.
“It just takes them a bit of time.”
