All Emma wants is to see her baby. Not even half the time, or at weekends, or in the holidays. The odd walk in the park would do, or a day at the beach. Emma misses her. She thinks about her all the time. She wonders if Luna has forgotten about her and, if she has, whether that’s for the best. The thought of Luna thinking that Emma abandoned her breaks her heart.
The last time she saw Luna was in mid 2021. Emma, who is in her 30s and works in social care in the south-west of England, travelled to where her ex lives, to see her. “She was so happy and excited to see me,” Emma says. “It was lovely. But he wouldn’t let me see her by myself.” They spent an hour together and as they were saying goodbye, Emma told Luna how much she loved her. Afterwards, Emma sat in the car and cried.
You’re not taking the dog! How pet custody battles turned nasty
Hi, my dear friends!
I recently started a new study for a notary magazine, where I write the column "Your Furry Rights". This time, the object of my research was the pets disputes
resolution. Recently, a law on mediation was passed in my country, which should expand the possibilities for resolving disputes bypassing the judicial system. Mediation is a more flexible tool and makes it possible to take into account the interests of the parties to the dispute, while judicial review relies mainly on the norms of the law. If we talk about pets, but the law extends the legal regime of things to them. But everyone who has a pet knows perfectly well that it is impossible to compare your beloved dog or cat, for example, with a closet or chair! This is another reason why mediation can help.
The article I was going to publish in the middle of this month was supposed to focus on the concept of pet custody. But when I started my research, I found that it was impossible to talk about custody and the usefulness of mediation to resolve pets disputes without addressing the issue of animal welfare.
The purpose of mediation and the choice of criteria for choosing a custodian seemed obvious to me. Maybe I didn't have enough personal experience... My own divorce three years ago didn't require a decision regarding animals - my ex just abandoned them with me. But when I thought about how I would act on the spot, for example, judges, my logic was this: a pet should stay with someone who takes better care of it and with whom it will be safe. If both former partners are good enough, caring and responsible, joint custody should be established.
But then I started reading articles on the sites of experienced pets mediators, and now I'm not sure about the correctness of this approach.
not all welfare issues are as clearcut as a dog with fleas. Animal behaviour can be difficult to interpret, and individuals can sincerely believe they are acting in the best interests of the pet, when in fact they’re causing significant harm. “I’m not going to sit here and tell you that I’m not to blame,” says Sham Ganglani, a 46-year-old product manager from Rhode Island. “I am just as much to blame as my ex-wife. We were in this together, and we didn’t recognise what was happening. It was hard to see what was best for the dogs.”
In 2016, Ganglani and his wife separated, divorcing two years later. At the time, they had two dogs: a mutt called Atticus and a German shepherd called Radley. “It seemed horrible to separate them,” he says, “because they were great friends.” So, as part of their divorce agreement, they decided to share both dogs, shuttling them between their houses every week. “Over time it didn’t work out for Radley,” Ganglani says. “It disrupted the routine for him.” There were warning signs: Radley became extremely protective, and Ganglani was so worried he hired a dog trainer for advice.
In November 2019, Radley bit a child at Ganglani’s ex-wife’s house. Ten days later, Radley bit Ganglani’s girlfriend’s son, who needed 17 stitches. A horrified Ganglani revoked his rights to Radley and his ex-wife agreed to take him full-time. But they continued to share Atticus, and in May 2020 Ganglani discovered a large gash on Atticus’s ear. His ex-wife admitted that Radley had attacked Atticus. “I was done,” Ganglani says. “I was not going to send Atticus back into a situation that was dangerous.”
His ex-wife took him to the family court, holding him in contempt of their divorce agreement, but before the case could be tried, Radley bit an 18-year-old dog groomer. Afterwards, Ganglani’s ex-wife agreed to drop the case. “It haunts me,” Ganglani says. “I feel responsible for what happened. We put Radley in a situation where he was not set up for success.” Given a do-over, Ganglani would not have split custody of the dogs. “People should figure out who will take the dog and make a clean break,” he says.
You’re not taking the dog! How pet custody battles turned nasty
I looked at several international conventions that mentioned animal welfare, I read the national legislation of different countries, I also paid attention to some philosophical articles on this topic. But the conclusion that I made is that all these rules are of the most general nature. The simplest rules are those regarding the physical welfare and safety of animals. They can be taken as a strict criterion from which it is impossible to deviate.
But when we talk about the emotional welfare of an animal, an individual approach is needed here. From this point of view, mediation is a much more flexible tool than a court decision, because the parties can turn to it again and again depending on the situation and how the animal perceives the new conditions.
But here, when I say "again and again" I want to caution that if such a need arises too often, it will be a pretty strong indicator that something is going wrong and perhaps the parties should consider whether joint custody really answers the best pet interests?
I have seen many child custody, but never seen an animal custody. This is both strange and interesting.