Relates to orders of protection with respect to companion animals

Section 2: Amends section 446 of the family court act by adding the same provisions as section 1 of this bill.

Section 3: Amends section 551 of the family court act by adding the same provisions as section 1 of this bill.

Section 4: Amends section 656 of the family court act by adding the same provisions as section 1 of this bill.

Section 5: Amends section 759 of the family court act by adding the same provisions as section 1 of this bill.

Section 6: Amends section 842 of the family court act by adding the same provisions as section 1 of this bill.

Section 7: Amends section 1056 of the family court act by adding the same provisions as section 1 of this bill.

Section 8: Amends section 530.12 of the criminal procedure law by adding the same provisions as section 1 of this bill.

Section 9: Amends section 530.13 of the criminal procedure law by adding similar provisions to section 1 of this bill. The provision where the respondent may be required to give up custody of any pet they own was not included because this section of law does not deal with "members of the same family or household," as defined in section 530.11 of the criminal procedure law.

Section 10: Amends section 240 of the domestic relations law by adding the same provisions as section 1 of this bill.

Section 11: Amends section 252 of the domestic relations law by adding the same provisions as section 1 of this bill.

Section 12: Establishes the effective date.

Justification

Study after study has linked domestic abuse with animal abuse. A study by the American Humane Association found that 71% of pet-owning women entering women's shelters reported that their batterer had injured, maimed, killed or threatened family pets for revenge or to psychologically control their victim. The fact is, the people who are capable of harming their significant others are almost certainly capable of harming their pets. Unfortunately, many abusers can hold this over their victims. According to the Urban Resource Institute, 48% of victims of domestic violence do not leave their abuser because they fear what would happen to their pet. This bill seeks to empower those who desperately need to get away from their abuser, but are too selfless and concerned that they will have to leave their pet behind.

Currently, orders of protection only prohibit the respondent from intentionally injuring or killing a pet belonging to the petitioner or a minor child in their household. Knowing that the petitioner has violated the order of protection would serve little comfort in the tragic event that someone lost their pet. For this reason, more needs to be done to prevent that from happening by giving the court discretion to forbid any contact between the respondent and the pet. Furthermore, it is imperative that the court has the discretion when issuing the order of protection to extend it so that it explicitly covers not only pets owned by the victim or a minor child in the household, but also any pets that may be legally owned by the abuser but in practice are shared with the victim. People can easily grow attached to the pets of their significant others, and a pet owned by their partner would certainly be a concern of theirs when considering leaving an abusive relationship, regardless of who legally owns the pet. States such as California, New Jersey, Ohio, Massachusetts, and many others have already recognized the need for such provisions. The American Humane Association found that 98% of Americans consider their pet to be a part of their family, and victims of violence should not be forced to abandon a part of their family in order to escape their abuser.

Legislative history

New bill.

Fiscal implications

None.

Local fiscal implications

None.

Effective date

This act shall take effect immediately.