Domestic Violence

RI - Domestic Violence - § 15-15-3. Protective orders--Penalty--Jurisdiction

Summary: In 2019, Rhode Island added language to its law on protection orders in domestic abuse circumstances that protects household pets. Upon petition, a judge may order that a defendant vacate the household immediately, and "further provid[e] in the order for the safety and welfare of all household animals and pets."

In 2019, Rhode Island added language to its law on protection orders in domestic abuse circumstances that protects household pets. Upon petition, a judge may order that a defendant vacate the household immediately, and "further provid[e] in the order for the safety and welfare of all household animals and pets."

IN - Domestic Violence - 31-9-2-42 “Domestic or family violence”

Summary: This section of the Family Law Code defines "domestic or family violence" as "[a]busing (as described in IC 35-46-3-0.5), torturing (as described in IC 35-46-3-0.5), mutilating (as described in IC 35-46-3-0.5), or killing a vertebrate animal without justification with the intent to threaten, intimidate, coerce, harass, or terrorize a family or household member."

This section of the Family Law Code defines "domestic or family violence" as "[a]busing (as described in IC 35-46-3-0.5), torturing (as described in IC 35-46-3-0.5), mutilating (as described in IC 35-46-3-0.5), or killing a vertebrate animal without justification with the intent to threaten, intimidate, coerce, harass, or terrorize a family or household member."

ENACTING AND ENFORCING FELONY ANIMAL CRUELTY LAWS TO PREVENT VIOLENCE AGAINST HUMANS

Share

|

Summary: Felony animal anti-cruelty laws should be enacted and strictly enforced to protect animals and humans. Studies show that violence in the home, of any type, is self-perpetuating, creating generations of abusers and victims. Children who witness abuse are more likely to abuse animals and eventually humans; even minor acts of animal abuse are signs of a disturbed individual and should be taken seriously. Current animal anti-cruelty laws fail to prevent this violence. This article proposes that stronger anti-cruelty laws must be enacted and properly enforced to prevent this cycle of violence.

Felony animal anti-cruelty laws should be enacted and strictly enforced to protect animals and humans. Studies show that violence in the home, of any type, is self-perpetuating, creating generations of abusers and victims. Children who witness abuse are more likely to abuse animals and eventually humans; even minor acts of animal abuse are signs of a disturbed individual and should be taken seriously. Current animal anti-cruelty laws fail to prevent this violence. This article proposes that stronger anti-cruelty laws must be enacted and properly enforced to prevent this cycle of violence.

ANIMAL CRUELTY AND VIOLENCE AGAINST HUMANS: MAKING THE CONNECTION

Share

|

Summary: The idea that there is a connection between the way individuals treat animals and human beings has a long history in Western popular culture, but a shorter history as the subject of scientific research. Recently, a growing body of evidence has confirmed an association between repeated, intentional abuse of animals and a variety of violent antisocial behaviors including child abuse, domestic violence, and violent criminal activities. The public made this connection before most law-enforcement or mental health officials. Public sentiment for tougher and better-enforced animal cruelty laws is strong, and there has been a dramatic response to recent high-profile animal abuse cases. Sensitivity to the importance of animal abuse as both an indicator of exposure to violence in the home and a predictor of increased risk for future acts of violence against people, promises to be an important tool to prevent many forms of societal violence.

The idea that there is a connection between the way individuals treat animals and human beings has a long history in Western popular culture, but a shorter history as the subject of scientific research. Recently, a growing body of evidence has confirmed an association between repeated, intentional abuse of animals and a variety of violent antisocial behaviors including child abuse, domestic violence, and violent criminal activities. The public made this connection before most law-enforcement or mental health officials. Public sentiment for tougher and better-enforced animal cruelty laws is strong, and there has been a dramatic response to recent high-profile animal abuse cases. Sensitivity to the importance of animal abuse as both an indicator of exposure to violence in the home and a predictor of increased risk for future acts of violence against people, promises to be an important tool to prevent many forms of societal violence.

ANOTHER WEAPON FOR COMBATING FAMILY VIOLENCE: PREVENTION OF ANIMAL ABUSE

Share

|

Summary: In this article, the author postulates that there is more than a mere coincidence between various forms of family violence. Furthermore, that acts of cruelty towards family pets are a form of family violence that has been largely unrecognized by the legal community. Admitting that much research still needs to be done to establish that there is a link between abuse towards people and abuse towards animals, the author invites the reader to consider this multi-victim approach to family violence and offers the strengthening of animal cruelty laws as a solution to this grave societal problem.

In this article, the author postulates that there is more than a mere coincidence between various forms of family violence. Furthermore, that acts of cruelty towards family pets are a form of family violence that has been largely unrecognized by the legal community. Admitting that much research still needs to be done to establish that there is a link between abuse towards people and abuse towards animals, the author invites the reader to consider this multi-victim approach to family violence and offers the strengthening of animal cruelty laws as a solution to this grave societal problem.

IN - Domestic Violence - 34-26-5-9 Ex parte orders; authority and jurisdiction of court; relief available

Summary: This Indiana law allows a court to grant ex parte orders for protection in cases of domestic or family violence. Effective July 1, 2017, a court may grant a petitioner the exclusive possession, care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, kept, or cared for by the petitioner, respondent, minor child of either the petitioner or respondent, or any other family or household member. Additionally, the court may prohibit a respondent from removing, transferring, injuring, concealing, harming, attacking, mistreating, threatening to harm, or otherwise disposing of an animal described in subdivision (c)(5).

This Indiana law allows a court to grant ex parte orders for protection in cases of domestic or family violence. Effective July 1, 2017, a court may grant a petitioner the exclusive possession, care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, kept, or cared for by the petitioner, respondent, minor child of either the petitioner or respondent, or any other family or household member. Additionally, the court may prohibit a respondent from removing, transferring, injuring, concealing, harming, attacking, mistreating, threatening to harm, or otherwise disposing of an animal described in subdivision (c)(5).

THE CONNECTION BETWEEN ANIMAL ABUSE AND FAMILY VIOLENCE: A SELECTED ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Share

|

Summary: This Selected Annotated Bibliography assembles legal and social literature that examines the link between domestic violence and animal abuse. Drawing from an ever-growing body of written works dedicated to the issue, the Bibliography presents the works that are most informative and useful to the legal community. These include case studies, current and proposed legislation, and social services guides that address the occurrence of and response to the animal cruelty-family violence correlation. In doing so, the Bibliography creates a resource that will prove helpful to a variety of legal practitioners, law makers, and professionals within the criminal justice system, and will serve as a tool to promote further understanding of the patterns of abuse that often concurrently victimize both humans and animals.

This Selected Annotated Bibliography assembles legal and social literature that examines the link between domestic violence and animal abuse. Drawing from an ever-growing body of written works dedicated to the issue, the Bibliography presents the works that are most informative and useful to the legal community. These include case studies, current and proposed legislation, and social services guides that address the occurrence of and response to the animal cruelty-family violence correlation. In doing so, the Bibliography creates a resource that will prove helpful to a variety of legal practitioners, law makers, and professionals within the criminal justice system, and will serve as a tool to promote further understanding of the patterns of abuse that often concurrently victimize both humans and animals.

AK - Domestic Violence - Article 7. Domestic violence

Summary: In 2016, the State of Alaska added language allowing the inclusion of pets in protective orders for domestic violence. Effective January 17. 2017 under Section 18.65.520, a petitioner may seek a protective order that includes a provision to "grant you [the petitioner] possession and use of a vehicle and other essential personal items, including a pet, regardless of the ownership of those items." In the new amendment to Section 18.65.590, “pet” means "a vertebrate living creature maintained for companionship or pleasure, but does not include dogs primarily owned for participation in a generally accepted mushing or pulling contest or practice or animals primarily owned for participation in rodeos or stock contests."

In 2016, the State of Alaska added language allowing the inclusion of pets in protective orders for domestic violence. Effective January 17. 2017 under Section 18.65.520, a petitioner may seek a protective order that includes a provision to "grant you [the petitioner] possession and use of a vehicle and other essential personal items, including a pet, regardless of the ownership of those items." In the new amendment to Section 18.65.590, “pet” means "a vertebrate living creature maintained for companionship or pleasure, but does not include dogs primarily owned for participation in a generally accepted mushing or pulling contest or practice or animals primarily owned for participation in rodeos or stock contests."

WI - Domestic Violence - 813.12. Domestic abuse restraining orders and injunctions

Summary: These Wisconsin statutes concern restraining orders or injunctions in domestic abuse cases, child abuse cases, and cases filed by "individuals as risk." In each of these laws, there are protections for “household pets,” defined as domestic animals that are not farm animals, as defined in s. 951.01(3), that are kept, owned, or cared for by the petitioner or by a family member or a household member of the petitioner. In both cases of domestic abuse and child abuse, a judge or circuit court commissioner shall issue a temporary restraining order ordering the respondent to refrain from removing, hiding, damaging, harming, or mistreating, or disposing of, a household pet, to allow the petitioner or a family member or household member of the petitioner acting on his or her behalf to retrieve a household pet, or any combination of these remedies requested in the petition. The domestic abuse and child abuse laws then outline the procedures for obtaining an injunction that includes those protections for domestic pets if requirements are met under the laws. In section 813.123, an "individual at risk," may also seek a TRO and injunction that orders the respondent to refrain from removing, hiding, damaging, harming, or mistreating, or disposing of, a household pet and allow the individual at risk or a guardian, guardian ad litem, family member, or household member of the individual at risk acting on his or her behalf to retrieve a household pet.

These Wisconsin statutes concern restraining orders or injunctions in domestic abuse cases, child abuse cases, and cases filed by "individuals as risk." In each of these laws, there are protections for “household pets,” defined as domestic animals that are not farm animals, as defined in s. 951.01(3), that are kept, owned, or cared for by the petitioner or by a family member or a household member of the petitioner. In both cases of domestic abuse and child abuse, a judge or circuit court commissioner shall issue a temporary restraining order ordering the respondent to refrain from removing, hiding, damaging, harming, or mistreating, or disposing of, a household pet, to allow the petitioner or a family member or household member of the petitioner acting on his or her behalf to retrieve a household pet, or any combination of these remedies requested in the petition. The domestic abuse and child abuse laws then outline the procedures for obtaining an injunction that includes those protections for domestic pets if requirements are met under the laws. In section 813.123, an "individual at risk," may also seek a TRO and injunction that orders the respondent to refrain from removing, hiding, damaging, harming, or mistreating, or disposing of, a household pet and allow the individual at risk or a guardian, guardian ad litem, family member, or household member of the individual at risk acting on his or her behalf to retrieve a household pet.

MI - Domestic Violence - 600.2950. Personal protection orders; current or former

Summary: This Michigan law relates to an action for a personal protection order to restrain/enjoin several categories of individuals: (1) a spouse or former spouse; (2) a person with whom the petitioner has a child in common; (3) a person in a dating relationship with petitioner; or (4) an individual who resided or is residing in the same household as the petitioner. Effective August 1, 2016, the order may now restrain or enjoin those mentioned individuals from engaging in the following actions if that person has the intent to cause the petitioner mental distress or to exert control over the petitioner with respect to an animal in which the petitioner has an ownership interest (subsection (1)(k)): (1) injuring, killing, torturing, neglecting, or threatening to injure, kill, torture, or neglect the animal; (2) removing the animal from the petitioner's possession; or (3) retaining or obtaining possession of the animal. Section 29 describes the criteria under which a petitioner is deemed to have an ownership interest in an animal.

This Michigan law relates to an action for a personal protection order to restrain/enjoin several categories of individuals: (1) a spouse or former spouse; (2) a person with whom the petitioner has a child in common; (3) a person in a dating relationship with petitioner; or (4) an individual who resided or is residing in the same household as the petitioner. Effective August 1, 2016, the order may now restrain or enjoin those mentioned individuals from engaging in the following actions if that person has the intent to cause the petitioner mental distress or to exert control over the petitioner with respect to an animal in which the petitioner has an ownership interest (subsection (1)(k)): (1) injuring, killing, torturing, neglecting, or threatening to injure, kill, torture, or neglect the animal; (2) removing the animal from the petitioner's possession; or (3) retaining or obtaining possession of the animal. Section 29 describes the criteria under which a petitioner is deemed to have an ownership interest in an animal.