A Landmark Dog Custody Case
by Michael Schaffer

From today’s Philadelphia Inquirer:

Tomorrow, a second trial on the custody of the nearly six-year-old brown pooch is set to begin. The Williamstown woman plans to testify again that her ex-fiancé broke an oral agreement to let her have the dog after she moved out of their house.

In March, a three-judge appeals panel ordered a new trial, saying Superior Court Judge John Tomasello should not have treated Dexter as just another piece of furniture during the first trial, in Gloucester County, in 2007. The new trial will be heard in Salem County, where Tomasello is now assigned.

Gina Calogero, Houseman’s attorney, said the appeals panel had issued a “landmark decision” on pet custody, which she called an “emerging field and cutting-edge law.” Calogero, who specializes in animal rights cases, says many judges are now being asked to decide who gets the pet when there is a breakup.

“Ten years ago, I never heard of any such case,” said Calogero.

A few thoughts:

1. This is a phenomenon I wrote about in my book. As pets have become a more emotionally important part of people’s lives, their attachment to them has taken on new forms, forms that reflect not just the eternal nature of animals, but the specific nature of our ever-changing human society. Divorce battles are a big part of that society, so it’s no surprise they’d involve pets.

2. The institutions of our society–courts and schools and governments that write restaurant codes and the like–adapt slowly but surely to changes in the way we live. And, sure enough, they adapt to the social upgrade we’ve given pets. It’s not fast enough for those of us with pets, of course, but eventually things change, whether it’s allowing restaurants to be pet-friendly if they choose, or devoting chunks of public land to dog runs, or drafting emergency evacuation plans that include pets. Same goes for figuring out how to adjudicate pet lawsuits or custody battles–and do so in a way that treats pets not as property but as the emotionally crucial beings they are in many people’s lives.

3. If I were a judge, I would be frantic to not establish a precedent that judges should decide these things. Not because it’s not worthy, but because it is a hell of a lot of work. Child-custody is tough enough–and at least the kid can talk.

4. The woman in this story has been on the Today show and otherwise been treated as an exotic. Someday fairly soon, it won’t seem so exotic.