Vindictive wife pulls 'dog move' with pet during divorce

Her "bitterness and resentment" cost the husband big time - but she didn't get away with it.

A woman has used the family pet as a pawn in her divorce proceedings and paid a huge price.

One such nasty example is this recent case I was involved in as a Family Lawyer, where the husband valued the family dog, not just for its companionship, but also for its ability to generate income as a stud.

The wife, however, saw the dog primarily as a cherished pet, and a source of emotional support during the turmoil of the separation.

Want to join the family? Sign up to our Kidspot newsletter for more stories like this. 

Family Lawyer Michael Tiyce. Image: Supplied/IStock

RELATED: I’m leaving my millions to a dog shelter not my kids

In a calculated move designed to diminish her husband’s interest in the animal, the wife had the dog desexed.

This action effectively ended the dog’s potential as a stud, stripping it of its economic value in the husband’s eyes. 

This added a new layer of bitterness and resentment between the parties, with the wife required to make a financial adjustment to compensate the husband for the loss of income he would have earned from the dog’s breeding services. 

RELATED: 'I'm battling a type of fur mum guilt I never saw coming'

"Parties use the pets as a pawn in separation"

This case highlights the extent to which pets can become entangled in the complexities of family law disputes and messy divorces, with their roles shifting from beloved companions to assets on a balance sheet.

It’s not uncommon for one party to take the family pet during a separation, refusing to return it, or to use the threat of withholding the pet as a means to extract concessions in property disputes.

Or in some cases, the pet becomes a bargaining chip, with its fate tied to the outcome of negotiations over assets, custody, and financial settlements.

This emotional attachment makes pets particularly effective as instruments of control and coercion. By withholding or threatening to harm a pet, one party can exert significant psychological pressure on the other, pushing them into making decisions they might otherwise resist.

Unfortunately, the legal system is often ill-equipped to deal with these situations. In Australia, pets are classified as ‘property’ under the law, which means they are treated similarly to other assets like furniture or cars.

This classification fails to account for the emotional significance of pets for both parties in the dispute as well as children possessing tight emotional bonds to the animals, leading to outcomes that can seem harsh or unjust. 

Introducing our new podcast: Mum Club! Listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts so you never miss an episode.

How to protect your pet in a divorce

While some courts have shown a willingness to consider the welfare of the animal and the emotional attachment of the parties, these factors are not always given the weight they deserve.

The increasing use of pets as pawns in family law cases reflects broader trends in the way separations are handled.

In some cases, it may be wise to formalise arrangements for the care and custody of pets early in the separation process, before emotions run too high. 

As family law continues to evolve, it is hoped that the courts will develop more nuanced approaches to handling disputes involving pets, recognising their unique role in the lives of those they comfort and care for.

As societal values and perspectives shift, it's crucial that legislation reflects this to ensure the fairest outcomes are achieved.

Until then, it remains a sad reality that pets, like so many other aspects of a shared life, can become just another asset to be fought over in the wake of a relationship’s breakdown.

Written by Michael Tiyce of Tiyce & Lawyers. Please seek your own advice if needed.

Originally published as Vindictive wife pulls 'dog move' with pet during divorce