Protection orders for pets?

Protection orders for pets?

Following the last post, I came across a post by Daniel Clement in New York, commenting on a New York Times article:

Now, there is a trend to issue orders of protection in favor of pets. The New York Times reported that in one case in Connecticut, a golden retriever was granted an order of protection against one half of a divorcing couple.

As the police tell it, Cassandra Reynolds pulled up in the driveway of her ex-husband’s home in South Windsor to pick up a few belongings.

A dispute ensued. Her ex-husband’s golden retriever approached her, so she kicked it, the police said. The dog yelped. Ms. Reynolds was arrested.

That was on Sept. 23. The next day, a Superior Court judge ordered Ms. Reynolds, 39, to stay away from her ex-husband and his new wife. The judge also ordered her to stay at least 100 yards away from Riley, the golden retriever — or face up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $5,000.

Not surprisingly, pets, like people, are victims of domestic violence. According to the Times, there is legislation pending in other states, including New York, to allow courts to issue orders of protection in favor of animals. While this may be a noble and even necessary measure, I wonder if there is better way to accomplish the same goal.

As one police officer pointed out, “In a dispute, people tend to fixate on things they know will harm the other person.” Let me preface, my next statement, by saying I am a dog lover and owner. That said, is the case of directing anger against the dog in the incident described in the Times article, much different from smashing the windshield of the spouses car? Aren’t both acts really just displaced anger designed to hurt or terrorize the spouse?

Wouldn’t a better solution be to read and write orders of protection issued in cases of domestic violence broadly to protect both the person and the property of the person? Isn’t the symbolic act of violence directed to the property or pets of a person a threat which should be included in any protective order?

Request an Appointment
Fill in the form below to find out if you have a claim.
Request an Appointment - Stephen Page
Things to Read, Watch & Listen

Page Provan Calls for Repeal of Surrogacy Parentage Regulation Changes

On 9 October 2026, our director Stephen Page wrote to the Attorney-General, the Hon Michelle Rowland MP, calling for the repeal of Part 3 of the Family Law Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Regulations 2026. If left in place, these regulations will remove the statutory presumptions that currently help establish the legal parentage of children… Read More »Page Provan Calls for Repeal of Surrogacy Parentage Regulation Changes

Australian Surrogacy Law Change: 3,000 Children’s Parentage at Risk

A change to Australia’s family law regulations threatens to remove an important layer of legal certainty for nearly 3,000 children born overseas through surrogacy. For their families, the issue is anything but technical. It concerns whether Australian law presumes that the people raising these children are their parents. The repeal of regulation 10.3 of the… Read More »Australian Surrogacy Law Change: 3,000 Children’s Parentage at Risk

Infertility Week: 4 things that can stop surrogacy

Infertility can eat away at a person’s sense of hope. It can make ordinary moments painful: a pregnancy announcement, a family gathering, or the seemingly endless appearance of babies everywhere. For someone longing to become a parent, the question can become deeply personal: why does parenthood seem possible for everyone else? Infertility awareness is not… Read More »Infertility Week: 4 things that can stop surrogacy

Family Law Section Law Council of Australia Award
Member of Queensland law society
Family law Practitioners Association
International Academy of Family Lawyers - IAFL
Mediator Standards Board