Essentially, Kano's Law enables courts to ask and rule in favor of the answer to the crucial question: "What is best for the pet?" During custody litigation, this will ensure custody and/or visitation is instated or reinstated with the party or parties that best provide(s) for the pet's best interests. Kano’s Law will ensure pets remain in loving, safe homes by legally recognizing their best interests.
Additionally, Kano's Law will prohibit courts from returning pets to homes where they endured abuse, neglect, and/or cruelty, unlike previously when the original ownership took precedence over the animal's best interests. In cases of pet theft, the animal would be returned to his/her original caregiver, unless there was evidence of abuse, neglect, and/or cruelty.
On September 16, 2022, the Gloucester Township Civil Court of New Jersey ruled that our beloved Olde English Bulldogge, Kano, shall be returned to the household where he had been abandoned, neglected, and abused. Current laws deem pets equitable to property, thus their best interests are not considered or protected when deciding custody. We are fighting for Kano and all of the animals suffering because of this unjust and inhumane legal status, so that this tragedy doesn't repeat itself. Thus, I began a petition to have Congress sign into law Kano's Law.
Kano's Law will protect all companion animals, also known as pets, and responsible guardians or caregivers. It extends to cases of divorce, separation, and domestic violence, as well as animal cruelty, neglect, and abandonment.
Envision this all too-common scenario: a couple is in the process of a separation, and they are disputing custody of the pet. One of the partners had bought the pet as a gift for the other, but now wants to claim sole custody, citing that he/she bought the animal, therefore, the animal belongs solely to him/her. Perhaps this person doesn't share a bond with the pet and is merely using the pet to emotionally harm the other partner. This person may even have a history of domestic violence or animal abuse, cruelty, and/or neglect. The other partner, however, shares a strong bond with the pet, was the primary caregiver, and has no history of animal abuse, cruelty, and/or neglect. Kano's Law would protect and reunite the pet with his/her loving caregiver and would deny the "purchaser" custody due to a history of abuse, cruelty, and/or neglect.
Or, imagine an abused or neglected animal is surrendered to a shelter only for that same "owner" to return some days or months later to reclaim his/her "property." This can, and oftentimes does, turn into a devastating cycle. Kano's law would prohibit this. Under Kano's Law, shelters would be able to retain custody of animals who suffered neglect or abuse, because the laws would favor the party who can best provide a safe, healthy life for those animals. This would allow the animal to be adopted or fostered into a loving and safe home.
Picture instead that a family discovers an animal wandering outside. The animal exhibits clear signs of abuse and/or neglect. The family has the animal scanned for a microchip, but there is none. The family puts a good faith effort to locate the animal’s owner(s). The family nurses the animal back to health, bonds with the animal, and welcomes the animal into their family unit. Months or years go by, and then one day the original owner sues the family for custody of the animal. During the trial, the family submits photographic evidence of the condition of the animal, and perhaps it is even discovered that the original owner has been investigated or convicted of animal neglect in the past. Sighting Kano’s Law, the court would rule in favor of the family, ensuring the animal remains in a loving, safe, and healthy home.
In recognition that companion animals, or pets, are sentient beings living in family units and therefore classified as dependent family members:
In pet or companion animal custody cases, the animal’s best interests shall be considered in order to determine custody and/or visitation rights. The animal shall be placed with, and custody and/or visitation rights instituted or reinstituted with, the party that best provides the fundamental necessities for the animal’s quality of life. The factors to be considered when determining which party best provides for the animal's best interests include, but are not limited to:
The financial ability to provide proper medical and maintenance care for the duration of the animal’s lifespan,
A history of animal abuse, cruelty, and/or neglect, including: former, present, or ongoing investigations or charges of animal abandonment, neglect, abuse and/or cruelty,
The ability to provide proper housing, including heat and a hygienic living environment,
The ability to provide basic life-sustaining provisions, including adequate food and potable drinking water,
The animal’s bond with each party, both the present and former caregiver or owner, shall be considered when deciding the animal’s placement.
The aforementioned clauses shall be decisive factors when determining which party should resume or be granted custody and/or visitation rights. These factors shall supersede other legislation dictating custody, previously known as “ownership,” of companion animals.