SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
New California divorce law: Treat pets like people — not property to be divided up
A new law being unleashed in California on New Year's Day will give pets' rights some bite in court cases. The measure provides judges with the power to consider what's in the best interests of the animal in divorce cases, instead of treating them the way they've been treated by courts in the past — as physical property.
[...] The law "makes clear that courts must view pet ownership differently than the ownership of a car, for example. By providing clearer direction, courts will award custody on what is best for the animal," [state Assembly member Bill] Quirk said after the bill was signed.
[...] Legal experts said the law means judges can take into consideration factors like who walks, feeds and plays with the pet when deciding who the animal should live with.
"Before it was an issue of who owns the dog and how you distribute the property," Favre said. "But pets aren't quite the same thing as china and sofas. They're more like children, in that they're living beings who have their own preferences." And as with children, he said, divorce can be "a trauma for animals as well."
Fur baby.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @09:58AM (6 children)
Children of the new millennium
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @11:54AM (4 children)
This is from posts seen on social media where people consider their pets to be their children, refer to them as their 'fur babies' and literally won't have children because they would rather have a cat or dog or whatever.
I wish this was a joke.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @03:27PM
That's just normal human response to the financial risk one takes by getting a child in the first world. The pet is never going to be faced with having to indebt itself multiple 100k$ in education, have the degree suddenly become worthless, and not get a job anyway because they are over 40. The owners won't have the risk of crushing child support payments if their relationship doesn't work out.
Americans still get more children than I think is rational, but in Taiwan there are tons of people that wheel around their lap dogs in strollers.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Tuesday January 01 2019, @04:06PM (2 children)
Why? What difference does it make to you that some people prefer pets to children, for whatever reason?
--
Democracy: Where any two idiots outvote a genius.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @06:18PM (1 child)
Depends on how well AI and robotics come along to handle geriatric care...
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Tuesday January 01 2019, @06:57PM
No, it really doesn't.
First of all, there are plenty of enthusiastic breeders out there, generally speaking.
Secondly, even where the population is actually declining, older folks that need care (which again, isn't all of them by any means) can be handled on a many-oldies-to-one-caregiver basis, just as they are today.
Also, look at it the other way around: people who choose pets over children can conserve more resources than those who do, because children are comparatively expensive. So they're more likely to be able to care for themselves, longer.
Although it is very likely indeed that elder care will be significantly enhanced by AI and robotics. We're already seeing some of that: LMGTFY [lmgtfy.com]
--
I scream, you scream, the police come, it's awkward.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @02:26PM
This is hardly new. A wise older friend once noted that "overly doting" pet ownership by a young couple often meant that children were coming in a few years. This latest generation of humans seems to have forgotten the second part of the sequence.