Monday, October 13, 2014

Ooo La La! France Changes the Status of Pets

This article originally appeared in Dog News and is published here by permission of the author.

Ooo La La! France Changes the Status of Pets

Carlotta Cooper



I happen to believe that most of the bad ideas that crop up in the United States commence in Europe. For Exhibit A I would like to offer a recent vote in the French parlement. Following a petition that was signed by nearly 700,000 French citizens (which goes to show you that mob rule is still not a good idea), the French MPs voted to change the status of animals from personal property (“movable goods”) to “living and feeling beings.”

The law the French were overthrowing dated from 1804 and was part of the Napoleonic Code. The new legislation was sponsored by French President Francois Hollande's Socialist party. Dogs, cats, horses, and other animals in France will now have new rights and stronger protection according to activists. Oddly enough, the French rejected proposals to ban cockfighting and bullfighting.

The original petition was initiated by 30 Millions d'Amis (translated to “30 Million Friends”). The head of that group, Reha Hutin, applauded the vote, telling Britain's Telegraph that by approving the bill the parlement recognized “an obvious fact: animals are beings endowed by feelings.” “[It was] ridiculous to see pets as pieces of furniture that can walk by themselves,” she adds.

By all accounts, the new legislation will give France's 63 million pets more protection from cruelty. (Apparently cockfighting and bullfighting don't matter when it comes to cruelty.) Britain's Daily Mail quoted philosopher and former education minister Luc Ferry, who called the previous status of animals “absurd.” According to Ferry, “animals suffer, they have emotions and feelings. It is not a question of making animals subjects of the law… but simply of protecting them against certain forms of cruelty.”

The change in the status of pets will also mean other things will change. For instance, couples will be able to fight for shared custody of pets in divorce cases. If a pet is run over by a negligent driver, s/he will be able to sue for compensation for suffering. Inheritance laws will also change to allow owners to leave their estates to their pets

Some of these issues are already in play here in the U.S. and have been working their way through the courts. Couples have already gone to court over the custody of pets – and even of stored semen from stud dogs. Owners have sued for suffering and emotional distress over the loss of a pet with varying outcomes. And here in the U.S., many owners leave large sums to their pets or for their future care after their owners die.

While these issues for pet owners in France may seem benevolent there are other issues that could be much more problematic. Critics point out that changing the status of animals could have detrimental effects on breeding, hunting, fishing, and agriculture. There is concern that animal rights activists could use the law to challenge animal slaughter practices by arguing that it is wrong to kill “beings with feelings” or to eat meat. Wolf culls and culls for other dangerous animals could also be challenged. There is also the issue of using animals for medical research which could be challenged on the same grounds.

Not mentioned by critics but no less worrisome is the fact that once pets are no longer an owner's property, an owner has fewer rights regarding the animal. It is much easier for the government or an outside agency to take your pet from you when your pet is not your property. A “living, feeling being” is much more of a free agent or wildcard than a pet who belongs to you by law.

I think we all would like to see animals treated well and have good animal welfare practiced everywhere in the world. Animals are certainly
not furniture. However, the issues that lie ahead in France, now that they have taken this step, may illustrate some of the problems that come when a society changes the status of animals from property to non-property. Just because an animal has feelings doesn't mean it should be autonomous. Or that it needs a lawyer or an activist to speak for it.

No comments:

Post a Comment