If a lady can sue McDonalds because she spilt hot coffee on herself, and a de facto spouse can claim half a house, how long will it be before a pet has an equal right to a stake in a family estate.
Pet training by legal contract was suggested in a recent post by MoonBeam McQueen.
While this was a tongue-in-cheek suggestion (or was it?). It got me thinking…
Especially with the billions of dollars that the “Queen of Mean” left to dog welfare, and her own dog was left millions while grandchildren were left out in the cold.
If a pet lives faithfully with a family for 10 years, perhaps working as a guard dog for many of these, or even as a babysitter, then surely it has a right to a percentage of the family home. Doesn’t it deserve a stake of an estate in the event of an owners death, or in a case of divorce.
Will we see lawyers taking on pets as clients to defend their natural rights…
Absurd – is obviously any rational person’s first reaction. But then who would have thought a cup of coffee needed to be labelled “hot – do not pour in lap”?
Would it be a bad thing if pets were given more legal rights?
Given the epidemic levels of pet dumping, and pet abuse, the day where pets are entitled to legal representation could be just what is needed.
Losing a house to pay for a pet to spend the rest of it’s life in care might cause people to think twice about pet neglect. This turning of the tables would give cause to reconsider pet abandonment.
On the other hand, would this also lead to pets being given the vote, and perhaps standing for president?
Pet rights. Should lawyers have the ability to work on behalf of a pet?