Safety Planning with Pets
General KnowledgeSafety

Safety Planning with Pets

By Danielle WorksSeptember 9, 2024September 19th, 2024No Comments

Safety planning is a critical step to finding freedom from domestic abuse, and the most effective safety plans include the entire family. For many survivors, this means finding a path to safety that accommodates their pet. In fact, half of all pet-owning survivors report that they would not consider entering a shelter if they couldn’t take their pet with them. If you’re an advocate that assists survivors with safety planning, use the following guide to ensure that your safety plans are pet inclusive. 

Establish Proof of Ownership

Helping survivors establish legal ownership of their pets is an important step to ensuring futures free from abuse and coercive control. Documents like veterinary records, adoption paperwork, and pet licenses help establish ownership. If your client already has these documents, advise them to keep copies in a safe place. For pet owners without documentation, you can help them build a paper trail by setting up a vet appointment and establishing pet care under their name.

Know Where to Go

If your client needs to leave home in a hurry, where will their pets go? Help survivors identify a friend or family member who can care for pets in an emergency or use domesticshelters.org to locate a shelter with pet options. While some shelters allow pets to live on site with their owners, others may provide off-site services like temporary boarding or foster care. 

If there are no pet-friendly shelters in your community, RedRover may be able to help. RedRover Safe Escape grants help cover the cost of temporarily boarding a pet while their owner is in a domestic violence shelter. Visit RedRover.org to review eligibility requirements and learn more.

Create a Pet Go-Bag

Prepare survivors for a quick departure by packing a pet go-bag with essential items. Include pet food, medications, veterinary records, ID tags, a leash, collar, carrier, and their pet’s favorite toys. Store these items with a trusted friend or in a secure location to ensure they are readily available when needed. 

Update the Pet's Microchip

Microchips are an important safety feature that help reunite lost pets with their owners. Typically inserted under a pet’s skin near their shoulders, microchips give off radio waves that can be detected by a microchip scanner. 

These scanners are available at most animal shelters and veterinary clinics. Once you’ve confirmed that a pet has a microchip, identify the corresponding registry using the table below. 

Microchip information should be updated regularly to ensure it is correct. When working with survivors of domestic violence, make sure to remove the abuser from the pet’s contact list and place a “do not disclose address” notice on their account. 

Unlike a microchip, GPS collars and devices like Airtags are able to provide real-time location information for pets, and by extension, survivors. Make sure your client removes these items from pets before leaving home. 

Build a Safe Routine

Help survivors establish a safe routine for their pets, whether they are sheltering with you or elsewhere. Identify safe routes for dog walks and encourage them to find a walking buddy. To prevent pets from being stolen or harmed, avoid leaving them outside unattended. Instead, keep pets indoors or behind secure privacy fencing. 

Change Care Providers

Keep pets and survivors safe by avoiding places the abuser may expect to find them. If the pet visited a particular veterinary clinic, groomer, or doggy daycare, work with the survivor to find new providers in new locations. Make sure these providers know who is approved to pick up the pet from appointments and who is not. 

Seek a Protective Order

As of October, 2024, there are 40 U.S. states with laws that allow pets to be included in domestic violence protective orders. Use the map below or visit the Animal Legal and Historical Center to learn more about laws in your state.

OREGON: Under O.R.S. § 107.718 , if requested by a petitioner who has been the victim of domestic abuse, the court may enter an order to protect a companion or therapy animal. This includes an order to “[p]revent the neglect and protect the safety of any service or therapy animal or any animal kept for personal protection or companionship, but not an animal kept for any business, commercial, agricultural or economic purpose.”
WASHINGTON: West’s RCWA 26.50.060 allows inclusion of pets in protective orders in cases of domestic abuse. A court may also order possession and use of essential “personal effects”, which may include pets. The court may order that a petitioner be granted the exclusive custody or control of any pet owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the petitioner, respondent, or minor child residing with either the petitioner or respondent and may prohibit the respondent from interfering with the petitioner’s efforts to remove the pet. The court may also prohibit the respondent from knowingly coming within, or knowingly remaining within, a specified distance of specified locations where the pet is regularly found.
CALIFORNIA: West’s Ann. Cal. Fam. Code § 6320 – 6327 allows, on a showing of good cause, the court to include in a protective order a grant to the petitioner of the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner or the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent.
IDAHO: Protection order laws do not explicitly include animals.
NEVADA: Under NEV. REV. STAT. §33.018, a knowing, purposeful or reckless course of conduct intended to harass the other such as injuring or killing an animal, is included in their definition of Domestic Violence. A victim can then get a Protection Order and enjoin the adverse party from physically injuring, threatening to injure or taking possession of any animal that is owned or kept by the applicant or minor child, either directly or through an agent.
ARIZONA: Under A. R. S. § 13-3602, if a court issues an order of protection, the court may grant the petitioner the exclusive care, custody or control of any animal that is owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by the petitioner, the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of the petitioner or the respondent, and order the respondent to stay away from the animal and forbid the respondent from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, committing an act of cruelty or neglect in violation of section 13- 2910 or otherwise disposing of the animal.
UTAH: U.C.A. 1953 § 78B-7-105 requires that forms for a civil protective order must include “a space to indicate whether an order under Subsection 78B-7-603(2)(k) or (l) regarding a household animal is requested” under subsection (2)(c)(iv).
WYOMING: W. S. 1977 § 35-21-105 grants sole possession of any household pet, as defined in W.S. 6-3-203(o), owned, possessed or kept by the petitioner, the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent to the petitioner during the period the order of protection is effective if the order is for the purpose of protecting the household pet. In addition, under subpart (a)(x), the court may order that the respondent not have contact with the household pet(s) in the custody of the petitioner and prohibit the respondent from abducting, removing, concealing or disposing of the household pet if the order is for the purpose of protecting the household pet.
MONTANA: Protection order laws do not explicitly include animals.
COLORADO: C. R. S. A. § 13-14-103 , C. R. S. A. § 18-6-800.3 allows an emergency protection order to include language restraining a party from molesting, injuring, killing, taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, disposing of or threatening harm to an animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by any other party, a minor child of either of the parties, or an elderly or at-risk adult. 2010 amendments to this statute includes within the definition of “domestic violence” any other crime against a person, or against property, including an animal, or any municipal ordinance violation against a person, or against property, including an animal, when used as a method of coercion, control, punishment, intimidation, or revenge directed against a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an intimate relationship.
NEW MEXICO: Protection order laws do not explicitly include animals.
TEXAS: Under V.T.C.A. Family Code § 85.021, in a protective order, the court may prohibit a party from removing a pet, companion animal, or assistance animal, as defined by Section 121.002, Human Resources Code, from the possession of a person named in the order.
OKLAHOMA: Under Okl. St. Ann. § 60.2, a person seeking a protective order may further request the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner, defendant or minor child residing in the residence of the petitioner or defendant. The court may order the defendant to make no contact with the animal and forbid the defendant from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, molesting, attacking, striking, threatening, harming, or otherwise disposing of the animal.
KANSAS: Protection order laws do not explicitly include animals.
NEBRASKA: Under Neb. Rev. St. § 42-903, 924, any victim of domestic abuse may file a petition and affidavit for a protection order as provided in this section. The court may issue a protection order granting relief that includes giving the petitioner sole possession of any household pet owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the petitioner, the respondent, or any family or household member residing in the household of the petitioner or respondent. The court may also enjoin the respondent from coming into contact with, harming, or killing any household pet owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the petitioner, the respondent, or any family or household member of the petitioner or respondent.
SOUTH DAKOTA: Protection order laws do not explicitly include animals.
NORTH DAKOTA: Protection order laws do not explicitly include animals.
MINNESOTA: M.S.A. § 518B.01 reflects Minnesota’s provision for restraining orders in cases of domestic abuse and allows the court to prevent harm companion animals. As stated in the law: “The order may direct the care, possession, or control of a pet or companion animal owned, possessed, or kept by the petitioner or respondent or a child of the petitioner or respondent. It may also direct the respondent to refrain from physically abusing or injuring any pet or companion animal, without legal justification, known to be owned, possessed, kept, or held by either party or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either party as an indirect means of intentionally threatening the safety of such person.”
IOWA: I.C.A. §§ 236.3, 236.4, 236.5 allows the court to grant petitioners exclusive care, possession, or control of any pets or companion animals in both temporary and permanent orders. The animals can belong to the petitioner, the abuser, or a minor child of the petitioner or the abuser. The court can also order the abuser to stay away from the animals and not take, hide, bother, attack, threaten, or otherwise get rid of the pet or companion animal.
MISSOURI: Under V. A. M. S. 455.010, 455.045, Any ex parte order of protection shall be to protect the petitioner from domestic violence, stalking, or sexual assault and may include “[a] temporary order of possession of pets where appropriate.” “Pet” is defined as a living creature maintained by a household member for companionship and not for commercial purposes.
ARKANSAS: Under A.C.A. § 9-15-205 and 9-15-401 to 407, upon a finding of domestic abuse, a court may “[d]irect the care, custody, or control of any pet. owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party residing in the household” in an order for protection filed by a petitioner. Arkansas also defines emotional abuse to include harming a spouse’s pet in its Spousal Safety Plan Act; emotional abuse, if committed by a spouse against hir or her spouse, also constitutes spousal abuse.
LOUISIANA: LA R.S. 46:2135 allows a court to enter a temporary restraining order, without bond, as it deems necessary to protect from abuse the petitioner. Among the provisions is one that allows the court to grant “. . . to the petitioner the exclusive care, possession, or control of any pets belonging to or under the care of the petitioner or minor children residing in the residence or household of either party, and directing the defendant to refrain from harassing, interfering with, abusing or injuring any pet, without legal justification, known to be owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either party.”
WISCONSIN: Wis. Stat. Ann. § 813.12, 813.122, 813.123 allows “household pets” to be included in restraining orders or injunctions in domestic abuse cases, child abuse cases, and cases filed by “individuals as risk.” In both cases of domestic abuse and child abuse, a judge or circuit court commissioner shall issue a temporary restraining order ordering the respondent to refrain from removing, hiding, damaging, harming, or mistreating, or disposing of, a household pet, to allow the petitioner or a family member or household member of the petitioner acting on his or her behalf to retrieve a household pet, or any combination of these remedies requested in the petition.
ILLINOIS: 725 I.L.C.S. 5/112A-14 allows for the protection of animals in domestic violence situations. The court can “[g]rant the petitioner the exclusive care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner or the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent and order the respondent to stay away from the animal and forbid the respondent from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, harming, or otherwise disposing of the animal.”
MICHIGAN: M. C. L. A. 600.295 allows a personal protection order to restrain or enjoin those mentioned individuals from engaging in the following actions if that person has the intent to cause the petitioner mental distress or to exert control over the petitioner with respect to an animal in which the petitioner has an ownership interest: (1) injuring, killing, torturing, neglecting, or threatening to injure, kill, torture, or neglect the animal; (2) removing the animal from the petitioner’s possession; or (3) retaining or obtaining possession of the animal.
INDIANA: IC 34-26-5-9 allows a court to grant a petitioner the exclusive possession, care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, kept, or cared for by the petitioner, respondent, minor child of either the petitioner or respondent, or any other family or household member. Additionally, the court may prohibit a respondent from removing, transferring, injuring, concealing, harming, attacking, mistreating, threatening to harm, or otherwise disposing of an animal described in subdivision (5).
OHIO: R.C. § 3113.31 allows a court to grant a protection order that may: (E)(1)(i) require that the respondent not remove, damage, hide, harm, or dispose of any companion animal owned or possessed by the petitioner; and (j) authorize the petitioner to remove a companion animal owned by the petitioner from the possession of the respondent.
KENTUCKY: KRS § 403.720, 740 expands the definition of “domestic violence” to include “[a]ny conduct prohibited by KRS 525.125, 525.130, 525.135, or 525.137, or the infliction of fear of such imminent conduct, taken against a domestic animal when used as a method of coercion, control, punishment, intimidation, or revenge directed against a family member or member of an unmarried couple who has a close bond of affection to the domestic animal.” Following a hearing, a court may issue a domestic violence order that awards possession of any shared domestic animal to the petitioner.
TENNESSEE: T. C. A. § 36-3-601 states that “abuse” includes inflicting, or attempting to inflict, physical injury on any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by an adult or minor. Section 606(9) allows the court to direct the care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party or a minor residing in the household. Further, in no instance shall the animal be placed in the care, custody, or control of the respondent, but shall instead be placed in the care, custody or control of the petitioner or in an appropriate animal foster situation.
MISSISSIPPI: Protection laws do not explicitly include animals.
ALABAMA: Protection laws do not explicitly include animals.
GEORGIA: Protection laws do not explicitly include animals.
FLORIDA: West’s F. S. A. § 741.30 allows petitioners to file injunctions for protection against domestic violence. Among the described incidents of domestic violence from which the petitioner may obtain protection is where the respondent has “intentionally injured or killed a family pet.” The court may consider this as a factor when determining whether there is reasonable cause to believe the petitioner is in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence and may award to the petitioner the temporary exclusive care, possession, or control of an animal that is owned, possessed, harbored, kept, or held by the petitioner, the respondent, or a minor child residing in the residence or household of the petitioner or respondent.
ALASKA: Under AS § 18.65.515 – 590, a petitioner may seek a protective order that includes a provision to “grant you [the petitioner] possession and use of a vehicle and other essential personal items, including a pet, regardless of the ownership of those items.” In the new amendment to Section 18.65.590, “pet” means “a vertebrate living creature maintained for companionship or pleasure, but does not include dogs primarily owned for participation in a generally accepted mushing or pulling contest or practice or animals primarily owned for participation in rodeos or stock contests.”
HAWAII: Under H R S § 586-4, the ex parte temporary restraining order may also enjoin or restrain both of the parties from taking, concealing, removing, threatening, physically abusing, or otherwise disposing of any animal identified to the court as belonging to a household, until further order of the court.
SOUTH CAROLINA: Code 1976 § 20-4-60 allows a judge to issue a protective order that prohibits the harm or harassment against any pet animal owned, possessed, kept, or held by the petitioner; any family or household member designated in the order; or the respondent if the petitioner has a demonstrated interest in the pet animal.The law also allows the judge to issue a protective order that provides for temporary possession of the personal property, including pet animals, of the parties and order assistance from law enforcement officers in removing personal property of the petitioner if the respondent’s eviction has not been ordered.
NORTH CAROLINA: Under N.C.G.S.A. § 50B-3, a protective order may provide for possession of personal property of the parties, including the care, custody, and control of any animal owned, possessed, kept, or held as a pet by either party or minor child residing in the household. The court may also order a party to refrain from cruelly treating or abusing an animal owned, possessed, kept, or held as a pet by either party or minor child residing in the household.
VIRGINIA: VA Code Ann.§§ 16.1-253, 16.1-253.1, 16.1-253.4, 16.1-279.1, 19.2-152.8, 19.2-152.9, and 19.2-152.10 grant petitioners possession of any “companion animal,” so long as the petitioner is considered the owner. To be considered an owner, a petitioner must either have a property interest in the animal, keep or house the animal, have the animal in their care, or have acted as a custodian of the animal.
WEST VIRGINIA: W. Va. Code, § 48-27-503 allows the terms of a protective order to include awarding the petitioner the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by either the petitioner or the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent and prohibiting the respondent from taking, concealing, molesting, physically injuring, killing or otherwise disposing of the animal and limiting or precluding contact by the respondent with the animal.
PENNSYLVANIA: Protection laws do not explicitly include animals.
NEW YORK: McKinney’s Family Court Act § 842 allows companion animals owned by the petitioner of the order or a minor child residing in the household to be included in the order was signed into law. The law specifically allows a court to order the respondent to refrain from intentionally injuring or killing, without justification, any companion animal the respondent knows to be owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by the petitioner or a minor child residing in the household.
VERMONT: 15 V.S.A. § 1103 allows a court to include an order relating to the possession, care and control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held as a pet by either party or a minor child residing in the household in a domestic violence situation.
NEW HAMPSHIRE: N.H. Rev. Stat. §§ 173-B:1, 173:B4, 173:B5 considers animal cruelty to be “abuse” under its protection of persons from domestic violence statute. The law allows a judge to grant the petitioner of a protective order exclusive care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the victim, the abuser, or a minor child in the household; the law also allows a judge to order the abuser to stay away from the pet in both temporary and final domestic violence protective orders.
MAINE: 19-A M. R. S. A. § 4108 – 4110 includes companion animals in protection orders and allows the court to enter an order directing the care, custody or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household.
MASSACHUSETTS: M.G.L.A. 209A § 11 allows the court to order the possession, care and control of any domesticated animal owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household to the plaintiff or petitioner in a no contact or restraining order. The court may order the defendant to refrain from abusing, threatening, taking, interfering with, transferring, encumbering, concealing, harming or otherwise disposing of such animal.
RHODE ISLAND: Under Gen.Laws 1956, § 15-15-3, a judge may order that a defendant vacate the household immediately, and “further provid[e] in the order for the safety and welfare of all household animals and pets.”
CONNECTICUT: Under C.G.S.A. § 46b-15, any family or household member who has been subjected to a continuous threat of present physical pain or physical injury by another family may apply to the Superior Court for an order of protection. The court may also make orders for the protection of any animal owned or kept by the applicant including, but not limited to, an order enjoining the respondent from injuring or threatening to injure such animal.
NEW JERSEY: N.J.S.A. 2C:25-26, 27,28, 29 authorizes courts to include pets in domestic violence restraining orders. The court is allowed to enter an order “prohibiting the defendant from having any contact with any animal owed, possessed, leased, kept or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household.”
DELAWARE: Under 10 Del.C. § 1045, a court may “[g]rant the petitioner the exclusive care, custody, or control of any companion animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the petitioner, the respondent, or a minor child residing in the residence or household of the petitioner or respondent and order the respondent to stay away from the companion animal and forbid the respondent from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, harming, or otherwise disposing of the companion animal.”
MARYLAND: MD FAMILY § 4-501, 504.1 allows an interim protective order to award temporary possession of any pet (defined in § 4-501 as a domesticated animal except livestock) to the person eligible for relief or the respondent.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: DC CODE § 16-1005 provides that if, after a hearing, the judicial officer finds that there is good cause to believe the respondent has committed or threatened to commit a criminal offense against the petitioner or against petitioner’s animal or an animal in petitioner’s household, the judicial officer may issue a protection order that directs the care, custody, or control of a domestic animal that belongs to petitioner or respondent or lives in his or her household.

Even if your state does not explicitly include pets in protection laws, judges may still issue protective orders for pets under “catch-all” provisions. These provisions allow judges to include whatever conditions are reasonable and necessary to ensure the victim’s safety. 

If your client was forced to leave a pet behind with an abusive partner, taking active steps to help them reclaim their pet may prevent them from returning to a dangerous situation. Consider reaching out to local police or humane law enforcement to see if they can help your client safely retrieve their pet. 

FINAL THOUGHTS

Incorporating pets into safety planning is an essential part of supporting survivors of domestic abuse. By addressing the needs of both people and their pets, advocates can provide more comprehensive assistance that not only safeguards the well-being of animals, but encourages more survivors to seek help. 

As we continue to refine our approaches to safety planning, let us remain committed to including every member of the family, recognizing that true safety and recovery come from addressing all aspects of a survivor’s life. By doing so, we can foster more inclusive and supportive environments for those seeking freedom from abuse. 

Want to learn more? Check out our webinar, “Safety Planning with Pets” with the Arizona Coalition to End Sexual and Domestic Violence. 

Author Profile
Danielle Works

Danielle Works is a Community Outreach Coordinator for RedRover. With more than 10 years of experience in animal welfare, Danielle consults with shelters throughout the country to identify collaborative solutions for pets and owners in crisis. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Biology from Willamette University in Salem, Oregon.