Change the law in Illinois: recognize our companion animals as sentient creatures, not property. 

Concern:    Are you aware that the law perceives our companion animals, who live with us, share our homes, and are members of our family as property? Property equivalent to a toaster or hairdryer, worth fair market value. While most veterinarians are empathetic and caring experts that practice the Veterinarian's Oath consistently, there is a minority that will not acknowledge liability regarding careless behavior that cause long-lasting injury and death of our companion animals and who endeavor to redirect liability onto others. There are no current laws to protect our companion pets from this negligence and malpractice. In addition, the many Veterinary Boards turn a blind eye to these heartbreaking situations.

 

Impact:     There is a propensity of some veterinarians to cover up their malpractice when a patient is lost, and the refusal by American Boards of Veterinary Medicine to discipline their colleagues firmly and fairly, results in ongoing violations of veterinary practice by these habitual offenders and unnecessary loss of pets’ lives. 

This makes it almost impossible to hold the “bad actor” minority of veterinarians accountable. If a veterinarian has performed malpractice or acts of negligence which result in the wrongful injury or death of your pet, the law only covers “the replacement cost” of your pet. It does not include damages for pain and suffering of the animal or their family, the loss of companionship, comfort, protection, court costs, reasonable attorney fees, and other reasonable damages resulting from intentional, reckless, or negligent acts of omission. In addition, the refusal of the American Boards of Veterinary Medicine to discipline their colleagues firmly and fairly, results in ongoing violations and veterinary malpractice by repeat offenders and the unnecessary loss of pets’ lives. 

Solution:     The first step is changing the laws is to recognize our domestic companion animals are not property and are sentient beings (feeling, living, conscious, aware, responsive, and reactive). 

This will lay the groundwork for changes in how our companion animals are viewed and treated. Usually when there has been malpractice or negligence it is because of a sub-standard of care given to our pets. We need to raise the bar and assure there is consistently a high standard of care for our pets.  

The concept about the valuelessness of dogs/ cats and other domestic animals with regards to veterinary care are dominant in Illinois law. For that reason, the law does not grant the domesticated companion owners a reasonable amount of compensation when their companion animal is injured or killed at the hands of their trusted veterinarian. 

 

Benefit:    With changed laws, there will be a higher level of accountability and transparency assuring less tragic endings for our companion animal. 

There will be more at stake for the “bad” veterinarians and the insurance companies that protect them. 

The cost of taking our pets to veterinarians has spiked in recent years and pet owners pay thousands of dollars on their pets’ healthcare. Although money will not bring our pet back, the insurance companies that protect the veterinarians will be forced to pay more than what your pet cost you. 

****There is absolutely no law in Illinois to protect our companion animals from veterinarian malpractice or negligence.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reference Materials
Michigan State University Animal Legal and Historical Center

Current Illinois Laws   May not be inclusive list 

• Veterinary reporting law for animal cruelty 
• Dog Fighting (720 I.L.C.S. 5/48-1)
• Facility/courtroom dog law (725 I.L.C.S. 5/106B-10)
• Animal Welfare Act (pet shops, kennels, breeders, etc.) (225 I.L.C.S. 605/1 - 22)
• Police Dog Retirement Act (510 I.L.C.S. 82/1 - 5)
• Police Service Dog Protection Act (510 I.L.C.S. 83/1)
• Research Dogs and Cats Adoption Act (510 I.L.C.S. 93/1 - 10)
• Dogs in restaurants law (65 ILCS 5/11-20-14)
• Animal Control Act (regulates licensing)
• Diseased Animal Act
• Humane Euthanasia in Animal Shelters

 

Companion Animal Issues   

• Animal Euthanasia
• Assistance Animals
• Breed Specific Legislation (BSL)
• Cat Issues
• Commercial Breeders and Puppy Mills
• Dog Bite Laws/Dangerous Dog
• Custody of Pets in Divorce
• Dog Fighting
• Dog Impound Laws
• Dog Leash Laws
• Dog/Pet Number Restrictions
• Emotional Support Animals and Waiver of "No Pets" Rules by Landlords
• Foster Care and Rescue Programs for Companion Animals
• Landlord & Tenant Issues Concerning Dog Bites
• Lost Dogs
• Municipal Ordinances, Generally
• Municipal Ordinances, Emerging Issues
• Pet/Companion Animal Damages
• State and Local Dog Laws
• State Spay and Neuter Laws
• "Swap Meet" Laws
• Wills and Trusts

 

• Brief Summary of Veterinary Malpractice
  Rebecca F. Wisch (2003; updated 2010)
• Brief Summary of Pet/Companion Animal Damages
  Rebecca F. Wisch (2003)

Related articles

• Pets: Property and the Paradigm of Protection , Brooke J. Bearup, 3 J. Animal L. 173 (2007).
• Non-economic Damages in Pet Litigation: The Serious Need to Preserve a Rational Rule , by Victor E. Schwartz and Emily J. Laird, 33 Pepp. L. Rev. 227 (2006).
• Death to Poochy: A Comparison of Historical and Modern Frustrations Faced by Owners of Injured or Killed Pet Dogs, Jason R. Scott, 75 UMKC L. Rev. 569 (Winter, 2006).
• Can the Injured Pet Owner Look to Liability Insurance for Satisfaction of a Judgment? The Coverage Implications of Damages for the Injury or Death of a Companion Animal, Mark Sadler, 11 Animal L. 283 (2005).
• Valuing Companion Animals in Wrongful Death Cases: A Survey of Current Court and Legislative Action and a Suggestion for Valuing Pecuniary Loss of Companionship , Elaine T. Byszewski, 9 Animal L. 215 (2003).
• Fido Seeks Full Membership in the Family: Dismantling the Property Classification of Companion Animals by Statute , Elizabeth Paek, 25 U. Hawai’i L. Rev. 481–524 (2003).
• The Economic Value of Companion Animals:  A Legal and Anthropological Argument for Special Valuation , by Geordie Duckler, 8 Animal L. 199 (2002).
• Valuing Man's and Woman's Best Friend:  The Moral and Legal Status of Companion Animals , by Rebecca Huss, 86 Marq. L. Rev. 47 (Fall, 2002).
• "Man's Best Friend:"  Property or Family Member?  An Examination of the Legal Classification of Companion Animals and Its Impact on Damages Recoverable for Their Wrongful Death or Injury , by William C. Root, 47 Vill. L. Rev. 423 (2002).
• Resolving Confusion in Pet Owner Tort Cases: Recognizing Pets' Anthropomorphic Qualities Under a Property Classification , Lynn A. Epstein, 26 SILULJ 31 (Fall, 2001).
• Anthropomorphic Qualities Under a Property Classification , by Lynn A. Epstein, 26 S. Ill. U. L. J. 31 (2001).

Related cases

• The Illinois Court of Appeals held that pet damages are not limited to nominal damages where the pet has no market value, but may include the actual value to plaintiffs. In this case, damages were established by the $4784 plaintiffs paid for veterinary expenses. The Illinois court relied on the Kansas Court of Appeals reasoning in Burgess v. Shampooch Pet Industries, Inc., 35 Kan.App.2d 458, 463, 131 P.3d 1248, 1252 (2006).
• Table of cases related to damages in pet (companion animal) cases.

Related laws

•  Table of statutes and pending bills related to pet damages or veterinary malpractice.

Related Links

• Veterinary Malpractice Topic Area (Web Center)