Challenges of no pets accommodation

We all remember our most memorable and challenging cases in veterinary practice – those particularly difficult and intricate surgeries, other cases requiring a high level of intellectual skill and detailed investigation to reach unusual diagnoses, and the patients whose lives were saved against all the odds.

However, there are cases I wish I had never experienced that I would like to forget, but continue to haunt me decades later. These are the terrible situations when vulnerable clients were being forced to relinquish their companion animals because of “no pets” in housing rules.

People think of the UK as a nation of animal lovers, with progressive animal welfare laws. However, with regards to companion animals in housing, we are behind the curve, lagging behind many other countries.

In the first of a three-part series, this first article will provide an overview of pets in housing issues, discuss progressive legislative developments and explain why addressing pets in housing issues is the current priority for the Society for Companion Animal Studies (SCAS).

Subsequent articles will illustrate practical steps that we as veterinarians can take to enable people and pets to stay together.

SCAS and the human-animal bond

Over the past 40 years, SCAS has established itself as the leading human-companion animal bond organisation in the UK through:

• providing education
• funding original research
• raising awareness
• publications
• encouraging best practice
• influencing the development of organisations, policies and practices that support the human-companion animal bond

The focus of our work is the human-animal bond, including the benefits that can accrue to individuals, vulnerable groups and for society.

The multidisciplinary nature of SCAS, including veterinarians and other health and social care professionals, creates unique synergies through which some of society’s most pressing problems can be addressed in a “one health, one welfare” approach (Jegatheesan and Ormerod, 2019).

SCAS members have successfully addressed many human-animal bond topics, including:

• the publication of guidelines for the safe introduction of resident and visiting companion animals into a wide range of health, social care and educational establishments
• resources and training in pet loss support
• training practitioners in the health, social care, education and veterinary professions about the human-animal bond, the links (between domestic and animal abuse), animal-assisted interventions, humane education and bond-centred veterinary practice (SCAS, 2019; the International Association of Human-Animal Interaction Organizations [IAHAIO], 2018, 2021).

SCAS members are particularly interested in how the human-animal bond can be applied to help disadvantaged groups and individuals, including older people, people with disabilities, those who are marginalised and people living long-term in institutions (Ormerod et al, 2005).

Our members have introduced programmes throughout the UK that help address the needs of disadvantaged groups. These include:

• hospital visitation programmes such as Pets as Therapy and Therapet
• assistance dog programmes including Canine Partners, Dogs for Good and Hearing Dogs for Deaf People
• pet fostering services such as Paws for Kids and the Pet Fostering Service Scotland
• programmes for the rehabilitation of offenders; for example, Paws for Progress at Polmont Young Offenders Institution
• humane education as in Fostering Compassion
• veterinary community outreach such as Our Special Friends

Most people regard their pets as one of the family. The role of pets in people’s lives has taken on new significance, with closer bonds of attachment. Companion animals have likely become more important due to demographic changes, including families being more dispersed, smaller family size and an increasing number of people living alone (Ormerod, 2008).

The main reason now for having a pet is for companionship, which differs from human companionship in that animals are non-judgemental, will not gossip, offer tactile comfort and are always available. People are also becoming aware of the research demonstrating positive health effects accruing from caring for an animal companion.

The most satisfactory bond relationships develop with animals that are sociable, intelligent and enjoy interacting with humans. A plethora of benefits can arise from caring for the “right” animal. Animals can improve health – especially cardiovascular function – encourage exercise, mitigate against loneliness and depression, and can provide invaluable support through times of crises and transition (Brooks et al, 2018; Kramer et al, 2019; McNicholas et al, 2005).

People with pets typically make 15% fewer GP visits (Siegal, 1990). For the UK, this equates to a saving to the NHS of circa £2.45 billion annually (Hall et al, 2016).

Pets in housing issues

Since its inauguration in 1979, SCAS has raised awareness about the unfairness and the many harmful consequences of “no pet” clauses.

SCAS has:

• held conferences throughout the UK
• given presentations at the House of Commons, House of Lords, Scottish Parliament, in Brussels and at international conferences
• campaigned on television and radio
• responded to government consultations
• engaged with other charities also concerned about these issues

Since 1998, we have informed and supported four private members’ bills on pets in housing – all of which enjoyed cross-party support in the Commons, but did not make the statute book. Very few private members’ bills are successful in changing legislation. However, they serve to raise awareness among parliamentarians.

Currently, only 7% of private landlords in England advertise their rental properties as pet friendly (Battersby, 2021), despite 50% of UK adults having pets and many more keen to adopt a pet.

Fewer landlords now permit pets due to unintended consequences of recent amendments to the Tenant Fees Act, which reduced the protection afforded to landlords for damage by pets by reducing the size of the pet deposit.

Sadly, home buyers can discover after purchase that their properties are affected by a no pet covenant. Many people are, therefore, faced with a stark dilemma – forced to choose between relinquishing their pet or having a home. Many far-reaching harms exist – the extent of which politicians and landlords are unaware.

We witness the distress suffered by our clients losing pets to terminal illness or serious injury. But to lose a healthy pet due to arbitrarily made rules can have an even more devastating impact.

This is an unnecessary loss – a loss that could have been avoided if the UK had legislation similar to that introduced in other countries. This is a loss without closure, as the fate of the pets is usually unknown.

Veterinary practice and animal shelter staff understand the anguish caused when landlords prohibit pets. However, the public, politicians and landlords do not fully realise the impact and scale of this most serious issue – a grave one that is becoming more common.

Faced with the choice of having a home or remaining with an animal companion, some people choose their animals and become homeless. Some are lost to suicide. Be aware those intending suicide may present their pets for euthanasia prior to committing the act.

It is essential we always determine the cause of euthanasia requests and counsel owners if euthanasia is contraindicated/unwarranted. We can ask if clients have suicidal thoughts, and guide them to mental health professionals and Samaritans.

Housing issues are the second highest reason for pet surrender (Battersea, 2021). Some of the animals are euthanised. A nationwide survey in 1998 by Anchor housing trust found older people moving to supported living were surrendering an estimated 140,000 companion animals annually, of which some 38,000 were euthanised. The fate of the rest was unknown. It also takes longer now for animals to be adopted due to the number of homes with pet prohibitions.

Other serious harms exist. These include that those denied animal companionship cannot access the health and social benefits that accrue from the human-animal bond. This includes the social support the animals deliver when people are going through a life crisis. Clients confide in us how animals help them through difficult times. For example:

• “I wouldn’t still be here after my husband died if it wasn’t for this little cat”.
• “The doctors told me I’d never walk again and I’d spend my life in a wheelchair, but Topsy needed her walks, so I forced myself. It took 18 months, but here I am walking”.
• “This wee cat saved my sanity”.
• “Bilbo our boxer supported us through difficult times, taught our family how to cope”.

Unfortunately, many of those who would most benefit from animal companionship are often denied this opportunity due to pets in housing bans.

Some progressive regional and national governments have enacted positive pets in housing legislation (Ormerod et al, 2019). It is anticipated that more governments will follow in recognition of the health and social benefits, and the associated significant fiscal savings. Health and social care professionals, working with veterinarians, can encourage social and private landlords to allow clients to keep a suitable pet.

Researchers from many disciplines and across the globe are documenting a wide range of benefits for physical and mental health across the lifespan accruing from human-animal interactions.

The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry lists many benefits for children, and states that “developing positive feelings about pets can contribute to a child’s self-esteem and self-confidence. Positive relationships with pets can aid in the development of trusting relationships with others. A good relationship with a pet can also help in developing non-verbal communication, compassion, and empathy“.

Of particular note for adult health is the cardioprotective effect, with dog and cat owners enjoying a 30% reduction in the incidence of heart attack and stroke (Qureshi, 2009; Kramer et al, 2019).

Pet ownership has also been associated with lower mortality rates associated with reduced cardiovascular disease (Chowdhury et al, 2017). Despite not all studies having produced positive findings (Wright et al, 2007), evidence for the cardiovascular benefits of pet ownership has reached a sufficient level for the American Heart Association — the US’ oldest and largest voluntary organisation dedicated to fighting heart disease and stroke — to issue supportive statements of the link (Levine et al, 2013).

Companion animals also mitigate against loneliness and this has been evident throughout the COVID pandemic (Ratschen et al, 2020). Companion animals have also been identified as being a strong driver of social capital – that is, the development of safer, friendlier, more trusting neighbourhoods (Wood et al, 2015).

It can be seen that excluding pets from housing not only has a very negative effect on individuals and their companion animals, but also on our society.

Situation in other countries

During my Churchill Fellowship and in subsequent overseas study trips, I have learned much from colleagues who were key to the introduction of local and national legislation to allow pets in housing. This was achieved via a range of drivers. These have included politicians having a sense of fairness, resulting in the provision of equal opportunities. Awareness of the mental anguish being caused to pet owners and that some were being forced into homelessness has also encouraged change.

In other cases, research demonstrating the benefits of pets in housing can effect change. The federal pets in housing bill in the US was enacted following research into pets in housing, which documented benefits for individuals and community, and also through increasing awareness of the harms being caused by forced surrender of older persons’ pets.

Tragedy can also effect change. For example, the Great Hanshin earthquake in Kobe, Japan, in 1995. This resulted in more than 6,000 deaths and more than 40,000 people became homeless – many with pets. The Kobe housing chiefs told me that this forced them to allow pets into housing from which they had previously been banned.

Legal challenges can also be effective – Belgian courts have ruled that blanket “no pet” covenants in leases contravene Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

More recently, progressive, well-informed politicians have been pressing their governments to introduce positive legislation in the light of burgeoning evidence-based research documenting a plethora of health and social benefits that can accrue from pet ownership. These benefits are not just for individuals, but also for communities through the creation of safer neighbourhoods, and to all citizens through fiscal savings.

What about the UK?

The lack of political progress in the UK – a country that takes pride in its animal welfare standards – has been deeply disappointing. However, politicians at local and national level are now showing more understanding of the issues.

The Labour Party issued an animal welfare plan in its 2018 manifesto with pledges to consult with landlords and tenants on allowing tenants to keep pets as default; to work with care home providers and advocate groups to explore the potential for elderly and disabled people who move into care homes to be able to keep their pets; and to improve accessibility to veterinary care for those on low incomes by working with organisations to explore how access to affordable vet care can be expanded.

Also, in 2018, the Scottish Labour Party issued a green paper promoting positive pet policies across all housing types. Former MSP Claudia Beamish led on this issue, stating: “It is becoming clear there is a need to integrate pets into institutions and homes. The failure to accommodate pets in housing is a moral issue for society, not least because of the detrimental impacts enforced pet loss can have on the well-being of both human and animal populations.”

In 2020, the then housing secretary Robert Jenrick outlined plans to revise the Government’s model tenancy agreement (2021). This was rewritten to provide a more positive approach to pets, which was very welcome. However, this is a voluntary agreement, which few landlords use. It has been the experience of SCAS that voluntary agreements do not work. They are often inconsistently applied, threatening to disrupt human-animal bonds, with many negative consequences.

Debbie Rook, a law lecturer at the University of Northumbria and a SCAS member who specialises in animal welfare law and in housing law, stated: “Yes, it is a positive step because the Government are expressly recognising the importance of pets to people and how traumatic it is to have to give up a pet when moving into rental housing. This is good news. However, merely changing the wording in the model tenancy agreement will not do much on its own. Without legislation like that in France and Ontario, many landlords will still include blanket bans on pets.”

In 2021, Andrew Rosindell MP introduced a private member’s bill seeking to allow companion animals in rental accommodation. However, this wasn’t supported by the Government. The Scottish Government (2021) currently has a consultation paper, A New Deal for Tenants, which includes proposals for pet policies. Submissions closed on 15 April.

Beacons of good practice in the UK

Beacons of good practice exist in the UK. Anchor housing trust, the largest not-for-profit provider of sheltered accommodation in England (now merged with Hanover), has always operated a positive pet policy, stating that older people should be able to exercise choice, including whether to have pets.

Wandsworth London Borough Council, in 2000, introduced a positive pet policy across all its housing, including sheltered accommodation and high flats. Principal policy officer Josephine Ross stated fewer pet-related issues existed following pets being allowed than when they were banned, and the animals had created a sense of community; people were happier.

Maidstone Borough Council and Adur and Worthing Councils have both introduced measures to support homeless pet owners.

The next SCAS article will discuss how pets in housing bans affect younger individuals and families. It will examine mental health issues and homelessness, and provide practical advice on how veterinary practices can support pet owners as they seek to acquire or remain in suitable accommodation.

Information will be shared about SCAS collaborations and research into this area, and some new SCAS initiatives that veterinary staff can get involved in. SCAS is collating pets in housing case studies and invites Vet Times readers to share their experiences with us. Have your clients been impacted by pets in housing restrictions? Documenting case studies is important as we seek to demonstrate the need to have protective legislation enacted.