Article Calling for a Uniform Pet Trust Statute
Pets play an important role in their owners’ lives. Pets can help lower blood pressure, reduce stress, prevent heart disease, lower health care costs, and reduce depression and loneliness. According to the 2011-2012 National Pet Owners Survey, approximately 72.9 million United States households own a pet. These pets are not only cats and dogs but also birds, horses, fish, reptiles, and other small animals. Cats and dogs are the most popular household pets: approximately 38.9 million households include a cat and approximately 46.3 million households include a dog.
The American Pet Products Association estimates that in 2011 pet owners will spend $ 50.84 billion on food, supplies, over-the-counter medicine, veterinary care, live animal purchases, and pet services such as grooming and boarding. This is an estimated $ 22.34 billion increase from just ten years ago, in 2001. Further, pet owners spend approximately $ 270 million per year on pet health insurance, and they expect medical care for their pets that is similar to human medicine. It is no surprise, then, that approximately 88% of pet owners consider their pets to be members of the family. Pet ownership, though, entails more responsibility than just caring for the pet while the owner is alive; pet ownership includes planning for the pet’s care after the owner’s death or incapacitation.
A pet owner may assume that family members will take care of a pet after the owner dies or becomes incapacitated. However, there is no guarantee that family members will want to, or be able to, care for a pet. Over 500,000 pets end up in shelters each year as a result of a pet owner’s death or incapacity. Of the approximately 6 to 8 million pets that end up in shelters every year, between 3 and 4 million are euthanized. Some of the 500,000 pets ending up in shelters as a result of the pet owner’s death or incapacity are bound to be included in the euthanized group. So, it is important for a pet owner to be able to make enforceable plans to ensure that a pet continues to receive care after an owner can no longer look after it. For a pet owner with the financial capability, a pet trust provides assurance that funds will be available for the care of a pet, even after the owner’s death or incapacity.
A pet trust can be as comprehensive or simple as the pet owner wishes. A traditional pet trust gives the pet owner more control over how a pet will be cared for and by whom, but this option requires attorney expertise. On the other hand, a statutory pet trust provides a pet owner with a cheaper and quicker way to fund a pet’s care after the owner’s death or incapacity.
Currently, forty-six states and the District of Columbia have enacted pet trust statutes. Statutory pet trusts are beneficial because they allow courts to fill in gaps when a pet owner dies or becomes incapacitated and has left money for the care of his or her pet, but does not specify, for example, who should care for the pet, how the pet should be cared for, and how money designated for the pet should be spent. Therefore, statutory pet trusts provide a mechanism to encourage responsible pet ownership by allowing owners to fund their pets’ care after the owner’s death or incapacity.
Twenty-one years have passed since the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) introduced the first pet trust statute in section 2-907 of the Uniform Probate Code (UPC). The 1990 version of UPC 2-907 was later amended in 1993. In 2000, the NCCUSL enacted a pet trust statute in the Uniform Trust Code (UTC): UTC 408. Many states have enacted pet trust statutes based verbatim on the language of UPC 2-907 or UTC 408. Other states have gone a step further and revised the language in UPC 2-907 or UTC 408.
This Article analyzes pet trust language from UPC 2-907, UTC 408, and state statutes, and it recommends language to create a new uniform pet trust law that could potentially provide greater protection for animals designated in pet trusts. Part II of this Article discusses the history of the pet trust and the limits that pet owners faced before the advent of the pet trust in the Uniform Codes. Part II continues by discussing the provisions and purposes of the pet trust language in [*5] UPC 2-907 and UTC 408. Part III analyzes state revisions of UPC 2-907 and UTC 408, discusses the reasons for these revisions and their potential benefits, and recommends language to create a new uniform pet trust statute. Part IV concludes this Article, and Part V provides a proposed uniform pet trust statute.