Response to interpellation 2024/25:370 on violence against animals as part of men's violence against women
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns violence against animals as part of violence against women. L advocates that violence against animals is a part of psychological violence 1 and that perpetrators of violence use animals for coercion 1. L argues that more protected housing can accommodate pets 2 and highlights the Västmanland model as an example of good work 3. L wants the leaving program to break down barriers to leaving violent relationships 3. S argues that society has not done enough 4 and advocates that the police or animal welfare inspectors can directly relocate animals 4 5. S wants the law to attribute higher values to animals as family members 4 5 and that 100 percent of protected housing should be able to accommodate pets 6 5. S wants animals to remain with the parent with the children during property division 5. L believes that the County Administrative Board should consider the context and risks when taking in neglected animals 7.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! Gustaf Lantz has asked me if I and the government intend to take any measures to make it more difficult for perpetrators of violence to use pets as a means of violence against a current or former partner.
I would like to start by thanking Gustaf Lantz for his commitment and for the opportunity to discuss a dimension of violence in close relationships that is often not noticed.
Violence in close relationships is a serious societal problem, and it occurs that violence against, or threats to harm, a pet in the victim's surroundings is exercised in parallel with, or as part of, violence in close relationships. Violence directed against a pet can be punishable. Even threats to harm a pet, or coercion combined with such a threat, can be punishable.
The National Board of Health and Welfare has been tasked by the government to support the implementation within health and social care of the national strategy to prevent and combat men's violence against women. The strategy covers all forms of physical, psychological, and sexual violence and threats of violence. The concept of psychological violence also includes material violence, where violence against animals can constitute a part. The assignment includes developing, updating, and implementing knowledge support on violence in close relationships within, among other places, social services.
In the Swedish Socialstyrelsen's educational material on violence in close relationships aimed at health and medical care and social services, it is highlighted that there is a connection between violence against animals and violence within the family. The material states that perpetrators of violence who subject animals to violence often use more severe and dangerous violence compared to perpetrators who do not usually use violence against animals. If a perpetrator directs violence toward an animal, there are reasons to believe that the violence against the victim is also about to escalate. The educational material contains examples of questions that can be asked to increase the detection of violence. These include questions about whether a close person has threatened to harm a pet.
Several of the county administrative boards have also produced information materials on violence against animals and violence in close relationships, including references to support functions such as women's shelters that can accept animals. The county administrative boards also train staff who work with animal welfare on the importance of considering issues regarding violence in close relationships and violence against children during animal welfare inspections.
Furthermore, I would like to mention that in the European Parliament and Council directive on combating violence against women and domestic violence, which was adopted in May 2024, it is stated in a recital (point 39) that when assessing the victim's protection and support needs, the primary objective should be to ensure the victim's safety and offer specially adapted support by, among other things, taking into account the victim's individual circumstances. Examples of circumstances that require special attention can be the use of companion animals to exert pressure on the victim. The directive shall be transposed in the Member States by June 2027.
In August 2022, a memorandum was submitted with proposals on how the criminal law protection against psychological violence can be strengthened, where, for example, threats or coercion linked to harming or otherwise neglecting a pet can constitute part of the violence. Several referral bodies have had views on the bill's compatibility with the requirements of the principle of legality regarding clarity and predictability. It is therefore important that the proposal is analyzed carefully. I do not wish to anticipate the result of that process other than by again emphasizing that the fundamental question of women's and men's equal right to safety and freedom from both physical and psychological violence is extremely urgent.
Gustaf Lantz (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you very much for the answer, Minister!
In my role as a member of the Committee on Social Affairs, I have had the privilege of meeting very many people who work on the front line in the fight against men's violence against women and who take care of the women who have suffered. I surprisingly often hear this question raised by women's shelters, healthcare, and people within social services. This is somewhat surprising to me, as I have not worked as much with these issues before.
Something that also surprises me is that the public debate has been so little characterized by this violence, which is a very clear example of men's violence against women. Already in 2004, Carin Holmberg could state in her research that 66 out of 87 patrol officers had experience of women not leaving an abusive man because they felt worried for an animal's safety. But despite the fact that the problem has been known for a long time, we can now state that society has not done enough.
This question is ultimately about life and death. If a woman does not leave a violent man, we know what it can lead to. This happens month after month and year after year. On average, 14 women die every year due to violence from a partner or former partner.
I think the answer I have received is very detailed. A great deal is being done regarding knowledge gathering and information, but also by looking at how one can obtain better criminal law protection. My question, however, was more focused on what we can do to make it harder for this to happen – a more preventive perspective. I am thinking that the police or animal welfare inspectors could directly relocate an animal in the event of a risk of violence or if there is a threat to the animal, so that this situation cannot arise.
Another thing that I believe is important is to ensure that protected housing can accept animals and that the government is active in creating more places in protected housing where animals are also welcome. This is something I have also noted when I have spoken with women's shelters; it is something that is experienced as a problem.
Another thing is how we view animals in Swedish law. They are one thing, in a legal sense. But I want to assert that an animal is not like a chair, a painting, or a car; rather, an animal is regarded by many as a family member and can play a very important role when a child witnesses violence or lives in a violent environment. The animal becomes a point of safety in a chaotic situation. Therefore, I think it is important that the law also keeps up with the human relationship to the animal and attributes other values to the animal legally as well.
One could imagine a general rule that an animal in a division of property should go to the parent who also has custody and visitation rights with the child, so that one does not separate the animal and the child. This is something that could be looked at when reviewing the whole.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! I want to begin by repeating what I said in my opening remarks: I truly appreciate that we are discussing this issue, because I share the interpellant's view. This is an issue that has been raised too little in this context.
Madam Speaker! I thought I would take the opportunity to tell a little about my experiences from my job as a prosecutor, when I have worked with just violence in close relationships. My perception is that there are different categories of perpetrators in this context. There are perpetrators whose violence is linked to an abuse of alcohol or drugs. There are perpetrators whose violence is linked to mental illness and who perhaps express that they want to harm both themselves and people in their surroundings. There is violence within a honor context, and there is violence among perpetrators with different forms of personality disorders, often empathy disorders and disorders with various narcissistic elements.
I have seen in my role as a prosecutor - where I have also seen that animals play a part in the whole - when it concerns perpetrators with personality disorders that the vulnerability of animals and the vulnerability that arises due to the emotional connections between crime victims, children, and animals becomes something that precisely these perpetrators may have a particular propensity to exploit. I mean that it is also here that there is the greatest reason for concern, because this is the category that I perceive as most dangerous. It is the category where we can sometimes see sadistic violence and violence that goes beyond what should be possible to subject another human being to. In this context, I think it is very important to understand the role of animals, especially in the situation of the crime victims.
I note that the interpellator mentions several measures regarding the legal status of animals. This is something that largely falls outside my ministerial role, but which I absolutely take with me, as I believe we need to raise this issue in a better way than we have done so far.
What I can state as something I see as very positive is what we see if we look at sheltered housing. In the Swedish Social Board's mappings, we see that the number of sheltered housings that can accept animals has increased. In 2024, it was 75 percent of the sheltered housings that could accept accompanying pets, compared to 57 percent in 2019. There we have, therefore, seen a positive development, and I believe that is a part of this work that is incredibly important to enable more people to leave destructive relationships and get a life in freedom.
Gustaf Lantz (S)
Madam Speaker! I share the Minister's view that the motives for men's violence against women are very different depending on who the perpetrator is. I have personal experience from having worked at the court and also within the Prison and Probation Service. I was struck by that one could sit with two crimes against women's peace one after the other with completely different characters in the negotiations. In one case, it could be about a young person with ADHD who had very great difficulty controlling their aggression and also their behavior in the courtroom, while in the other case, it could involve an outspoken sadist who showed no remorse whatsoever and where the problem was completely different.
I also believe that it is in the latter case, where it concerns deliberate, cold-blooded, sadistic violence directed at one's own family through violence against an animal, that the great danger lies. Therefore, I believe it is important with a preventive measure – there should not even be a possibility to perpetrate this violence – rather than with punishment in hindsight. One must ensure that the animal can be moved when the family has moved and does not remain as an extension and an opportunity to perpetrate violence. I believe that is the path that must be taken. I believe that one must see the animal not as just any thing but as a family member who can also happen to be subjected to the violence that can affect women and children.
Who can be against the position that I and the Minister of Justice take, that this is an important issue? I had a debate article in Expressen about this together with two colleagues. Guess what happened? Yes, the storm of hate and mockery began already in the comment section. I was a bit taken aback and surprised that there are people who, even outwardly, completely openly and shamelessly in a comment section, belittle, humiliate and mock the crime victims who have suffered this horrific violence.
We have a common task, all decent forces in society, to tackle these issues. It feels very urgent.
It was positive to hear that the proportion of shelters that can accept pets has increased. I am very happy to hear that. But unfortunately, there are still shelters that have to say no, and then this situation can continue to occur. We should not be satisfied until 100 percent of the women who have animals and are exposed to threats can take their animals with them. It is only then we can consider the issue to be resolved.
It is very good that the government is responsive. I believe there may be reason to press further on that part.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! Let me begin by saying that what the interpellator tells us regarding the comment section of the debate article is incredibly regrettable.
More is needed, but things that are very good are already being done. I believe we need to try to see how we can spread them more.
An example of good things being done is the County Administrative Board in Västmanland, where they have worked with this issue within the framework of a project called Animals and Violence. They have done this since 2012. It is a piece of work called the Västmanland Model. It was a project that started in connection with a case where a woman was murdered when she could not take her animals with her to a protected residence and did not want to abandon them. There are other such examples. That makes it incredibly distasteful with the mocking comments in your article.
In the project, there are things and items that have been developed. There is a collaboration with, among others, the police, the social emergency service (socialjouren), and various associations in the county, including an association called VOOV, Veterinär omtanke om våldsutsatta. It is a non-profit organization that provides temporary foster homes for animals during the time the owner is in a protected residence. It is an organization that, for example, Roks and Unizon also refer to in their work.
As part of the project, there is also a checklist where, among other things, it states that social workers must always ask women who are victims of violence if there are animals in the home and if the animals need to be taken care of. If there are animals and one meets children, one should ask how the animal is doing. If a child expresses concern regarding this, it is something that must be taken very seriously. There are more good points in the checklist, I should say. I truly believe that there are things that can be done better.
Let us lift our gaze and look at the problem area as a whole. Shortly before the summer, the Government presented an action program with 132 points to prevent and combat men's violence against women, violence in close relationships, honor-related violence and oppression, and human trafficking and prostitution. This action program includes a so-called "leave-program," where we have, among other things, tasked Socialstyrelsen to find a coordinated support chain for those affected by violence. The leave-program aims largely to break down the obstacles that exist today when it comes to leaving relationships where one is affected by violence.
I hope that the leave-program will make a big difference in the work, but of course, we need to continue to identify factors that cause people to stay in violent relationships. This is a very important measure for us to be able to bring down the dreadful figures - it is an average of 14 women every year who are murdered by a partner or a former partner.
Gustaf Lantz (S)
Madam Speaker! I am very pleased that we can discuss this issue today and that we are giving it attention. It is one of the keys to truly reducing the lethal violence against women.
It may seem like a small issue, but only if one has not met the people who work with these matters at the very front line - people who are involved in women's shelters or work within healthcare or social services. It is an extremely urgent issue.
We must have more knowledge about this. There is already research, but the knowledge must be spread. But we must also take action. I think the most important thing is to ensure that the perpetrators do not have the opportunity to exercise their violence against either the animals, the women, or the children. In that case, I think that police or animal welfare inspectors should be given the legal right to immediately move an animal when there is a risk of violence.
In the place where the women and children have moved, space must also be prepared for the animal, which is often seen as a family member. For this to be effective, the protected housing must also be able to accommodate the animals, so that they can live with the family that has moved.
Furthermore, I think it is high time that we stop viewing animals as just any object in the law. It is a cold approach to animals. Animals are often family members and should be treated as such. I think the starting point should be that the animals in a division of property and divorce should end up with the parent who also has the children, because animals and children have a very special relationship. Animals have a very important role to play for children, especially for those who have experienced tough things.
I would like to thank you for a very constructive and good conversation in the chamber today.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! When it comes to the ability to house animals, it is the County Administrative Board that is today the authority that controls that the animal welfare legislation is followed. There, decisions can be made, among other things, to take into custody neglected animals. I believe it is important that in that work, one also sees this context and the risks that may exist in it.
I also want to thank you for a very constructive debate on a subject that, of course, deserves significantly more attention than it has received so far. Many thanks!
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.