Abstract Background : In Ontario, Canada, intimate partner violence (IPV) shelters often prohibit multispecies families (close social groupings that include humans and nonhuman animals, often cohabitating), creating a significant barrier for women fleeing abuse. This lack of co-sheltering is despite the documented link between concurrent human and animal abuse and the kin-like relationships and strong bonds these women have with companion (CAs), emotional support (ESAs), and service animals (SAs). Methods : This article, through critical animal studies and moral entrepreneurial lens, begins to unpack how the categories of SA, ESA, and CA show up in practice in IPV shelters. Our semi-structured interviews with IPV shelter workers reveal that co-sheltering of CAs is occurring covertly and overtly in the province, though most shelters remain human-only. Results : Noted is how the current SA exception (they must be allowed in-shelter, by law) challenges the exclusion of nonhuman animals from shelters, as well as how successful co-sheltering of CAs in the few co-shelters in this study does the same; ESAs are found to inhabit a grey area of inclusion and purpose. We examine relevant housing, disability, and human rights laws and policies, as they impact how clients living with SAs, ESAs, and CAs access and stay in IPV shelters. Conclusions : We conclude with specific law, policy, and procedural recommendations, including recognizing nonhuman animals not as property but as family members, while naming, recognizing, and funding the Homeless Companion Animal Care Sector (HCACS) as an essential social service, to encourage and support co-sheltering and advocate for a more inclusive and less speciesist approach to emergency sheltering and housing.
Lindsay et al. (Thu,) studied this question.