Pet Prenups: Does Your Relationship Need Poodle Protection?

When you think about getting a pet with your partner, perhaps you should also give some thought to a poodle pre-nup, with a cat claws.

SORRY. I couldn't resist.

But in all seriousness, when a relationship breaks down, childless couples don't always get away scot-free.

They may think they've avoided alimony payments and the fight for access, but if you've both lavished love on your pooch for years and now need him to break up your fights, you're in for a sticky battle.

And the desire to keep in contact with a much-loved dog or cat (or any other animal with a longer life expectancy than your relationship) can force couples who should go their separate ways, to continue interacting, however hard that makes it to move on.

Research by Dogs Trust found that a fifth of separating couples found deciding who gets the dog was ‘as stressful’ as who gets the children. Charming!

A friend of mine is still regularly delivering their collie to his ex wife's house so she can play with her for a few hours, despite the fact that said ex was the one to run off with a barman.

He also had to rehome The Cat From Hell with no help from his former other half.

And in the sped up life world of celeb-land it's quite the problem, with famous couples buying pets willy nilly before they've even met the parents.

Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattison hit difficulties as their relationship broke down. Initially they agreed to share custody but R-Patz got himself into hot water with his ex when he left the pups with friends while filming in Canada.

And when the Cheryl/Ashley Cole partnership came to an end, Cheryl insisted she get sole custody of the pair's two Chihuahuas.

For cases such as these, animal charity Blue Cross has created a 'pet pre-nup', a prenuptial agreement that clearly decides who the pet really belongs to and who gets to keep it should the relationship end.

It sounds like a great idea but whether it will be legally binding is uncertain.

Barrister Simon Rowbotham said on the BBC:

"Some of it would be enforceable in a court potentially but then it's a bit of a grey area.

"At the moment pets do get discussed in court but they tend to be bigger animals with financial implications behind them.

"The Blue Cross plan is more looking at everyday couples and it’s the emotional attachment to the pet rather than the financial, but whether or not you can protect yourself in the future is difficult to say."

Even if it's not written in the law, talking through what would happen to the pets in your relationship and getting it all down on paper is probably a good idea.

Even in house shares, if a pet comes into your lives and you share costs and responsibilities for it, you still decide who has ultimate ownership, don't you? Who has to pay its extortionate gas bill and who gets to take it with them when said vet's bill means they can't afford the rent anymore.

Rowbotham added: “Some people think it’s a slightly pessimistic approach to a relationship but actually some people would say that when you’re still together and when you’re getting on, it’s probably the best time to decide what happens.

"So this is a logical extension to what’s already happening.

“In America animal pre nups are not unusual.”

Anyone for a pre pup?

[Are these police puppies the cutest things you've ever seen?]