welfare Archives - usatoday24

If the question is whether your neighbors can prohibit you from having a dog, the answer is not in the Animal Welfare Law: it is in Vigo

June 19, 2026 by usatoday24

Can the community of owners of your building prohibit you from having a pet? The answer, as is usual when it comes to legislation and clash of rights, is a huge ‘it depends’. The Horizontal Property Law (LHP) says little about it and the animal welfare standard It even remembers that owners are obliged to keep their dogs, cats and other animals “integrated into the family nucleus.” Now, a sentence dictated in Galicia reminds us that the subject is much more complex and has chiaroscuros. There, in fact, a man has lost the legal battle to live with his poodle. Legal pulse in Galicia. Coexistence in neighborhood communities is not always easy. even less when a dog, cat or any other pet that can cause noise or dirty common areas is added to the equation. In a building in Nigrán (province of Pontevedra) these frictions have led to a legal pulse between the owner of a flat and the rest of his neighbors that has had an unexpected outcome: justice has endorsed that the latter (the board of owners) have the right to prohibit the former from living with their dog. It matters when and how. The sentence Galician, yes, responds to a case with very specific particularities. To understand it, we have to go back to 2010, when the residents of the property unanimously approved, in an ordinary general meeting, to prohibit the presence of any animal on the floors and common areas of the building. They only left one exception: guide dogs. In 2011, that decision was ratified as an internal rule that was incorporated into the community’s statutes, where it remains today. In theory, the pet ban didn’t cause any more problems until a few years ago, when one of the families in the building acquired a poodle. This led to the rest of the neighbors holding an extraordinary general meeting at the end of 2023 to revalidate the 2010 rule and reiterate the veto on pets. The dog’s owner did not like the decision, who went to court in March 2024 for what he considered an “abusive” rule and contrary to the Animal Welfare Law. Crossover of arguments. The Nigrán lawsuit is interesting because it demonstrates the legal intricacies that these types of disputes can have, but it is equally important to understand that the ruling responds to a very specific case. To begin with, there is a key fact that is responsible for highlighting the magistrate herself in her order: the neighbor in disagreement knew “the existence, content and purpose” of the community rule long before acquiring the poodle. What’s more, if the pet ban was approved in 2010, it was partly at the request of his father, who already lived in the property. In short: the affected party was informed of the ban. What did he then claim before the judge? That, in his opinion, the legal context of 2010 is not the same as that of 2024, when he presented his complaint. And it is not, he insists, because in September 2023 The Animal Welfare Law (LBA) came into force, a rule that recognizes pets as “sentient” beings. Did you convince the magistrate? No. Perhaps the legislation on pets is different today than in 2010, but the Vigo judge in charge of the lawsuit has seen it clearly: The LBA does not overthrow the board’s agreement. “It does not establish an absolute and unlimited right to own pets nor does it automatically repeal any community provision that regulates or limits said tendency.” “It does not eliminate the possibility of establishing legitimate limitations when they respond to reasons of coexistence, health or general interest,” he emphasizes. What exactly does the LBA say? The rule, which came into force three years ago, points out that owners of pets must “keep them integrated into the family nucleus, whenever possible due to their species, in good health and hygiene”, although it also specifies that when this is not feasible (due to their size or species) their caregivers must find them “appropriate accommodation”. He same article of the LBA makes it clear in any case that pet owners are obliged to adopt “the necessary measures” so that they do not cause “annoyance, danger, threats or damage” to other people, animals or property, which includes, among other things, preventing them from soiling public spaces. And the Horizontal Property Law? When it comes to coexistence and blocks of neighbors, the reference Bible is another norm, something older: the Horizontal Property Law (LPH). It does not address the issue of pets directly, but it does provide a series of important guidelines. The main one appears in article 7.2, which reminds that neither the owner of an apartment nor its tenants, if any, can carry out “activities prohibited in the statutes, harmful to the property or that contravene the general provisions on annoying, unhealthy, harmful, dangerous or illicit activities.” In cases like this it can end in trial. The value of the statutes. The ruling of the Vigo court recalls the weight of the decisions adopted in neighborhood associations, the statutes and the importance of the rules of coexistence being duly registered in the Property Registry. Also the nuance of whether the veto on pets is before or after a neighbor gets one and whether or not he knows this in advance. In any case the Galician magistrate slide An important fact: the LBA “does not establish an unrestricted right to the presence of animals anywhere.” Images | Charles Puaud (Unsplash) and Zhen Yao (Unsplash) In Xataka | Your cat asks you to cuddle and then bites you. It’s not evil, it’s that you don’t understand its signs

The Animal Welfare Law is clear about whether dogs can enter bars. And also about the fine for breaking the rule

June 13, 2026 by usatoday24

To humans (we know since recently) we like to surround ourselves with pets since long before we we started cultivating the land or the invention of writing. However, they have never played such a relevant role in our homes. The first official statistics On the subject, he estimates that in Spain they live 15 million of pets, more than the entire population of the country under 30 years of age. Only the dogs add up to 7.5. With such a deployment it is normal that more and more people count on them when planning travel or go to a bar. The big question is… Can they pass? Are pets allowed? If you go to Google and type “pets”, “restaurants” and “access” you will find a good handful of publications that talk about whether or not pets can access bars, restaurants, hotels and (in general) private businesses. It stands to reason. First, because in Spain there are more and more pets and every time they are more incorporated in our daily lives. Second, because with the thermometer fooling around with the 30th In much of the country and with clear skies, people increasingly want to make plans outside, stay in a hotel on the beach or go for a drink at a bar. And what is the answer? Depends. As is usually the case when we talk about pets, the ‘bible’ we must turn to in search of answers is the Law 7/2023 on March 28. Said like this, it may not sound familiar to you, but its most popular name surely does: the Animal Welfare Law (LBA), which began to be applied a long time ago. three years. In this specific case we are interested in your article 29which regulates “access with pets to means of transportation, establishments and public spaces.” There the regulatory framework is established and a very simple idea is put forward: as a general rule, pets can enter bars, restaurants and other businesses where food is served, unless otherwise stated. Now, in each case what both the host and the owner of the animal do will greatly influence, so this guideline does not always have to be followed. What does it say about the hoteliers? That they have the right to decide whether or not pets enter their businesses, although if they decide to do the latter and close the doors to them, they must make it very clear from the beginning. And in writing. Basically, Law 07/2023 states that if the owner of a restaurant chooses to ban pets, he must record his decision, warning it on the door in a perfectly visible way. The objective: to avoid surprises for clients or that, once they are seated with their dog, they are asked to leave the premises. What exactly does the law say? The indication that interests us is in the second point of the article 29. And says: “Public and private establishments, hotel accommodations, restaurants, bars and in general any others in which drinks and food are consumed, may facilitate the entry of pets that do not constitute a risk to people, other animals and things, to areas not intended for the preparation, storage or handling of food, without prejudice to the provisions of public health regulations, or municipal ordinances or specific regulations.” “If the entry and stay of the animal is not admitted, they must show a badge indicating this, visible from the outside of the establishment”. Does only the hotelier influence? No. From the LBA comes off that the dog owner also has rights and obligations and that even the latter must comply with certain rules. For example, the previous paragraph emphasizes that the doors of the premises will be open to pets “that do not constitute a risk to people, other animals and things.” And later, in point 5, the same article of the LBA emphasizes that the owners also have responsibilities: “People responsible for pets who can access the transport and establishments and places indicated in the previous sections must take the animal in accordance with the hygienic-sanitary conditions and respecting the security measures determined by the establishment or means of transport itself, as well as specific sectoral legislation.”. What happens in other places? The LBA not only regulates access to restaurants, bars and accommodation. the same article (29) also clarifies that, in general, public and private transport services must “facilitate” the entry of pets as long as they do not represent a threat. However, the ‘photo’ is not the same in all services. Taxi drivers or platforms such as Uber or Cabify can decide “at their discretion” whether or not to accept pets, while the law states that railway, shipping and airline operators must “adopt the necessary measures to guarantee the transportation of animals (…) as long as they are carried out under the access conditions established by each operator, respecting the hygienic-sanitary and safety conditions required by law.” Does it say anything else? Yes. The LBA make it clear also that shelters, refuges, care centers and other places dedicated to caring for people in a vulnerable situation must “make it easier” for their users to access their pets, if they have them. If for whatever reason that is not possible, the same centers must “promote agreements with animal protection entities or shelter projects” so that the pet is not left unattended. It is a fundamental measure to prevent people (homeless people, sick people or victims of abuse, for example) from avoiding going to shelters or residences just so as not to leave their pets helpless. And public buildings? The law points out also that, “unless expressly prohibited,” which must be clearly signposted on the outside of buildings, “pets will be allowed access to public buildings and facilities.” Everything stated in the previous points, of course, does not apply in the case of assistance dogs (for example, those used by the blind) and those that are part of the Armed Forces or State Security Corps. In those cases … Read more

In Alicante, the Animal Welfare Law is causing demonstrations for a very specific thing: feline colonies

May 19, 2026 by usatoday24

Despite the rain and the cold and the fact that the call was made Sunday at noona few weeks ago around 200 people They went out on the street in Alicante, with banners and a megaphoneto demand, among other things, the resignation of the city’s mayor. They did not mobilize the housing, the increase in price from the shopping cart, unemployment, immigrationcorruption or any of the other issues that according to the CIS It keeps the Spaniards awake at night. What led them to complain are the feline colonies from Alicante. Or rather, how the City Council is managing them despite the fact that since 2023 the Animal Welfare Law (and the autonomous) clearly states what your responsibilities are. What has happened? April 12 around 200 people They met on the Explanada de España, on the seafront of Alicante, to demand that the City Council change its management policy for feline colonies. Between messages such as “cats are unprotected” or “not looking is abandoning,” the protesters denounced what they consider a passive attitude on the part of the City Council, responsible for the street colonies. “He has done absolutely nothing,” regretted in statements to the newspaper Information Antonio Ripoll, president of the Felinos Lo Morant association. The group assures that, despite their insistence on the situation of the colonies, from the Consistory they have only received “excuses” and answers that they interpret as “a way of delaying things.” One of the triggers for the April 12 demonstration came to early marchwhen the Colonias Felinas Alicante (Acofal) association denounced that the municipal cleaning services had removed the cat houses installed in the Parque de la Ereta, which left their colony without shelter or food. “Scattered and disoriented”. What happened in Ereta even led PACMA to launch a statement in which it denounces “the repeated withdrawal” of food, water and shelters in the area, which affects “more than one hundred cats registered”, and warns the City Council of “a possible violation of regional and state animal protection legislation.” “It is impossible to move the cats from the Ereta Park, which occupies the entire slope of the mountain that surrounds the Santa Bárbara Castle,” underlines the collective: “The withdrawal of food, water and shelter leaves the animals unprotected, dispersed and disoriented, especially in episodes of rain.” What does the LBA have to do with it? Both in the messages of the animal associations and in that of PACMA it is repeated a fundamental idea: If the focus is on the City Council it is because for a few years the Animal Welfare Law (LBA) clearly states that local administration plays a key role in the management and care of feline colonies. In fact, PACMA warns that what happened in Ereta could “constitute a violation” of state regulations, the Law 7/2023but also the autonomous range, the 2/2023. “They oblige public administrations to guarantee the correct management and protection of feline colonies,” argues the animalist party. The message is very similar to the one sent from the associative world. Ripoll, for example, matches in which the City Council “is systematically failing to comply with the animal welfare law.” Even they point out that colonies often depend on caregivers who manage them by investing their own resources and time, something they attribute to the lack of “budget and adequate technical personnel” in the animal protection office. Chapter VI. Article 39. The truth is that the legislation is very clear on this matter. The state law 7/2023 of protection of the rights and well-being of animals details in its chapter IV, article 38, the role of city councils: “In the absence of other provisions in regional legislation and respecting the scope of competence established by current legislation, it is up to local entities to manage community cats, for which purposes they must develop Feline Colony Management Programs.” Even precise What minimum requirements should these management plans cover: encourage citizen collaboration, launch training and information campaigns, and establish population control plans. Also the care of animals. In fact, the rule makes it clear that it must be the local entity that assumes “responsibility for health care”, using registered veterinarians to do so, and also establishes protocols for treating cat colonies. Does the law say more? Yes. It puts a few homework extra to city councils (for example, including sterilizations in population control plans), specifies the roles of regional administrations and citizens and finally highlights certain actions that are categorically “prohibited” in the colonies. These include sacrificing cats with very specific exceptions, taking specimens from colonies (and therefore not used to being among humans and confined) to “animal protection centers” and exchanging animals from one colony to another. The law too precise that cats can only be removed from their communities in certain cases. In case there were any doubts Valencian law It also emphasizes that the town councils, hand in hand with animal associations and veterinarians, “will carry out comprehensive management” of the colonies in their municipalities. And that includes CER (Capture, Sterilization and Recovery) programs, feeding, shelter, supervision and health treatment for the felines. “Community cats will be identified with a microchip under the ownership of the local administration.” Beyond Alicante. Alicante is not the only municipality in which the application of the LBA and its obligations has generated friction with the town councils. In Torres Torres (Valencian Community) the volunteers who take care of the feline colonies recently threatened also with going to the Ombudsman in the face of what they consider the “inaction of the city council” and at the end of 2025 PACMA denounced that the Donostia City Council was violating Law 7/2023 in a neighborhood of the city. Similar situations have been experienced in Sangunt (Valencian Community) or Saint Joseph (Ibiza). “Volunteer veterinarians”. Two years ago, shortly after the approval of the LBA, the Alicante College of Veterinarians even released a statement to remember two key ideas about caring for cat colonies. The first is that “population and health control” depends on … Read more

Finland has realized that its welfare state is not enough to avoid the birth crisis. Now look for how to stop it

November 4, 2025 by usatoday24

The world has been looking at the Nordic countries for decades with a mixture of admiration and envy for their model of social welfare. A clear example is Finland, a benchmark in education, aids to motherhood and spent in social benefits. None of this, however, has prevented him from seeing how his birth rate it contracts little by little. In fact, the fall has been so forceful since 2010 and its rate is at such low levels that the Government has decided to hands to work. Now you have a diagnosis… and a formula with 20 ingredients. What does the data say? That Finland has a birth problem. A particularly complex one. The statistical basis The World Bank shows that its birth rate has plummeted over the last six decades, going from 2.7 during the baby boom to 1.3 in 2023. The decline was particularly sharp between the 1960s and 1970s, followed an oscillating curve until the last decade and accelerated again towards 2010. latest data of Macrotrends show a slight recovery, but the rate still remains far from past values. Why is it important? Because it shows that Finland has a problem, one recognized without half measures by the Government itself. “Finland’s birth rate has been declining rapidly over the past 15 years. In 2024 the country’s total fertility rate became as low as 1.25,” recognized last March the Ministry of Social Affairs, which admits that although Finland is not the only country dealing with this challenge, the collapse there has been “exceptionally rapid” in the last decade and a half and threatens to become an economic and social challenge. “Finland’s rate has fallen to a historic low and the decline has been more pronounced than in the other Nordic countries. There is a considerable gap between the ideal number and the actual average number of children. It is essential to find solutions to reduce the gap,” advocated in spring the Minister of Social Security, Sanni Grahm-Laasonen. In 2023 the indicators of the neighbors Norway and Sweden there were around 1.4 children on average per woman, also far from the replacement rate that allows countries to stay away from immigration. Why is the birth rate falling? That’s the million dollar question. And the one that the Finnish authorities did a while ago. To answer it in 2024 the Government commissioned a report which had to clarify the factors that hinder the country’s demographic engine and (just as important) explore possible solutions. The task was relevant because, as the Executive assures, in Finland there is “a big difference” between the number of children that couples want to have and those they have. “Studies show that Finnish family policy has favored both well-being and birth rates and continues to play an important role. However, the current decline is mainly due to the fall in the number of first births and the increase in the proportion of childless people,” reflect Professor Anna Rotkirch, from Väestöliitto (the Finnish Family Federation), one of the experts who participated in the preparation of the birth report. Did you identify the causes? Yes. And no. The Government quote somebut he also recognizes that there is no “clear reason” that alone explains the decline in birth rates. “Therefore there are no easy solutions to stop it,” the Ministry of Health resigns itself before listing some factors that come into play, such as cultural changes, unstable relationships, health, the situation of the labor market and income or the problems of reconciling professional life and parenting. The NPR organization was recently one step further and interviewed experts and young Finns to find out how they approached parenthood. Poa Pohjola and Wilhelm Bomberg, aged 38 and 35, are the first ones he cites in his analysis: the couple has been together for about three years and last July they had their first baby, although Pohjola admits that not so long ago he believed he would never have children. “It seemed impossible to me,” the woman confesses. His case is paradigmatic because it agrees with a phenomenon that Finnish researchers have observed and can be extended to many other countries, including Spain: delayed maternity and the increase in people who directly choose not to have children. In the case of Finland this has led to a fertility rate slightly lower to that of the EU average and nations such as Iceland, Denmark, Sweden or Norway. Does it matter beyond Finland? Yes. And it matters because Finland offers a particularly interesting case study. As remember Liisa Siika-ahofrom the working group of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, “in Finland benefits and services for families are relatively good.” In fact the Nordic countries they usually stand out precisely because of the facilities they provide for having offspring. Specifically Finland does it in aspects such as incentives, education and paid leave. “We can no longer claim that our good family policies explain the good fertility of the Nordic countries,” points out to NPR Annelie Miettinen, from the state agency Kela. “What baffles researchers is how this can be true, because all of these countries are relatively good at offering family support,” Miettinen said, “but there are really no good explanations for today’s very low fertility rates.” Just as it happens in Spain if the country is managing to weather the demographic storm is basically thanks to the immigration flow. How to solve it? A few months ago the Government made public a report on the topic that includes twenty proposals focused on the family and birth rate, all based on the premise that the commitment to early childhood education, family leave and economic support will boost birth rates. Until it is confirmed, the Health Department itself remains cautious. “In Finland the benefits and services for families are relatively good. This means that there are no areas where simple changes can be made,” takes on Sikka-aho. “However, all systems require maintenance and that is what many of our proposals address. It is unlikely that … Read more

From Europe its “welfare state” was envied. But it is increasingly difficult to pay, and France is the best example

October 8, 2025 by usatoday24

Europa presumed for decades of having found the perfect formula to combine economic prosperity with social justice: hospitals open to all, affordable universities and worthy retirements after a work life. That pact between generations, envied on the other side of the Atlantic, became the identity mark of the continent. And yet They begin to become visible. And one of its banners wobbles: France. A price too high. I told this week The Washington Post. Europe lives a historical crossroads: the social model that guaranteed universal health, accessible education and decent retirements begins to show cracks that can no longer be hidden. France It is the epicenter of that tension. There, the runaled public debt, political paralysis and succession of Fallen prime ministers In just fifteen months they show deep wear. The State Spend more than any other country rich in social protection, but that expense seems unsustainable in a context of low growth and growing polarization. The recent resignation From Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu, unable to agre as inalienable. Model under generational pressure. There are more, since, in France, new generations feel that they inherit a system that they cannot sustain. He Post counted Cases of young people such as Anastasia Blay, who depend on intermittent subsidies to survive, convinced that they should not load with the mistakes of the past or give up a decent life. In front of them, retirees like Christine Boucau-Podorski They defend The pensions achieved after decades of hard work and are willing to limited sacrifices, but not losing acquired rights. This struggle between young and old reflects the intergenerational shock that crosses To all of Europe: Who pays the invoice, what benefits should be preserved and to what extent intergenerational solidarity can continue to be the base of the European social contract. Germany and France Wobm up. Fragility is not limited to France. Germany, the other great Historical support of the European Union, faces industrial recessiondeterioration of infrastructure and a government that admits since “the current system is unassumable.” Political tensions are intense, with the social democratic opposition refusing to accept drastic cuts and the extreme right by capitalizing citizen discomfort. Meanwhile, the Ultras games grow On both sides of the rhine fed by social disenchantment and the feeling of stagnation. The paradox is that Italy or Spainonce considered weak links, they exhibit today greater stability macroeconomic than European locomotives. The center, formerly balancing, has become the area of greatest uncertainty, which weakens the European project at a time of growing external threats. The southern paradox. It is quite striking that countries historically seen as fragile, such as Spain and Italy, today appear (either They seem) as relatively more stable. Italy, after decades of political instability, lives its strongest period with a controversial government that has even achieved An improvement of the credit rating. Spain, meanwhile, has reduced by half unemployment in the last decade and maintains growth above the European average, despite spend less on well -being than France or Germany. This roles investment shows to what extent the clichés of the southern Europe have been exceeded: the Mediterranean nations, previously accused of fiscal laxity, seem to have learned to navigate austerity, while “the rich north” It sinks in its own budgetary rigidity. The perfect storm. The challenge is aggravated by external factors that multiply internal pressures. The Russian Invasion of Ukraine pushes to increase the defense expensejust when public coffers They are already exhausted. China Compete fiercely With European industry, from electric cars to nuclear energy, eroding the international position of German and French manufactures. And the United States, far from offering security, Add uncertainty with a president who changes position in a matter of days and threatens tariffs to his own allies. Europe must decide If prioritize shield Your welfare state, to reorient resources towards military security or find a balance that does not sacrifice either global competitiveness or social cohesion. The great unknown. Experts Like Andreas Eisl They argue that the dilemma is first of all politician: it is not if Europe can maintain its social model, but to what extent it wants to do it and what sacrifices is willing to assume. Attempts to apply cuts, such as 44,000 million euros proposed in the budget that demolished Prime Minister François Bayrou, have caused A massive rejection on the street and fed polarization. However, mathematics is relentless: with a aging populationa Birth in Declive and one Increasing resistance To immigration, the fiscal base narrows while the needs increase. Europe may not be on the verge of a Greek collapse, or it does not seem, but the sustainability of its “way of life” indicates that it has ceased to be An unquestionable dogma. And that is, perhaps, the true battle of the future: if the old continent manages to reinvent his social contract without dynamiting him in the process. Image | Pexels, Martin Greslou In Xataka | Spain has a big problem with the generational relief of the labor market: 3.5 million young workers are missing In Xataka | Birth in Poland is a disaster and hotels have had an idea: money for those who conceive in a stay

Log In

Sign In

Forgot password?

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections