20.04.26
When someone harms an animal, it is rarely an isolated act. In many cases, it is a warning sign of wider abuse.
In recent years, there’s been growing awareness that animal cruelty is a warning sign of other abuse in a relationship, family or community. Pets are threatened, harmed or killed as a way to control, intimidate and silence victims. Animal abuse is often part of a wider pattern of coercion and violence.
Holly’s Law aims to make sure those warning signs are no longer ignored.
The story behind Holly’s Law
Holly’s Law was launched by Annette Bramley after the tragic murder of her daughter Holly in 2023.
Before Holly was killed, her abuser had already shown deeply disturbing behaviour. He had killed and threatened her pets, and had reportedly harmed animals as a child. These were not isolated incidents. They were clear warning signs of escalating abuse.
This pattern is not uncommon. In many domestic abuse cases, cruelty to animals sits alongside coercive control, manipulation and violence. Yet too often, animal abuse is treated as separate, rather than recognised as part of the wider risk picture.
Holly’s Law seeks to change that.
Building on Clare’s Law
To understand Holly’s Law, it helps to look at Clare’s Law.
Clare’s Law gives people the right to ask police whether their partner has a history of domestic abuse. It also allows police to proactively disclose information if they believe someone is at risk. Around 150,000 applications are made each year.
It works because it allows targeted, controlled sharing of information where there is a genuine risk of harm. It helps people make informed decisions about their safety and gives professionals a structured way to share vital safeguarding information.
Holly’s Law builds on this approach.
It proposes an Animal Protection Disclosure Scheme (APDS). This is essentially a system that would allow relevant professionals to access and share information about animal abuse when it could help prevent harm to people.
In practice, this could mean:
- Including animal abuse information in safeguarding discussions
- Ensuring cases discussed at MARAC (Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences) don’t miss key warning signs
- Giving professionals a fuller picture of risk
Why not create an animal abusers register?
At first glance, a public register of animal abusers might sound like a strong solution. But in reality, it is unlikely to prevent harm effectively.
A public register would be broad and unfocused. It would not distinguish between levels of risk or ensure that the right professionals see the right information at the right time. It could also lead to misuse.
Existing systems such as ViSOR already allow certain information to be managed securely.
Holly’s Law takes a different approach. It focuses on safeguarding — not public exposure.
It is:
- Proportionate – focused on genuine risk, not blanket disclosure
- Actionable – giving professionals information they can use immediately
- Practical – designed to work within existing safeguarding systems
- Preventative – aimed at stopping harm before it escalates
Because in cases like Holly’s, the warning signs were already there.
