RESEARCH
Recei ed: 5 No embe 2024 / Re ised: 20 May 2025 / Accep ed: 22 May 2025
© The Au ho (s) 2025
Ja ie López-Cepe o
[email p o ec ed]; [email p o ec ed]
1 Pe sonali y, Assessmen & Psychological T ea men Depa men , Uni e sidad de Se illa,
Se ille, Spain
2 Expe imen al Psychology depa men , Uni e sidad de Se illa, Se ille, Spain
3 Facul ad de Psicología, Uni e sidad de Se illa, despacho S502. C/Camilo José Cela S/N,
Se ille 41018, España
Nego ia ing Rela ionships Wi hin Mul ispecies Families:
Analysing Dilemmas on Humanisa ion o he Bond
Ja ie López-Cepe o1,3 · AliciaEspañol2
Human A enas
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s42087-025-00504-y
The li e a u e indica es ha companions a e equen ly conside ed pa o ou amilies. Bu ,
wha does i mean? This a icle examines how he ela ionship be ween humans and non-
human animals is de ined wi hin he amily o ganiza ion. We o ganized h ee online ocus
g oups in e iews, and he analysis was conduc ed using e lexi e hema ic analysis. The
ela ionships wi h animals seemed o be based on ou hemes: (1) ex e nal limi s (legal,
mo al, and biological) ha ame he human-animal ela ionship; (2) pa icipan s’ pe cep-
ion o hei ole wi hin he ela ionship (e.g. ca egi e s); (3) cha ac e is ics pe cei ed in he
animal ha de e mine he inclusion as a membe o he amily; and (4) le el o humanisa-
ion unde s ood om a wo-dimensional model: acco ding o he simila i y be ween spe-
cies and he balance be ween he needs o humans and non-human animals. These indings
p o ide new pe spec i es on mul ispecies amilies and highligh un esol ed dilemmas in
dominan social discou ses.
Keywo ds Mul ispecies amily; Animal u n; Human-animal bond; Humanisa ion; Implica-
i e dilemmas.
In oduc ion
In he same way ha a oms make up ma e , Wes e n socie ies a e buil a ound he amily
as one o hei elemen al uni s (Fu us en, 2023). Much o he alues and expec a ions o
each communi y a e ansmi ed o indi iduals h ough hei amilies, which play he ole
o eposi o ies o in o ma ion and chains o cul u al ansmission. Despi e i s impo ance
1 3
J. López-Cepe o, A. Español
and ubiqui y, i is di icul o o e a single de ini ion o amily, gi en ha each communi y
and his o ical momen a ec he pa ame e s o his social o ganiza ion (Roos e al., 2006).
The las ew decades ha e seen d as ic changes in amily models (Fu s enbe g, 2019).
Faced wi h a p e ious model in which ma iage was he main bonding o ma and p o-
c ea ion was a no ma i e objec i e, he seconda y demog aphic ansi ion (SDT) o Wes -
e n socie ies akes us o a new pa adigm in which amily models a e mul iple and plas ic.
SDT encompasses wo cha ac e is ics: changes in cohabi a ion, d i ing o a mo e di e se
household o ganiza ion (e.g. a angemen s ha do no include ma iage), and a diminishing
bi h a e (e.g. deciding no o ha e o sp ing is common). Bo h endencies a e independen
and, al hough bo h phenomena coincided in Wes e n Eu ope coun ies, hey do no seem o
co ela e in o he egions (Les haeghe, 2020). Beyond he composi ion o households, he
bonds among ela i es also seemed o change, wi h needs such as pe sonal g ow h and he
sea ch o au onomy and exp ession occupying a mo e p edominan ole (Blacks one, 2014;
Les haeghe, 2014). Howe e , hese changes may ake ime o e lec in social discou ses.
Thus, in indus ialized coun ies, p oc ea ion is s ill seen as an an icipa ed and expec ed
unc ion o couples (Gillespie, 2000; Pel on & He lein, 2011).
Wi hou in ending o be exhaus i e, hese examples illus a e ha he concep o am-
ily a ies o e ime and depends on he human communi y on which we ocus. Despi e
his a iabili y, human g oups ypically sha e one cha ac e is ic: hey belie e ha hei
usual p ac ices a e no mal (I ine & Cilia, 2017). When a amily de ia es om commonly
accep ed no ms, i s membe s may ace disbelie , c i icism, o e en accusa ions o being
ou side s om hose who adhe e o socie al expec a ions (Hin z & B own, 2020).
In addi ion o he eco ded changes in amily unc ions, goals, and s uc u es, he li e a-
u e highligh s la ge a ia ions in he s a us o non-human animals ha li e wi hin he am-
ily home. In Wes e n socie ies, he e has been a g adual inc ease in he in ensi y o he bond
be ween humans and companion animals, along wi h a g ea e in e es in hei well-being.
This has led o deba es abou wha i means o be a good ca egi e and how we should de ine
ou ela ionship wi h hese animals (Fox & Gee, 2019; Philo & Wilbe , 2000). This ad ance
is e lec ed in amily s udies, in which a g owing a ie y o unc ions and oles pe o med
by animals in he household ha e been desc ibed (Leow, 2018; Walsh, 2009). Ano he sign
o change is e lec ed in he appea ance o new e ms o e e o he ela ionship. Thus, he
concep o amily pe has gi en way o new concep ions, such as mo e- han-human amilies
o mul ispecies amilies, in which hese animals a e pe cei ed as ull membe s o he house-
hold (Adams, 2019; I ine & Cilia, 2017).
In o he wo ds, non-human animals ha e ound new places wi hin ou idea o amily
(Philo & Wilbe , 2000). Howe e , hese social changes a e subjec o a ious deba es (Fox
& Gee, 2019). Va ious s udies conduc ed in indus ialized coun ies show ha animals con-
side ed companions ( hose ha li e in he home wi h no assigned unc ion o he han p o-
iding company) a e alued as pa o he amily by mos o he humans wi h whom hey
li e (Bouma e al., 2022; Ca lisle-F ank & F ank, 2006). Howe e , he exac meaning and
implica ions o being pa o he amily emain unclea . Fo example, some s udies poin
ou he exis ence o se e al ypes o ca ego ies o ela ionships be ween humans and non-
humans, such as he iad dominionis ic -human beings domina e o he animals-, human-
is ic -all species a e and dese e he same-, and p o ec ionis -humans mus ake ca e o ,
pu hemsel es a he se ice o animals- (Blouin, 2013). O he s udies in oduce concep s
ha indica e ha he animal’s s a us can a y wi hin a con inuum o lexible pe sonhood
1 3
Nego ia ing Rela ionships Wi hin Mul ispecies Families: Analysing…
(Lau en -Simpson, 2017; Shi -Ve esh, 2012). Finally, he li e a u e shows a i id deba e on
whe he animals could play a su oga e ole eplacing human beings as ela i es, o i he e
is a g owing in e es in he signi ican o he ness o non-human animals (Linne & Angille a,
2024).
Fo all he abo e, i is no su p ising ha he li e a u e desc ibes a lack o consis ency
among he coexis ing discou ses a ound mul ispecies amilies (Fox & Gee, 2019; I ine &
Cilia, 2017; Lau en -Simpson, 2017; Volsche, 2021). The esea ch me hods used may also
acili a e hese con usions, as many o he a ailable e e ences explo e he opic h ough
quan i a i e me hods such as ques ionnai es c ea ed ad hoc (Blouin, 2013; Bouma e al.,
2022, among o he s). These ins umen s p e en inding answe s beyond he ques ions
included by he esea che s, he eby es ic ing he possibili y o inding new solu ions o
hese deba es (Gobo, 2005).
Conside ing he po en ial in luence o cul u e on human-animal in e ac ions, i seems
impo an o emphasise ha mos o hese s udies ha e been de eloped in Anglo-Saxon con-
ex s (Lau en -Simpson, 2017; Volsche, 2021, among o he s). On he one hand, Spain is a
sou he n Eu opean coun y embedded in he SDT (Meil e al., 2023), and i could lead o he
assump ion ha much o he indings p esen in he li e a u e could help explain how ani-
mals i Spanish households. Bu , on he o he hand, i s popula ion appea s o ha e ex eme
con adic ions when i comes o alking abou companion animals: Al hough Spania ds
show some signs o he so-called animal u n, as hey show a s ong in e es in companions’
wellbeing -among he highes in Eu ope- (Eu opean Commission, 2017), and a ecen bill
ecognised hese animals as amily membe s (Animal Righ s and Wel a e P o ec ion Bill,
2023), mo e han 300.000 animals a e abandoned e e y yea , making Spain one o he Eu o-
pean coun ies wi h he highes abandonmen a e (Fa jó e al., 2015; Fundación A ini y,
2020). Also, while o he Eu opean coun ies ha e p omo ed bills o p o ec cohabi a ion
o mul ispecies amilies (e.g., Ren e s’ Righ s Bill in he UK, and Loi 70–598 [legisla ion
on he ela ionship be ween lesso s and enan s] in F ance), Spanish lesso s a e ee o ban
he p esence o non-human animals in en ed p ope ies, e lec ing ha he social changes
a ound mul ispecies amilies ad ance slowly.
Fo all hese easons, he p esen s udy seeks o explo e how non-human animals i
wi hin he amily o ganiza ion in Spain, using open and lexible me hods nes ed in he quali-
a i e esea ch pa adigm (B aun & Cla ke, 2013; Denzin e al., 2023). We aim o unde s and
he main hemes ha es ablish he ounda ion o de ining he ela ionship, sea ching o
simila i ies and di e ences o p e ious wo ks de eloped in hi d coun ies, and explo ing
i some o he appa en con adic ions could be be e unde s ood by e isi ing some o he
concep s ha a e usually p esen in he li e a u e.
Me hodology
In his sec ion, we highligh he di e en decisions made du ing da a p oduc ion and analy-
sis. Fo con enience, we ha e di ided hem in o ou sec ions ega ding he esea ch design,
pa icipan cha ac e is ics, de ails abou he ins umen s used, and he analysis p ocedu e.
1 3
J. López-Cepe o, A. Español
Resea ch Design
Gi en he explo a o y na u e o his esea ch, he no el y o he opic and he dispa a e
opinions i gene a es, we op ed o a da a p oduc ion p ocedu e ha would allow cap u ing
he g ea es numbe o pe spec i es on he objec o s udy. To do his, we op ed o use he
quali a i e social esea ch echnique o he ocus g oup (Ki zinge , 1994). This echnique
consis s o de eloping a g oup in e iew wi h he objec i e o discussing he ques ions
abou he speci ic opic ha is aised. As se e al au ho s highligh (Ki zinge , 1994; S ewa
& Shamdasani, 2015), his da a p oduc ion echnique enables he exp ession o di e en
pe spec i es and encou ages discussions on con o e sial issues.
The in e iews we e analysed ollowing he hema ic analysis me hod, aimed a iden i y-
ing, analysing, and epo ing pa e ns p esen in he da a collec ed (B aun & Cla ke, 2006,
2022). This analysis model o e s e sa ili y and sensi i i y o di e gences in discou ses,
allowing us o espond o he ambi alences and con adic ions ound in he li e a u e. In
u n, hema ic analysis o e s a s uc u ed guide o de elop he analysis in six s eps, om
he iden i ica ion o speci ic codes in he in e iew o he abs ac ion o gene al hemes p e-
sen ed by he pa icipan s, passing h ough se e al s ages o e iew and e inemen o he
ini ially p oposed codes.
Ou hema ic analysis app oach s a ed om an expe ien ial and cons uc i is pe spec-
i e, o ga he he ep esen a ions, expe iences, and discou ses o he pa icipan s. We unde -
s and ha pa icipan s b ing o he con e sa ion s o ies, imp essions and posi ionings ha
a e p esen in hei social en i onmen . People app op ia e hese discou ses and adop hem
as hei own - o en inco po a ing mu ually inconsis en a gumen s. The e o e, he analysis
o he pa icipan s’ in e en ions allows access o a uni e se o social discou ses cons uc ed
and ec ea ed in he ac i i y scena ios in which hey pa icipa e (We sch, 1993). A he
beginning, he analy ical p ocess was de eloped wi h a deduc i e and seman ic app oach.
To do his, we ook some equen ly used e ms om he i s au ho ’s aining in amily
he apy (such as s uc u e, hie a chy, communica ion, among o he s) and in an h ozoology
(e.g., an h opomo phising), which se ed as a guide o iden i y some pa e ns o esponse o
he pa icipan s. Th oughou he coding and w i ing p ocess we u ned o a mo e induc i e
and la en analysis.
This p ojec has he app o al o he E hics Commi ee o [Uni e si y].
Pa icipan s
Th ee ocus g oups we e cons i u ed wi h 11 women and 1 man, aged be ween 18 and 64
yea s. All pa icipan s had li ed wi h animals o mo e han one yea o hei li espan. They
men ioned ha ing coexis ed wi h 1 o 5 animals, being dogs and ca s he mos equen
species. Mos o he pa icipan s li ed in mul ispecies amilies ounded wi h hei pa ne s,
al hough h ee o hem emained in hei pa en s’ households. Two hi ds o he pa icipan s
epo ed li ing in u ban a eas. The main sociodemog aphic da a and he dis ibu ion o pa -
icipan s in he di e en ocus g oups a e speci ied in Table 1.
The ins uc ions indica ed ha he s udy was ocused on analyzing he coexis ence o he
daily li e o mul ispecies amilies in he Spanish con ex . The sample was made up based on
he in o ma ion p o ided by he pa icipan s in a o m. To be selec ed, pa icipan s had o be
na i e Spanish speake s, be o e 18 yea s o age, and ha e cohabi ed wi h an animal o a
1 3
Nego ia ing Rela ionships Wi hin Mul ispecies Families: Analysing…
leas 6 mon hs p io o he in e iew. Likewise, he ela ionship main ained wi h he animal
had o be limi ed only o he domes ic sphe e, lea ing o he ela ionships ou o he s udy,
such as wo king ela ionships wi h animals, like he ding o e e ina y ca e.
E en hough he e is no exac ecommenda ion on he app op ia e sample size o quali-
a i e s udies (Ame ican Psychological Associa ion, 2020), he sample selec ed is su icien
o comple e medium-sized s udies such as he one p esen ed (B aun & Cla ke, 2013, p. 48).
Ou wo k aims o explo e he meanings and expe iences o mul ispecies amilies a he han
he e i ica ion o quan i ica ion o hese.
Ins umen s
An ad hoc semi-s uc u ed in e iew was c ea ed o collec da a. The ques ions we e s uc-
u ed a ound h ee axes ha espond o he h ee speci ic objec i es p oposed in he p ojec :
(1) he animal’s ela i e posi ion o place wi hin he amily, (2) he unc ional o ganiza ion
o i uals ha occu in he amily nucleus, (3) he in eg a ion o animals in o human ela-
ionship ca ego ies. The in e iew sc ip p o ided se e al equi alen ques ions o ocus he
con e sa ion i necessa y.
The in e iews we e de eloped wi hin he Blackboa d Collabo a e Ul a en i onmen .
This pla o m allows mee ings o be eco ded in ooms accessible only by in i a ion. I
also makes i easie o pa icipa e using pseudonyms and wi hou sha ing ideo images.
Table 1 Sociodemog aphic in o ma ion o pa icipan s
#
G oup
Tag Gende Age En i onmen Ca ing o
any human
ela i e?
Ca e o
animals
Cu en # o
companions
Species
cohabi-
a ed
1 CA Male 18–
29
Ru al No Sha ed 4–5 Dog,
ca
1 BE Female 30–
39
U ban No Alone 1 Dog
1MR Female 30–
39
U ban No Sha ed 1 Ca ,
o he
1 LU Female 30–
39
U ban O sp ing Sha ed 1 Dog,
abbi
2 CB* Female 30–
39
U ban No Sha ed 2–3 Dog
2 MG Female 18–
29
Ru al No Sha ed 1 Dog
2 LS Female 40–
64
Ru al No Sha ed 2–3 Dog
2 MJ Female 18–
29
Ru al No Sha ed None Dog,
o he
3 EL Female 18–
29
U ban No Sha ed 2–3 Dog,
ca
3RQ Female 18–
29
U ban No Sha ed None Ca ,
o he
3CR Female 30–
39
U ban No Sha ed 4–5 Dog,
ca
3 MC Female 30–
39
U ban No Sha ed 4–5 Dog
* Pa icipan could no comple e he in e iew due o echnical p oblems
1 3
J. López-Cepe o, A. Español
Al oge he , his pla o m o e s a ious al e na i es o pa icipan s o decide he deg ee o
p i acy hey wan o main ain.
P ocedu es
Pa icipan ec ui men was ca ied ou h ough he Facebook and Twi e social ne wo ks
using he p o essional p o iles o he esea che s, and h ough he labo a o y websi e [name
o he labo a o y on human-animal bond]. In e es ed indi iduals comple ed an online o m
ha eques ed in o med consen . To conduc he in e iew, hey we e equi ed o ha e
access o he in e ne and an elec onic de ice ha would allow hem o connec o he pla -
o m whe e he in e iews we e eco ded. Following he ecommenda ions o main aining
p i acy in i ual en i onmen s (Lobe e al., 2020), pa icipan s chose whe he hey wan ed
o use ideo images o only audio, as well as he pseudonym wi h which hey wan ed o
in oduce hemsel es.
We p oposed holding i ual ocus g oups (S ewa & Shamdasani, 2015) o allow us o
con ac he pa icipan s o all o e Spain. The in e iews las ed an a e age o 103 min and
we e eco ded and s o ed o ansc ip ion. This ansc ip ion was ca ied ou conside ing
he seman ic con en (B aun & Cla ke, 2013). To pseudonymize he in e iews we ha e
eplaced all iden i ying elemen s - names o people, pe s, and places - wi h an equi alen
desc ip ion o hem. The ex ac s ha e been edi ed o emo e epe i ions and i ele an
aspec s ha do no con ibu e o he in ended examples. Exp essions ha e lec ed doub s o
pauses in he speech ha e been eplaced by ellipses o imp o e eadabili y.
Coding ook place o e se e al weeks. I was always done in pai s, some imes wi h he
collabo a ion o a s uden in aining. The analysis o hese codes led he esea ch eam o
g oup hem in o a ious hemes and, in u n, in o ou o e a ching hemes: cons uc ion o
he human-animal ela ionship in he amily; choice o e ms o desc ibe he ela ionship;
e olu ion o he ela ionship in he amily li e cycle; and o ganiza ion o mo e- han-human
amilies. This a icle p esen s he esul s e e ing o he i s o hese o e a ching hemes,
ese ing he es o he analysis o o he publica ions.
Analysis
Pa icipan s build hei ela ionship wi h hei animals based on ou main hemes: “E e y
game has i s ules”, “Who am I in he ela ionship?”, “Who a e you, my li le iend?”, and
“To humanise o no o humanise? Tha is he ques ion”. We unde s and ha hese opics
show ou basic pilla s ha suppo he de ini ion o he ela ionship be ween human and
non-human animals in he amily con ex (see Fig. 1). Nex , we go on o explain each o
hem.
E e y Game Has i s Rules
This heme e e s o he ex e nal limi s (legal, mo al, and biological) ha ame he human-
animal ela ionship. Pa icipan s a e awa e ha hey li e wi hin a legal and egula o y
amewo k ha s ipula es ce ain obliga ions owa ds animals, a du y o ca e (Glan ille
e al., 2020). These ex e nal condi ions impose ce ain labels on he ela ionship, such as
being he owne o he animal: bu being legally esponsible o he animal and eeling like
1 3
Nego ia ing Rela ionships Wi hin Mul ispecies Families: Analysing…
an owne a e wo di e en issues, which o en appea as dilemmas (Fox, 2006). Following
Blouin’s classi ica ion (2013), he no ma i e s anda d makes i easie o cons uc he ela-
ionship in e ms o dominance o e he animal, while he ela ionship ha is being el may
i be e wi h companionship o he obliga ion o p o ec .
I o example, don’ speak in e ms o owne ship as such, and i kind o sounds ugly, bu
in he end i ’s who I am. Tha ’s wha i says on he pape s (laughs). No, bu in he end a dog
s ill “belongs o”. Ano he hing is on a mo al le el and wha we may eel, bu no, i doesn’
bo he me ei he . I is ue ha I do no use i , I do no say “I am you owne ” o “I am he
owne o ” bu in he end i is wha i is. And when he e calls you and asks o he “name
o he owne ”, i doesn’ bo he me, because I know i ’s me. [In e iew 2; MG]
The conside a ion o companions as subjec s wi h igh s also appea s equen ly e e ed
o and in ela ion o a ious opics. Fo example, ou pa icipan s deba e he implica ions
o adop ing e sus pu chasing animals, and e lec on whe he ob aining inancial bene i s
(e.g., by exposing hem on social ne wo ks) can be exploi a i e. Companion animals a e
li ing beings, and as such hey ha e he igh o be espec ed as hey a e and no be ea ed
as me e me chandise o objec s o alue. The mo al deba e abou hei in insic alue and
no as means is ecu ing o ma k he ela ionship hey wan o de elop.
Yes, I also know people who ha e ied o make hei dogs in luence s, and hen o d ess
hem up in cos umes, he le e [publica ion] o he hund ed, he en housand ollowe s, all
o his. Bu well, I hink ha has ano he objec i e (laughs), no so much as he eeling o
uni y bu a he ying o mone ize you ela ionship wi h animals a li le, bu well ha ’s my
poin o iew. [In e iew 1; MR]
Unlike o he coun ies in Eu ope (such as F ance o he UK), in Spain he e a e no eg-
ula ions ha ensu e he possibili y o li ing wi h animals in you esidence, an elemen
ha is especially p oblema ic when i comes o en ed housing. In addi ion, in Spain only
assis ance animals (e.g. guide dogs) a e gua an eed access o all es ablishmen s. The e o e,
he clash be ween he pe sonal cons uc ion o wha amily is and i s social ecogni ion is
e iden .
Fig. 1 Themes a ound de ini ion o ela ionships wi hin mo e- han-human amilies
1 3
J. López-Cepe o, A. Español
(…) we b ough he o [new ci y], I looked o an apa men ha would le me ha e a
dog. I wouldn’ go anywhe e wi hou my dog, I wouldn’ go anywhe e. They wouldn’ le me
ge ma ied in he ho el wi h he because he ho el was picky, bu o he wise I’d b ing he
in oo (laughs). I ’s also e y impo an o me o ha e my whole amily he e. [In e iew
1; LU]
This i s heme allows us o e i y ha ou pa icipan s ind i di icul o i hei ela ion-
ship wi h non-human animals in o he socially dominan discou se (Hin z & B own, 2020).
The a emp o classi y he ela ionship in o a single ca ego y—as owne e sus pa ne , in
Blouin’s (2013) e ms—c ea es discom o . Ou esul s poin o he exis ence o b oade
dilemmas, whe e di e en pe spec i es – mo al, legal, biological – collide wi h each o he .
The eby, he no ms —o discou ses— o his social game did no o e guidance o esol e
hese dilemmas, and ha makes many o he pa icipan s choose o mo e he ocus om
he ex e nal condi ions o he ela ionship —gene ally assumed as objec i e— o subjec i e
conside a ions. The e o e, he nex opic ocuses on wha he pa icipan s eel and pe cei e
wi hin he ela ionship.
Who I Am in he Rela ionship?
A second heme e e s o he way in which pa icipan s expe ience hei ole in he ela ion-
ship. Consis en wi h p e ious wo k (Cha les, 2016; Glan ille e al., 2020), ou pa icipan s
unde s and ha hei ole equi es gua an eeing he well-being and ca e o non-human ani-
mals. Pa allel o cu en expec a ions o ha ing o sp ings a e he SDT, i is no a ma e
o cohabi a ing wi h animals, bu o aking ca e o animals so hey can enjoy and de elop
(Blacks one, 2014; Les haeghe, 2014). Human esponsibili y appea s as a cen al concep ,
in acco dance wi h wha has been s a ed in o he wo ks (Volsche, 2018; Wes ga h e al.,
2019). This ansla es in o he p o ision o esou ces o hei well-being and he adap a ion
o domes ic spaces and ou ines o mee he pe cei ed needs o he animal, e en when i may
comp omise he com o o he human:
Well, I ha e a se an ela ionship, as I say, wi h he ca because he is he one who wakes
me up (laughs) i doesn’ ma e i i ’s he weekend o [ h oughou he week]. Yes, he’s he
one who o ganizes he day and he one who… I hink ha his happens o people who ha e
a ca in hei apa men , hose who li e in he coun yside o ha e dis ac ions don’ ha e i
his way. This one pe sonally wakes me up and well, since I’m he i s one o ge up o wo k
and so on, well I eed him, he s ays calm. […] We dedica e play ime o him e e y e ening,
because he chases ea he s and so on, so he uses up ene gy and well, a dinne ime he also
s a s o look a me om he ki chen wi h his pene a ing look o “Well, wha ? A e you ge -
ing up?” (laughs) He s a s ea ing dinne , he s ays calm and when i ’s ime o us o go o
sleep, he s a s playing o a while and hen he ge s on op o my husband un il I u n a ound
and he ge s on op o my head and ha is ou (laughs) ou daily li e, mo e o less ha is he
ou ine. [In e iew 1; MR]
The e ms hey use o e e o he ela ionship ela e mainly o he mo he -child bond,
al hough also o companionship o iendship ( o a mo e ex ensi e e iew o he e ms used,
e e o López-Cepe o, 2025). All pa icipan s highligh he cen ali y o his bond wi hin
he home: hey say hey do no unde s and a li e wi hou (non-humans) animals. Al hough
hey a e clea ha hei ela ionships wi h non-human animals a e di e en om hose wi h
1 3
Nego ia ing Rela ionships Wi hin Mul ispecies Families: Analysing…
o he humans, hey cons uc hei discou se om he obliga ion acqui ed owa ds animals
(Glan ille e al., 2020; Wes ga h e al., 2019).
I would say, o summa ize… esponsibili y; because i you a e no going o be espon-
sible, don’ ha e hem. I is a li es yle ha is o ally, o ally, o ally in ag eemen and hey a e
amily and also, i is mu ual lea ning. They lea n om us, bu , abo e all… Well, I don’ know
abou hem lea ning om us, hey mus lea n some hing (pause), I guess. Bu o us, come
on, i is inc edible. I’m also seeing i in my son, so i can happen om he e y beginning.
And ea ing an adul who espec s all li ing beings, ha seems like an inc edible and supe
li es yle o me, you know? So since I’m in ha phase, I would make like a se o all hose
wo ds because ha ’s how i is. [In e iew 1; LU]
These discou ses highligh he impo ance o hei ela ionships wi h animals, as well as
he esponsibili y wi h which hey assume i . Howe e , hey show he exis ence o asymme-
ies in he ela ionship: he human appea s as he main pe son esponsible o he decisions,
hus occupying a hie a chically supe io posi ion o he non-human animal (Cha les, 2016;
Volsche, 2018) and seems o be he main bene icia y. A en ion o he pe cei ed needs o
animals was a ecu ing heme, so he nex opic analysed ocuses on he cha ac e is ics o
non-human animals.
Who A e You, my Li le F iend?
The hi d heme analyses he cha ac e is ics o he animal ha de e mine i s inclusion as a
membe o he amily: pa icipan s e e o a a ie y o aspec s ha acili a e he iden i ica-
ion o he non-human animal as pa o he household. Some o hese quali ies a e di ec ly
obse able. Thus, he appea ance o he animal (e.g., hey a e p e y) and he ac ions hey
pe o m a ac he a en ion o he humans wi h whom hey li e. Howe e , i is he in e ence
abou hei in e nal s a es ha akes cen e s age when desc ibing he easons o conside ing
hem pa o he amily.
On he one hand, pa icipan s equen ly ocus on he abili y o eel: animals su e pain
and exp ess joy. This basic emo ional sys em allows you o unde s and and empa hize wi h
hei needs and eelings. These cha ac e is ics help o pe cei e hem as beings o be ca ed
o and whose needs and igh s mus be espec ed, in a way like ha desc ibed in p e ious
s udies (Volsche, 2018). In gene al, he g ea e con inui y is ound be ween humans and
non-humans, he g ea e balance is desc ibed in he ela ionship.
One o hem, he emale [dog], is e y, e y a ached o sleeping and being close o us
and since she is olde , i makes us sad o ha e o say no o he and since she is so good, well,
we le he . [In e iew 2; LS]
And… in gene al, o he opic o aca ions, i is ue ha , o example, we don’ ake he
ca s because, o example, well, nei he o hem likes he s ee . So… we also don’ know
how hey will eac in an en i onmen o he han hei own. I also makes us eel bad, well,
no mally when we go o… maybe an apa men much smalle han ou s, maybe hey ge
s essed, hey ge o e whelmed. And wha we usually do is call someone we us and ell
hem o come check on he ca s, eed hem, clean hem, like, hey may ha e o clean he li e
box and so on, basically o pay a en ion o hem. [In e iew 3; HE]
Howe e , wha is cen al o pa icipan s ede ining hei ela ionship, is o pe cei e ha
animals ha e in en ions. They a e subjec s wi h men al s a es, as es, desi es, and com-
munica i e in en ion (Volsche, 2018). Rega ding he cogni i e abili ies o humans and
1 3
J. López-Cepe o, A. Español
Blouin, D. D. (2013). A e dogs child en, companions, o jus animals? Unde s anding a ia ions in People’s
o ien a ions owa d animals. An h ozoos, 26(2), 279–294. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 2 7 5 2 / 1 7 5 3 0 3 7 1 3 X 1 3 6 3 6 8
4 6 9 4 4 4 0 2
Bouma, E. M. C., Reijgwa , M. L., & Dijks a, A. (2022). Family membe , bes iend, child o ‘jus ’ a pe ,
owne s’ ela ionship pe cep ions and consequences o hei ca s. In e na ional Jou nal o En i onmen-
al Resea ch and Public Heal h, 19(1). h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/ije ph19010193
B aun, V., & Cla ke, V. (2006). Using hema ic analysis in psychology. Quali a i e Resea ch in Psychology,
3(2), 77–101. h ps://doi.o g/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
B aun, V., & Cla ke, V. (2013). Succes ul quali a i e esea ch: A p ac ical guide o beginne s. Sage.
B aun, V., & Cla ke, V. (2022). Thema ic analysis. A p ac ical guide. Sage.
Ca lisle-F ank, P., & F ank, J. M. (2006). Owne s, gua dians, and owne -gua dians: Di e ing ela ionships
wi h pe s. An h ozoos, 19(3), 225–242. h ps://doi.o g/10.2752/089279306785415574
Ca , E. C. J., Wallace, J. E., Onyewuchi, C., Hellye , P. W., & Kogan, L. (2018). Explo ing he meaning and
expe ience o ch onic pain wi h people who li e wi h a dog: A quali a i e s udy. An h ozoos, 31(5),
551–565. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 8 9 2 7 9 3 6 . 2 0 1 8 . 1 5 0 5 2 6 7
Cha les, N. (2014). Animals jus lo e you as you a e’: Expe iencing kinship ac oss he species ba ie . Sociol-
ogy, 48(4), 715–730. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0038038513515353
Cha les, N. (2016). Pos -human amilies? Dog-human ela ions in he domes ic sphe e. Sociological Resea ch
Online, 21(3). h ps://doi.o g/10.5153/s o.3975
Clea y, M., Wes , S., Thapa, D. K., Wes man, M., Vesk, K., & Ko nhabe , R. (2022). G ie ing he loss o a
Pe : A quali a i e sys ema ic e iew. Dea h S udies, 46(9), 2167–2178. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 7 4 8 1 1
8 7 . 2 0 2 1 . 1 9 0 1 7 9 9
Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S., Gia dina, M. D., & Cannella, G. S. (Eds.). (2023). The SAGE handbook o
quali a i e esea ch (6 h ed.). SAGE.
Eu opean Commission. (2017). A i udes o Eu opeans owa ds animal wel a e. Special Eu oba ome e , 442.
h ps://doi.o g/10.2875/884639
Fa jó, J., Bowen, J., Ga cía, E., Cal o, P., Rueda, S., Amblás, S., & Lalanza, J. F. (2015). Epidemiology o
dog and Ca abandonmen in Spain (2008–2013). Animals, 5(2), 426–441. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 3 3 9 0 / a n i
5 0 2 0 3 6 4
Fox, R. (2006). Animal beha iou s, pos -human li es: E e yday nego ia ions o he animal-human di ide in pe -
keeping. Social and Cul u al Geog aphy, 7(4), 525–537. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14649360600825679
Fox, R., & Gee, N. R. (2019). G ea expec a ions: Changing social, Spa ial and emo ional Unde s andings o
he companion animal–human ela ionship. Social and Cul u al Geog aphy, 20(1), 43–63. h p s : / / d o i . o
g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 1 4 6 4 9 3 6 5 . 2 0 1 7 . 1 3 4 7 9 5 4
Fundación A ini y (2020). Es udio Él nunca lo ha ía: Pe os y ga os abandonados, adop ados y pe didos
en España en 2019. h p s : / / w w w . u n d a c i o n - a i n i y . o g / o b s e a o i o / i n o g a i a - e l - n u n c a - l o - h a i a - e s u d
i o - d e - a b a n d o n o - y - a d o p c i o n - 2 0 2 0
Fu s enbe g, F. F. (2019). Family change in global pe spec i e: How and why amily sys ems change. Family
ela ions (Vol. 68, pp. 326–341). Blackwell Publishing L d. 3h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/ a e.12361
Fu us en, S. (2023). Ins i u ional heo y and o ganiza ional change. Edwa d Elga Publishing. h p s : / / d o i . o
g / 1 0 . 4 3 3 7 / 9 7 8 1 0 3 5 3 0 7 2 1 0
Gillespie, R. (2000). when no means no: disbelie , dis ega d and de iance as discou ses o olun a y child-
lessness. In Women’s S udies In e na ional Fo um (Vol. 23, Issue 2).
Glan ille, C. R., Hemswo h, P. H., & Coleman, G. J. (2020). Concep ualising dog owne mo i a ions: The
pe ca e compe ency model and ole o du y o ca e. Animal Wel a e, 29(3), 271–284. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1
0 . 7 1 2 0 / 0 9 6 2 7 2 8 6 . 2 9 . 3 . 2 7 1
Gobo, G. (2005). The enaissance o quali a i e me hods. Fo um Quali a i e Sozial o schung / Fo um: Qual-
i a i e Social Resea ch, 6(3).
Hawkins, R. D., Hawkins, E. L., & Tip, L. (2021). I can’ gi e up when I ha e hem o ca e o : People’s
expe iences o pe s and hei men al heal h. An h ozoos, 34(4), 543–562. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 8 9 2
7 9 3 6 . 2 0 2 1 . 1 9 1 4 4 3 4
Hin z, E. A., & B own, C. L. (2020). Child ee and bingoed: A ela ional dialec ics heo y analysis o mean-
ing c ea ion in online na a i es abou olun a y childlessness. Communica ion Monog aphs, 87(2),
244–266. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 3 6 3 7 7 5 1 . 2 0 1 9 . 1 6 9 7 8 9 1
Howle , M. (2022). Looking a he ‘ ield’ h ough a zoom lens: Me hodological e lec ions on conduc ing
online esea ch du ing a global pandemic. Quali a i e Resea ch, 22(3), 387–402. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 1
7 7 / 1 4 6 8 7 9 4 1 2 0 9 8 5 6 9 1
I ine, L. (2023). Ou zoological connec ions and why hey ma e . Sociological Fo um, 38(4), 1464–1477.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/soc .12961
I ine, L., & Cilia, L. (2017). Mo e- han-human amilies: Pe s, people, and p ac ices in mul ispecies house-
holds. Sociology Compass, 11(2), 1–13. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/soc4.12455
1 3
Nego ia ing Rela ionships Wi hin Mul ispecies Families: Analysing…
Ki zinge , J. (1994). The me hodology o ocus g oups: The impo ance o in e ac ion be ween esea ch pa -
icipan s. Sociology o Heal h & Illness, 16(1), 103–121. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1467-9566.ep11347023
Kogan, L. R., Bussola i, C., Cu in-Mcculloch, J., Packman, W., & E dman, P. (2022). Disen anchised
guil —pe owne s’ bu den. Animals, 12(13), 1–17. h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/ani12131690
Lau en -Simpson, A. (2017). Conside ing al e na e sou ces o ole iden i y: Childless pa en s and hei ani-
mal kids. Sociological Fo um, 32(3), 610–634. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/soc .12351
Leow, C. (2018). I ’s No Jus A Dog: The Role o Companion Animals in he Family ’s Emo ional Sys em
[Uni e si y o Neb aska-Lincoln]. h p s : / / d i g i a l c o m m o n s . u n l . e d u / c e h s d i s s / 3 1 7 / ? u m _ s o u c e = d i g i a l c o
m m o n s . u n l . e d u % 2 F c e h s d i s s % 2 F 3 1 7 & u m _ m e d i u m = P D F & u m _ c a m p a i g n = P D F C o e P a g e s
Les haeghe, R. (2014). The second demog aphic ansi ion: A concise o e iew o i s de elopmen . P oceed-
ings o he Na ional Academy o Sciences, 111(51), 18112–18115. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 7 3 / p n a s . 1 4 2 0 4
4 1 1 1 1
Les haeghe, R. (2020). The second demog aphic ansi ion, 1986–2020: sub- eplacemen e ili y and ising
cohabi a ion—a global upda e. Genus, 76(1). h ps://doi.o g/10.1186/s41118-020-00077-4
Linne, J., & Angille a, F. (2024). Li ing oge he , lo ing oge he : Pe amilies in he 21s cen u y. His o y o
he Family. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 1 0 8 1 6 0 2 X . 2 0 2 3 . 2 3 0 0 6 2 9
Lobe, B., Mo gan, D., & Ho man, K. A. (2020). Quali a i e da a collec ion in an e a o social dis ancing.
In e na ional Jou nal o Quali a i e Me hods, 19, 160940692093787. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 1 7 7 / 1 6 0 9 4 0 6
9 2 0 9 3 7 8 7 5
López-Cepe o, J., Español, A., & Rod íguez-Banda, Á. (2025). ‘The e Is No a Wo d’, bu Is I Necessa y?
Analyzing P agma ic Decisions Rega ding Te minology Wi hin Mul ispecies Family Rela ionships.
Animals, 15(4). h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/ani15040568
Mal e ud, K., Sie sma, V. D., & Guasso a, A. D. (2016). Sample Size in Quali a i e In e iew S udies. Quali-
a i e Heal h Resea ch, 26(13), 1753–1760. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1049732315617444
Meil, G., Roge o-Ga cía, J., & Díaz-Gandasegui, V. (2023). Family di e si y in Spain. In M. A. Adle & K.
Lenz (Eds.), The Changing Faces o Families (pp. 122–141). Rou ledge. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 4 3 2 4 / 9 7 8 1
0 0 3 1 9 3 5 0 0 - 7
Me iam-Webs e . (2019). Humanize. Me iam-Webs e ’s collegia e dic iona y (11 h ed.). Me iam Webs e
US.
Mon esano, A., López-González, M. A., Saúl, L. A., & Feixas, G. (2015). A e iew o cogni i e con lic s
esea ch: A me a-analy ic s udy o p e alence and ela ion o symp oms. In Neu opsychia ic Disease
and T ea men (Vol. 11, pp. 2997–3006). Do e Medical P ess L d. h ps://doi.o g/10.2147/NDT.S91861
Pel on, S. L., & He lein, K. M. (2011). A p oposed li e cycle o olun a y child ee couples. Jou nal o
Feminis Family The apy, 23(1), 39–53. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/08952833.2011.548703
Philo, C., & Wilbe , C. (2000). Animal spaces, Beas ly places: An in oduc ion. In C. Philo, & C. Wilbe
(Eds.), Animal spaces, Beas ly places: New geog aphies o human-animal ela ions. Rou ledge.
Powe , E. (2008). Fu y amilies: Making a human-dog amily h ough home. Social and Cul u al Geog a-
phy, 9(5), 535–555. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14649360802217790
Roos, P. A., T igg, M. K., & Ha man, M. S. (2006). Changing amilies/changing communi ies wo k, amily
and communi y in ansi ion. In Communi y, Wo k and Family (Vol. 9, Issue 2, pp. 197–224). h p s : / / d o
i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 1 3 6 6 8 8 0 0 6 0 0 5 8 6 9 8 5
Rosenbe g, S., Riggs, D. W., Taylo , N., & F ase , H. (2020). Being oge he eally helped’: Aus alian ans-
gende and non-bina y people and hei animal companions li ing h ough iolence and ma ginalisa-
ion. Jou nal o Sociology, 56(4), 571–590. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1440783319896413
Shi -Ve esh, D. (2012). Flexible pe sonhood: Lo ing animals as amily membe s in Is ael. Ame ican An h o-
pologis , 114(3), 420–432. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 1 1 1 / j . 1 5 4 8 - 1 4 3 3 . 2 0 1 2 . 0 1 4 4 3 . x
S ewa , D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N. (2015). Focus g oups: Theo y and p ac ice (3 d ed.). Sage.
Volsche, S. (2018). Nego ia ed bonds: The p ac ice o child ee pe pa en ing. An h ozoos, 31(3), 367–377. h
p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 8 9 2 7 9 3 6 . 2 0 1 8 . 1 4 5 5 4 7 0
Volsche, S. (2021). Pe pa en ing in he uni ed S a es: In es iga ing an e olu iona y puzzle. E olu iona y
Psychology, 19(3), 1–9. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/14747049211038297
Walsh, F. (2009). Human-animal bonds II: The ole o pe s in amily sys ems and amily he apy. Family
P ocess, 48(4), 481–499. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 1 1 1 / j . 1 5 4 5 - 5 3 0 0 . 2 0 0 9 . 0 1 2 9 7 . x
We sch, J. V. (1993). Voices o he Mind. A Sociocul u al app oach o media ed ac ion. Ha a d Uni e si y
P ess.
Wes ga h, C., Ch is ley, R. M., Ma in, G., & Pe kins, E. (2019). The esponsible dog owne : The cons uc-
ion o esponsibili y. An h ozoos, 32(5), 631–646. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 0 8 9 2 7 9 3 6 . 2 0 1 9 . 1 6 4 5 5 0 6
Publishe ’s No e Sp inge Na u e emains neu al wi h ega d o ju isdic ional claims in published maps and
ins i u ional a ilia ions.
1 3
