Losing a family pet gives parents a chance to teach children about death and grieving

Losing a pet is the first time many children encounter death. The experience can become an opportunity for profound emotional learning and influence how young people understand and process grief when they are adults, according to psychologists and pet bereavement specialists.

Parents and guardians therefore have important roles to play when a family pet dies. Along with helping children accept the painful permanence of death, caregivers can guide kids through a healthy and healing mourning process that provides a foundation for coping with an inevitable part of life.

“People are so adverse to talking about death and grief, but it is the one thing that is guaranteed: We are all going to die. We need to be open to talking about that,” said Deirdra Flavin, CEO of the National Alliance for Children’s Grief.

Here are some things to consider when talking with children about death and supporting them through pet loss.

Depending on how old they are and their individual circumstances, children vary in their ability to comprehend the concept of death. The way they process grief, how long they mourn and the impact of the loss is also unique to each child, just as it is for adults. Experts say sadness, anger and other overwhelming emotions associated with grief may be more difficult for younger children to navigate, so having support is crucial.

Psychologists and bereavement counselors say some people feel the heartbreak from a pet's death as intensely as the loss of any other loved one, reflecting the potential depths of human-animal bonds. In the case of children, their relationship with a pet, and whether the death was sudden or not, are other factors that may shape individual responses.

Colleen Rolland, president of the Association for Pet Loss and Bereavement, says parents usually know how intellectually and emotionally capable their children are of processing death.

Children as young as 4 years old might have been exposed to death through fairy tales and other stories but may struggle to understand its finality, Rolland said. Older children, who will know their loss is forever, may need more emotional support from friends and family, she said.

Elizabeth Perez said she learned quickly how differently her three children processed the death of their dog, Zoe, who was hit by a car nearly a year-and-a-half ago in front of their second daughter. The other two children were inside the family's home in Pullman, Washington.

“Carmen would talk about how the images kept replaying in her head, she was having nightmares and couldn't sleep,” Perez said, adding that her daughter hasn't worn the dress she had on that day since.

Perez recalls she and her husband spending a lot of time with Carmen, now 11, and asking her questions about her feelings. Even their youngest child, who did not see the car hit Zoe and had spent the least amount of time with the dog, still tears up thinking about the April 2024 accident.

“It was really hard for the whole family. Everybody was feeling it differently and at different times,” Perez said. “We, as parents, did not feel prepared.”

Experts say it’s important to be honest and use clear language when discussing death with children. Adults often are inclined to protect children with euphemisms, such as a pet went to sleep, got lost or was put down.

“That can be alarming for children and cause a lot of confusion and fear. So, saying ‘The fish went to sleep’ might create concerns for the child when they are going to sleep,” Flavin said. “Particularly with younger kids because they are so literal in terms of the way that things are expressed to them.”

When Leah Motz's daughter was 2 years old, she told her their 15-year-old dog, Izzy, had a “good life but his body is broken and it won’t be able to fix itself.” Motz recalled that before taking him to be euthanized near their home in Renton, Washington, she further explained they were going to “help Izzy die.”

Sometimes adults have a hard time recognizing the impact that losing a pet instead of a person might have on children. Rolland says child grief tends to be trivialized in general, and that people who are very devoted to their pets can produce as much stigma as sympathy.

“But pet loss is a very real form of grief,” she said.

Raquel Halfond, a licensed clinical psychologist with the American Psychological Association, says children’s behavior often indicates how they are feeling even if they are not expressing it verbally.

“Maybe you notice your child is having more tantrums. Suddenly there’s stuff that they used to love doing, they no longer want to do. Maybe they start to refuse to go to school. It’s really normal to have these for a while,” Halfond said.

Other signs to look for include uncharacteristic sadness, tears, anger and even silence, she said. A child's emotional response is often independent of their willingness to talk about death, but she said it might be time to seek professional help if their emotions or behavior affect their ability to function.

Much like they do in other situations or developmental stages, children often learn how to handle grief by watching their caregivers. The way adults respond to loss is likely to set an example for their children.

“Parents, or caregivers, must be confident in how they deal with pet loss,” Rolland said, adding that parents who are unfamiliar with grief or display unhealthy behaviors might teach children to act in the same manner.

Two of Meaghan Marr's dogs died in a suburb north of Atlanta, when her two children were young. The first to go, Sadie, had ongoing health issues, so Marr was able to have continuous conversations and prepare her then-7-year-old son and 4-year-old daughter.

“My son definitely understood what was going on. While my daughter was sad, it didn’t quite reach her as deeply,” Marr said. She said it seemed like a lot of the children's' emotions were in response to her own grieving for a pet she refers to as her “soulmate dog.”

Halfond advises parents not to hide their feelings from their children.

“If you’re feeling sad, it’s OK for the child to see you feeling sad. In fact, it could be confusing if something sad happened and they don’t see that emotion reflected in their parents," she said.

One way to help children come to terms with the death of a pet is by memorializing the lives of the late companions through activities such as raising money for animals in need, drawing pictures, holding funerals or doing the things their pets loved to do.

Before their dog Sadie died, Marr said many of the conversations with her kids centered around how dogs don't live forever and would one day go to heaven. The difficult part for her was explaining that was true of every pet.

“We talked about if they still wanted animals even though they are not going to last as long as we do,” she said. “It hurts to lose them, but they make your life so much better while they are here.”

Meaghan and Chris Marr prepare to pose for a photograph with their children on Thursday, Sept. 25, 2025, in Cartersville, Ga. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson)

Meaghan and Chris Marr pose with their children and dogs for a photograph on Thursday, Sept. 25, 2025, in Cartersville, Ga. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson)

Meaghan Marr looks at photographs of her family's former pets on Thursday, Sept. 25, 2025, in Cartersville, Ga. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson)

Meaghan Marr holds the ashes her previous dog, Jewels, on Thursday, Sept. 25, 2025, in Cartersville, Ga. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson)

Meaghan and Chris Marr pose with their children and dogs for a photograph on Thursday, Sept. 25, 2025, in Cartersville, Ga. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson)

ATLANTA (AP) — Donald Trump would not be the first president to invoke the Insurrection Act, as he has threatened, so that he can send U.S. military forces to Minnesota.

But he'd be the only commander in chief to use the 19th-century law to send troops to quell protests that started because of federal officers the president already has sent to the area — one of whom shot and killed a U.S. citizen.

The law, which allows presidents to use the military domestically, has been invoked on more than two dozen occasions — but rarely since the 20th Century's Civil Rights Movement.

Federal forces typically are called to quell widespread violence that has broken out on the local level — before Washington's involvement and when local authorities ask for help. When presidents acted without local requests, it was usually to enforce the rights of individuals who were being threatened or not protected by state and local governments. A third scenario is an outright insurrection — like the Confederacy during the Civil War.

Experts in constitutional and military law say none of that clearly applies in Minneapolis.

“This would be a flagrant abuse of the Insurrection Act in a way that we've never seen,” said Joseph Nunn, an attorney at the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program. “None of the criteria have been met.”

William Banks, a Syracuse University professor emeritus who has written extensively on the domestic use of the military, said the situation is “a historical outlier” because the violence Trump wants to end “is being created by the federal civilian officers” he sent there.

But he also cautioned Minnesota officials would have “a tough argument to win” in court, because the judiciary is hesitant to challenge “because the courts are typically going to defer to the president” on his military decisions.

Here is a look at the law, how it's been used and comparisons to Minneapolis.

George Washington signed the first version in 1792, authorizing him to mobilize state militias — National Guard forerunners — when “laws of the United States shall be opposed, or the execution thereof obstructed.”

He and John Adams used it to quash citizen uprisings against taxes, including liquor levies and property taxes that were deemed essential to the young republic's survival.

Congress expanded the law in 1807, restating presidential authority to counter “insurrection or obstruction” of laws. Nunn said the early statutes recognized a fundamental “Anglo-American tradition against military intervention in civilian affairs” except “as a tool of last resort.”

The president argues Minnesota officials and citizens are impeding U.S. law by protesting his agenda and the presence of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and Customs and Border Protection officers. Yet early statutes also defined circumstances for the law as unrest “too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course” of law enforcement.

There are between 2,000 and 3,000 federal authorities in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area, compared to Minneapolis, which has fewer than 600 police officers. Protesters' and bystanders' video, meanwhile, has shown violence initiated by federal officers, with the interactions growing more frequent since Renee Good was shot three times and killed.

“ICE has the legal authority to enforce federal immigration laws,” Nunn said. “But what they're doing is a sort of lawless, violent behavior” that goes beyond their legal function and “foments the situation” Trump wants to suppress.

“They can't intentionally create a crisis, then turn around to do a crackdown,” he said, adding that the Constitutional requirement for a president to “faithfully execute the laws” means Trump must wield his power, on immigration and the Insurrection Act, “in good faith.”

Courts have blocked some of Trump's efforts to deploy the National Guard, but he'd argue with the Insurrection Act that he does not need a state's permission to send troops.

That traces to President Abraham Lincoln, who held in 1861 that Southern states could not legitimately secede. So, he convinced Congress to give him express power to deploy U.S. troops, without asking, into Confederate states he contended were still in the Union. Quite literally, Lincoln used the act as a legal basis to fight the Civil War.

Nunn said situations beyond such a clear insurrection as the Confederacy still require a local request or another trigger that Congress added after the Civil War: protecting individual rights. Ulysses S. Grant used that provision to send troops to counter the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacists who ignored the 14th and 15th amendments and civil rights statutes.

During post-war industrialization, violence erupted around strikes and expanding immigration — and governors sought help.

President Rutherford B. Hayes granted state requests during the Great Railroad Strike of 1877 after striking workers, state forces and local police clashed, leading to dozens of deaths. Grover Cleveland granted a Washington state governor's request — at that time it was a U.S. territory — to help protect Chinese citizens who were being attacked by white rioters. President Woodrow Wilson sent troops to Colorado in 1914 amid a coal strike after workers were killed.

Federal troops helped diffuse each situation.

Banks stressed that the law then and now presumes that federal resources are needed only when state and local authorities are overwhelmed — and Minnesota leaders say their cities would be stable and safe if Trump's feds left.

As Grant had done, mid-20th century presidents used the act to counter white supremacists.

Franklin Roosevelt dispatched 6,000 troops to Detroit — more than double the U.S. forces in Minneapolis — after race riots that started with whites attacking Black residents. State officials asked for FDR's aid after riots escalated, in part, Nunn said, because white local law enforcement joined in violence against Black residents. Federal troops calmed the city after dozens of deaths, including 17 Black residents killed by local police.

Once the Civil Rights Movement began, presidents sent authorities to Southern states without requests or permission, because local authorities defied U.S. civil rights law and fomented violence themselves.

Dwight Eisenhower enforced integration at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas; John F. Kennedy sent troops to the University of Mississippi after riots over James Meredith's admission and then pre-emptively to ensure no violence upon George Wallace's “Stand in the Schoolhouse Door” to protest the University of Alabama's integration.

“There could have been significant loss of life from the rioters” in Mississippi, Nunn said.

Lyndon Johnson protected the 1965 Voting Rights March from Selma to Montgomery after Wallace's troopers attacked marchers' on their first peaceful attempt.

Johnson also sent troops to multiple U.S. cities in 1967 and 1968 after clashes between residents and police escalated. The same thing happened in Los Angeles in 1992, the last time the Insurrection Act was invoked.

Riots erupted after a jury failed to convict four white police officers of excessive use of force despite video showing them beating a Rodney King, a Black man. California Gov. Pete Wilson asked President George H.W. Bush for support.

Bush authorized about 4,000 troops — but after he had publicly expressed displeasure over the trial verdict. He promised to “restore order” yet directed the Justice Department to open a civil rights investigation, and two of the L.A. officers were later convicted in federal court.

President Donald Trump answers questions after signing a bill that returns whole milk to school cafeterias across the country, in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)