In the U.S., the problem of differential access to veterinary care is increasingly recognized as a necessary subject of professional discussion, with impacts on veterinary practice and training. These discussions often center on the differences between “gold standard care,” i.e. the standards of care, techniques, and procedures taught in the 32 Colleges of Veterinary Medicine, and an emerging set of protocols referred to as the more affordable “spectrum of care”. In this paper, Professor Desmond asks what happens when we reframe these debates not primarily as solutions to economic problems but rather in a social justice framework. Is the widespread lack of access to care, whether for economic, locational, educational, linguistic, or other reasons, actually an issue of “justice”? Focusing on the category of “pets,” Professor Desmond asks whether the growing assertion by many U.S. owners/guardians that pets are “part of the family” should lead us to conceive of health care for pets as a fundamental right, and/or obligation of the state. Arguing that emerging research demonstrates positive health impacts of pet-keeping on humans, she suggests that mobilizing notions of One Health and of the social determinants of health can potentially lead to policy changes that could support both the health of animals and human communities.