Compassion for Other Animals Beyond the Human Hierarchy of Concern

2020 ◽  
pp. 99-112
Author(s):  
Brian Hare
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Regulatory Regime ◽  
Reasonable Person ◽  
Human Psychology ◽  
Moral Framework

Beauchamp and DeGrazia provide a moral framework meant to enhance the well-being of research animals—and thereby animal research. They offer six principles that they argue any reasonable person would accept as conditions for permitting invasive animal research. While some are implicit in the current regulatory regime, the authors’ framework gives individual researchers the ability to challenge committee and institutional decisions on explicit moral grounds. Although the authors have provided a useful moral framework that improves upon the time-tested Three Rs, their framework has important limitations pertaining to assumptions about human psychology—specifically, our ability to perceive pain in animals.

scholarly journals Foreword and Introduction to This Issue on Contemporary Safety Topics in Animal Research

ILAR Journal ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-126
Author(s):  
John Bradfield ◽  
Esmeralda Meyer ◽  
John N Norton
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Health ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Occupational Health And Safety ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
The Status ◽  
Safety Considerations ◽  
Animal Care ◽  
Health And Well Being

Abstract Institutions with animal care and use programs are obligated to provide for the health and well-being of the animals, but are equally obligated to provide for safety of individuals associated with the program. The topics in this issue of the ILAR Journal, in association with those within the complimentary issue of the Journal of Applied Biosafety, provide a variety of contemporary occupational health and safety considerations in today’s animal research programs. Each article addresses key or emerging occupational health and safety topics in institutional animal care and use programs, where the status of the topic, contemporary challenges, and future directions are provided.

scholarly journals Three models for the regulation of polygenic scores in reproduction

2021 ◽  
pp. medethics-2020-106588
Author(s):  
Sarah Munday ◽  
Julian Savulescu
Keyword(s):  
Human Genetics ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Embryo Selection ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Regulatory Regime ◽  
Polygenic Scores ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

The past few years have brought significant breakthroughs in understanding human genetics. This knowledge has been used to develop ‘polygenic scores’ (or ‘polygenic risk scores’) which provide probabilistic information about the development of polygenic conditions such as diabetes or schizophrenia. They are already being used in reproduction to select for embryos at lower risk of developing disease. Currently, the use of polygenic scores for embryo selection is subject to existing regulations concerning embryo testing and selection. Existing regulatory approaches include ‘disease-based' models which limit embryo selection to avoiding disease characteristics (employed in various formats in Australia, the UK, Italy, Switzerland and France, among others), and 'laissez-faire' or 'libertarian' models, under which embryo testing and selection remain unregulated (as in the USA). We introduce a novel 'Welfarist Model' which limits embryo selection according to the impact of the predicted trait on well-being. We compare the strengths and weaknesses of each model as a way of regulating polygenic scores. Polygenic scores create the potential for existing embryo selection technologies to be used to select for a wider range of predicted genetically influenced characteristics including continuous traits. Indeed, polygenic scores exist to predict future intelligence, and there have been suggestions that they will be used to make predictions within the normal range in the USA in embryo selection. We examine how these three models would apply to the prediction of non-disease traits such as intelligence. The genetics of intelligence remains controversial both scientifically and ethically. This paper does not attempt to resolve these issues. However, as with many biomedical advances, an effective regulatory regime must be in place as soon as the technology is available. If there is no regulation in place, then the market effectively decides ethical issues.

scholarly journals Virtue Ethics and Laboratory Animal Research

ILAR Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca L Walker
Keyword(s):  
Virtue Ethics ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Laboratory Animal ◽  
Animal Studies ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Moral Significance ◽  
Moral Framework ◽  
Animal Research Ethics ◽  
Human Animal

Abstract This article appeals to virtue ethics to help guide laboratory animal research by considering the role of character and flourishing in these practices. Philosophical approaches to animal research ethics have typically focused on animal rights or on the promotion of welfare for all affected, while animal research itself has been guided in its practice by the 3Rs (reduction, refinement, replacement). These different approaches have sometimes led to an impasse in debates over animal research where the philosophical approaches are focused on whether or when animal studies are justifiable, while the 3Rs assume a general justification for animal work but aim to reduce harm to sentient animals and increase their welfare in laboratory spaces. Missing in this exchange is a moral framework that neither assumes nor rejects the justifiability of animal research and focuses instead on the habits and structures of that work. I shall propose a place for virtue ethics in laboratory animal research by considering examples of relevant character traits, the moral significance of human-animal bonds, mentorship in the laboratory, and the importance of animals flourishing beyond mere welfare.

Grief as a normative phenomenon: The diffuse and ambivalent normativity of infant loss and parental grieving in contemporary Western culture

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 519-533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ester Holte Kofod ◽  
Svend Brinkmann
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
Qualitative Interview ◽  
Cultural Norms ◽  
Personal Health ◽  
Small Child ◽  
Moral Framework ◽  
Bereaved Parents ◽  
Medical Terms ◽  
Qualitative Interview Study ◽  
Infant Loss

Grief is often conceived in causal or reactive terms, as something that simply strikes people after a loss. But, on closer scrutiny, there are good reasons to think of grief as a normative phenomenon, which is done or enacted by people, relative to cultural norms. To substantiate the claim that grief should be thought of as normative, we draw upon empirical examples from a qualitative interview study with bereaved parents following infant loss, and analyze how grieving the loss of a small child in our culture is experienced, interpreted, and enacted within a diffuse and ambivalent, yet inescapable, moral framework. Further, we discuss some of the possible consequences for bereaved individuals when navigating the normative landscape of grieving in contemporary Western cultures: A landscape in which suffering is increasingly dealt with in psychiatric and medical terms and understood as an adverse and unnecessary condition to be overcome in order to maximize personal health, happiness, and well-being.

Animal Research and Human Psychology

1967 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Mehlman
Keyword(s):  
Animal Research ◽  
Human Psychology

scholarly journals Opioids and Social Connection

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tristen Inagaki
Keyword(s):  
Subjective Experience ◽  
Social Bonds ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Social Bonding ◽  
Social Experiences ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Social Connection ◽  
Social Contacts ◽  
Future Work

Social connection, the pleasurable, subjective experience of feeling close to and bonded with others, is critical for well-being and continued social bonding. Despite the importance of social connection for many important outcomes, less research has experimentally examined how humans connect with those with whom they feel close. The strongest insights into the biological bases of social connection come from animal research showing that social bonds rely on the same neurochemicals that support general motivation. One neurochemical, opioids, has received increased attention in recent years with the rise of pharmacological methods to manipulate opioids in humans. This paper reviews emerging findings to show that opioids affect social feelings, behaviors, and perceptions in both positive and negative social experiences and concludes with translational implications of such findings. Future work should consider the subjective feelings of social connection felt during interactions with close social contacts to further understanding of social connection.

Sustainable Spaces with Psychological Values: Historical Architecture as Reference Book for Biomimetic Models with Biophilic Qualities

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nely Ramzy
Keyword(s):  
Built Environment ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Reference Book ◽  
Human Psychology ◽  
Biomimetic Models ◽  
Human Needs ◽  
Area Of Interest ◽  
Growing Body ◽  
Historical Architecture ◽  
Frame Work

Biomimicry is a growing area of interest in architecture due to the potentials it offers for innovative architectural solutions and for more sustainable, regenerative built environment. Yet, a growing body of research identified various deficiencies to the employment of this approach in architecture. Of particular note are that: first, some biomimetic technologies are not inherently more sustainable or Nature-friendly than conventional equivalents; second, they lack any spatial expression of Nature and are visually ill-integrated into it. In a trial to redeem these deficiencies, this paper suggests a frame-work for more sustainable strategy that combines this approach with the relative approach of "Biophilia", with reference to examples from historical architecture. Using pioneering strategies and applications from different historical styles, the paper shows that the combination of these two approaches may lead to enhanced outcomes in terms of sustainability as well as human psychology and well-being. In doing so, architects may go beyond simply mimicking Nature to synthesizing architecture in tune with it and bringing in bio-inspired solutions that is more responsive to human needs and well-being.

Damage Awards

2019 ◽  
pp. 87-96
Author(s):  
Dov Fox
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
Reproductive Outcome ◽  
Major Life ◽  
Damage Awards ◽  
Reasonable Person ◽  
Professional Misconduct ◽  
Contraceptive User ◽  
Reproductive Loss ◽  
To Come ◽  
Future Loss

Two questions should guide award determinations for procreation deprived, imposed, and confounded: First, how serious is a plaintiff’s reproductive loss? The answer goes to the nature and duration of that loss’s practical consequences for the plaintiff’s life. The second question asks how likely any future loss is to come about, and the extent to which its cause can be traced to a defendant’s misconduct, as opposed to some other factor for which the defendant isn’t to blame. The severity of reproductive injuries calls for objective inquiry into how a reasonable person in the plaintiff’s shoes would be affected. Permanent injuries tend to be more severe than temporary ones because they can be expected to cause greater disruption to major life activities like education, work, marriage, friendships, and emotional well-being. The question isn’t what plaintiffs would have done if they’d known that negligence would dash their efforts—it’s how much those injuries can be expected to impair their lives, from the perspective of their own ideals and circumstances. The causation element of this damages inquiry asks: What are the odds that plaintiffs would have suffered the complained-of reproductive outcome if it hadn’t been for the professional misconduct? Preexisting infertility, contraceptive user error, and genetic uncertainty can deprive, impose, or confound procreation just the same in the absence of any wrongdoing. Probabilistic recovery starts with the award total corresponding to the absolute loss in question, and reduces it by the extent to which the loss was caused by outside forces.

Principles of Animal Research Ethics

2020 ◽  
pp. 5-42
Author(s):  
David DeGrazia ◽  
Tom L. Beauchamp
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Social Benefit ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Ethical Review ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Moral Framework ◽  
Animal Research Ethics

The centerpiece section of this book on animal research ethics presents a new moral framework of general principles. It is preceded in the front matter by a preamble that explains the overall project in the book as well as in the sections specifically on the six principles. The centerpiece section first discusses the essential place of ethical justification in the animal research arena and then presents the framework of three principles of social benefit and three principles of animal welfare. Next it examines both the critical role played by ethics committees in a well-functioning system of ethical review of animal research and the idea of scientific necessity as a justification for harming animal subjects. The section closes with an analysis of the influential Three-Rs framework, as presented in Russell and Burch’s Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. Despite the Three Rs’ important advance in the promotion of animal welfare, it does not adequately address the costs and benefits of animal research to human beings and lacks a comprehensive program of animal-subjects protection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document