The ethics of research involving animals - Nuffield Council on ...

T h e e t h i c s o f r e s e a r c h i n v o l v i n g a n i m a l s
3.73 <strong>The</strong> crucial question now is not how scientists once behaved, but rather how we could
reasonably expect them to behave if regulations were less rigorous. <strong>The</strong> existence <strong>of</strong> any
regulation is justified in terms <strong>of</strong> reducing risks, and therefore we first have to consider what
the consequences <strong>of</strong> non-regulation, or less-detailed regulation, would be. 28 Accordingly,
scientists who consider that they are sufficiently experienced to judge the needs <strong>of</strong> animal
welfare in the planning and conduct <strong>of</strong> their work might well argue that they now have
acquired appropriate virtues. If this is correct, then the risk <strong>of</strong> making regulations less
detailed would be small. Furthermore, consideration <strong>of</strong> ethical aspects forms part <strong>of</strong> the
training <strong>of</strong> personal licence holders, 29 and is beginning to be included in college and
university education in the life sciences. Some take the view that continuing developments
in this area might be considered another good reason for relaxing regulation.
3.74 Opponents, however, might argue that scientists have developed virtues to the degree that
they have, primarily because <strong>of</strong> the regulations. <strong>The</strong>y assert that a strict regulatory
framework encourages scientists to be proactive in seeking out and implementing humane
practices. In a less-regulated world, they might let such virtues wane, especially as a
scientist’s priority is usually to make scientific progress, which may <strong>of</strong>ten, but need not
necessarily always, coincide with ensuring the highest possible degree <strong>of</strong> animal welfare.
3.75 In this respect, it might be instructive to compare common Western approaches to a particular
non-Western approach. Western practice usually focuses on beliefs and their consequences.
An example <strong>of</strong> a different approach is that practised by Australian Aborigines, for whom the
emphasis is on people and their relationships. 30 In the Western context, causing pain or
suffering to <strong>animals</strong> is recognised by some as an <strong>of</strong>fence to reason and is addressed by
adopting a resolution to minimise harmful consequences, for example by applying
Refinement, Reduction and Replacements. In the Aboriginal approach, the subject <strong>of</strong> any
<strong>of</strong>fence is considered to be another being, referred to as an ’I’ or ’thou’, and a ritual apology
can sometimes be <strong>of</strong>fered to an animal killed to provide food or clothing. <strong>The</strong> object <strong>of</strong> this
process is to inform the spirit <strong>of</strong> the animal that the act has been done in order to survive.
<strong>The</strong> apology is a quest to reweave a torn religious (literally binding) relationship.
3.76 Clearly, for the UK context, the Western approach to the conflict between human and
animal interests is more practicable and therefore appears to be the more preferable. But
whether the harm to <strong>animals</strong> can actually be reduced depends not only on the scientific and
technological means available, but also on the willingness <strong>of</strong> humans to recognise that an
animal has in some (not necessarily overtly religious) sense an ’I’ or ’thou’, or is a ‘subject <strong>of</strong>
experience’, qualifying it as having moral status. This thought adds an important dimension
to the common Western approach and can contribute to the motivation <strong>of</strong> identifying and
applying the Three Rs. In terms <strong>of</strong> the generally agreed need to minimise animal suffering,
the classical Western and the non-Western approaches might therefore be considered as
being morally complementary.
28 Some regulations merely encode pre-existing good practice, such as the policy decision not to grant licences for <strong>research</strong>
<strong>involving</strong> the great apes, which was implemented some years after the practice had ceased in the UK.
29 New applicants for personal licences are required to have successfully completed an accredited training programme
comprising three or possibly four modules (with ‘very limited exemptions’). <strong>The</strong> first module includes a section entitled An
introduction to ethical aspects <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> <strong>animals</strong> in scientific procedures. New applicants for project licences are required
to have successfully completed a further module which includes a section entitled Ethical aspects <strong>of</strong> the use <strong>of</strong> live <strong>animals</strong>.
See Home Office (1992) Education and training <strong>of</strong> personnel under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, available at:
http://www.home<strong>of</strong>fice.gov.uk/docs/training_statement1.html. Accessed on: 19 Apr 2005.
30 Clearly it is not possible to generalise from this example to a general paradigm <strong>of</strong> ‘non-Western practice’. <strong>The</strong>re is a wide
spectrum <strong>of</strong> views, some <strong>of</strong> which are very close to what has been presented above as a ‘Western’ view. See, for example,
Preece R (1999) Animals and Nature: Cultural Myths, Cultural Realities (Vancouver: University <strong>of</strong> British Columbia Press).
56