探索针对犬猫的野外干预和创新中动物福利考量的实际伦理指导方面的差距。
Exploring the Gaps in Practical Ethical Guidance for Animal Welfare Considerations of Field Interventions and Innovations Targeting Dogs and Cats.
作者信息
Tasker Louisa, Getty Susan F, Briggs Joyce R, Benka Valerie A W
机构信息
Independent Consultant, Hillcrest, Stanton-by-Dale, Derbyshire DE7 4QQ, UK.
Alliance for Contraception in Cats & Dogs, 11145 NW Old Cornelius Pass Road, Portland, OR 97231, USA.
出版信息
Animals (Basel). 2018 Jan 27;8(2):19. doi: 10.3390/ani8020019.
Domestic dogs () and cats () are common species targeted by nongovernmental or intergovernmental organizations, veterinarians and government agencies worldwide, for field interventions (e.g., population management, rabies vaccination programs) or innovations (e.g., development of technologies or pharmaceuticals to improve animal welfare). We have a moral responsibility to ensure that the conduct of this work is humane for dogs or cats, and to consider the human communities in which the animals live. Ethical review is widely accepted as being integral to responsible practice, and it is fundamental to good science that underpins innovation. Despite the necessity of field interventions or innovations to advance the welfare of individuals or populations of animals, we found a lack of specific guidance and review processes to help navigate ethical dilemmas surrounding the conduct of such work. This can be detrimental to the wellbeing of animals and their human communities. Here we identify the gaps in existing ethical frameworks (specifically application of Reduction and Refinement principles, challenges of obtaining meaningful informed consent with variations in the quality of human-animal relationships, and limited resources regarding considerations of local stakeholders), and outline the need for additional tools to promote ethical conduct in the field.
家犬( )和家猫( )是全球非政府组织、政府间组织、兽医和政府机构开展实地干预(如种群管理、狂犬病疫苗接种计划)或创新活动(如开发改善动物福利的技术或药物)时常见的目标物种。我们有道义责任确保此类工作对犬猫人道,并考虑动物所在的人类社区。伦理审查被广泛认为是负责任实践不可或缺的一部分,也是支撑创新的良好科学的基础。尽管实地干预或创新对于提高动物个体或种群的福利是必要的,但我们发现缺乏具体的指导和审查程序来帮助应对此类工作中围绕伦理困境的问题。这可能对动物及其人类社区的福祉有害。在此,我们确定了现有伦理框架中的差距(特别是减少和优化原则的应用、由于人兽关系质量差异而在获得有意义的知情同意方面面临的挑战以及关于当地利益相关者考虑的资源有限),并概述了在该领域促进符合伦理行为所需的额外工具。
相似文献
J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003
ScientificWorldJournal. 2016
J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2011
引用本文的文献
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2024-11-1
Surg Open Sci. 2023-11-20
本文引用的文献
Lab Anim (NY). 2017-3-22
Front Vet Sci. 2016-10-20
J Small Anim Pract. 2016-2
Animals (Basel). 2012-11-6
Animals (Basel). 2014-6-19