Bioethics Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
J Med Ethics. 2022 May;48(5):299-303. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106945. Epub 2021 Mar 31.
Animal ethics committees (AECs) typically focus on the welfare of animals used in experiments, neglecting the potential welfare impact of that animal use on the animal laboratory personnel. Some of this work, particularly the killing of animals, can impose significant psychological burdens that can diminish the well-being of laboratory animal personnel, as well as their capacity to care for animals. We propose that AECs, which regulate animal research in part on the basis of reducing harm, can and ought to require that these harms to researchers are reduced as well. The paper starts by presenting evidence of these burdens and their harm, giving some examples showing how they may be mitigated. We then argue that AECs are well placed to account for these harms to personnel and ought to use their power to reduce their occurrence. We conclude by responding to four potential objections: (1) that this problem should be addressed through health and safety administration, not research ethics administration; (2) that the proposal is unjustifiably paternalistic; (3) that these harms to laboratory animal personnel ought to occur, given their treatment of animals; and (4) that mitigating them may lead to worse treatment of research animals.
动物伦理委员会(AEC)通常专注于实验中使用动物的福利,而忽略了动物使用对动物实验室人员可能产生的福利影响。这项工作中的一些内容,尤其是动物的处死,会给实验室动物人员带来巨大的心理负担,降低他们的幸福感,影响他们照顾动物的能力。我们认为,动物伦理委员会以减少伤害为部分依据来监管动物研究,那么委员会也可以并且应该要求减少对研究人员的伤害。本文首先提出了这些负担和伤害的证据,并举例说明了如何减轻这些负担和伤害。然后我们认为,动物伦理委员会有能力考虑到这些对人员的伤害,并应该利用其权力来减少伤害的发生。最后我们回应了四个潜在的反对意见:(1)这个问题应该通过健康和安全管理来解决,而不是通过研究伦理管理来解决;(2)该提案是不合理的家长式作风;(3)鉴于他们对动物的处理方式,这些对实验室动物人员的伤害应该发生;(4)减轻这些伤害可能会导致对研究动物的更糟糕的待遇。