McGlacken Renelle, Hobson-West Pru
School of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Anim Welf. 2024 Sep 23;33:e36. doi: 10.1017/awf.2024.42. eCollection 2024.
The use of animals as scientific models is argued to be crucial for producing new scientific and medical knowledge and clinical treatments. However, animal research continues to raise socio-ethical concerns. In recent years, there has been a push for openness amongst the life science community, with the aim of increasing the transparency of animal research to wider publics. Yet, how this push for openness is experienced by those responsible for the care and welfare of research animals requires further study. This paper draws upon qualitative interviews with Named Veterinary Surgeons (NVS) in the UK and explores how they practise openness, avoid openness, and, at times, challenge the way their role is represented within openness agendas. Overall, this social scientific analysis reveals that the current openness agenda has the potential to create tensions for professionals, as they seek to manage regulatory and public imaginaries of the veterinary identity alongside the animal research controversy. The paper concludes by arguing for a culture of dialogue, where openness includes allowing those with responsibilities for animal welfare to express ambivalence or concern about their own role. Finally, the paper calls for sustained academic work on relations between the veterinary profession and wider society, particularly areas that involve contested practices in which care and harm may coincide.
将动物用作科学模型被认为对于产生新的科学和医学知识以及临床治疗至关重要。然而,动物研究继续引发社会伦理问题。近年来,生命科学界一直在推动开放,目的是提高动物研究对更广泛公众的透明度。然而,负责研究动物护理和福利的人员如何体验这种开放的推动还需要进一步研究。本文借鉴了对英国指定兽医外科医生(NVS)的定性访谈,探讨了他们如何践行开放、避免开放,以及有时如何挑战他们在开放议程中被呈现的角色方式。总体而言,这种社会科学分析表明,当前的开放议程有可能给专业人员带来紧张关系,因为他们试图在动物研究争议的背景下管理监管机构和公众对兽医身份的想象。本文最后主张建立一种对话文化,其中开放包括允许那些负责动物福利的人表达对自己角色的矛盾态度或担忧。最后,本文呼吁就兽医行业与更广泛社会之间的关系开展持续的学术研究,特别是涉及护理和伤害可能并存的有争议做法的领域。