Literature DB >> 19854996

Engaging science in a climate of values: tools for animal scientists tasked with addressing ethical problems.

C C Croney1, R Anthony.   

Abstract

In the United States, escalating concerns about current farm animal science and production methods have resulted not only in increased food animal protection policies, but also in animal welfare legislation. Animal scientists and industry leaders are apprehensive that such policies may be driven primarily by emotion and a lack of scientific understanding, and thus may have unforeseen consequences. However, decisions about animal care, and particularly animal welfare, cannot be made solely on the basis of science because the potential effects on producers, animals, and concerned citizens and the implications for the environment and on food prices must also be considered. Balancing the interests and values of all stakeholders in regard to animal welfare problems has presented a considerable challenge. Ethical accounting processes, such as the Ethical Matrix and the ethics assessment process by Campbell, offer models to combine socioethical concerns with relevant factual information, thereby facilitating decision making that is ethically responsible and that offers viable solutions. A case study is used to illustrate application of the ethics assessment process by Campbell that includes identification of the ethical problems, the embedded values, the relevant facts, and moral tests that can be applied. Awareness of these emerging ways of examining ethics that offer real solutions to conflicts of interests and not merely "one size fits all" answers should be an asset to animal and poultry scientists.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19854996     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2009-2353

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  3 in total

1.  Benchmarking animal handling outcomes on cow-calf operations and identifying associated factors.

Authors:  Elaine Calaba; Michaela Clowser; Zachary D Weller; Libby Bigler; Jesse Fulton; Lily N Edwards-Callaway
Journal:  Transl Anim Sci       Date:  2022-08-01

2.  Public Attitudes to Housing Systems for Pregnant Pigs.

Authors:  E B Ryan; D Fraser; D M Weary
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Recalibrating Veterinary Medicine through Animal Welfare Science and Ethics for the 2020s.

Authors:  Andreia De Paula Vieira; Raymond Anthony
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 2.752

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.