THE RIGHTS OF ANIMALSAn interview with Jerrold Tannenbaum, professor of veterinary ethics and law Jerrold Tannenbaum is a professor of veterinary ethics and law, the only one in the world, by his reckoning. He came to the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine last April after holding a similar position at Tufts University Veterinary School for 17 years. This is his second career with the University of California; he was an assistant professor of philosophy for two years at UC Santa Barbara before leaving for Harvard Law School. After Harvard, Tannenbaum argued major criminal cases on appeal as an assistant district attorney in New York City, then handled private civil litigation. In 1982, just as he was considering returning to teaching philosophy, an opportunity arose that sent him in an unexpected direction. Affection for their pet Yorkshire terrier, Phillip, motivated Tannenbaum's wife to become a veterinarian, studying at Tufts Veterinary School, and Tannenbaum, at the request of the school's dean, to create a position focusing on veterinary ethics and law. We've had more animal rights activism at UC Davis this past year than in recent years. Has something changed in the social climate? We're seeing people become more interested in animal welfare. Much of it is motivated by the rising value that many place on companion animals, such as dogs, cats, horses and birds. These relationships can be intense and loving, and people quite naturally look at their own animals and ask, "How are other animals treated?" What has prompted this increase in affection for companion animals? There are many factors, including advances in veterinary medicine and science --many of which have been pioneered here at UC Davis. Veterinarians can now help animals that only a few years ago would have had to be euthanized. The fact that pets can now live longer, healthier, and happier lives encourages people to accept and strengthen the bonds of affection and respect with their animals. What kind of impact do you believe the animal rights movement will have in the coming decades? The animal rights movement wants to terminate all use of animals for the benefit of humans or other animals. This means no raising of animals for food or fiber, no use of animals in horse racing, for example, rodeos, circuses, or zoos. It also means not having animals as pets because people do this at least in part for their own benefit. I do not see the animal rights movement achieving such aims. The movement can, however, impede important uses of animals in research and agriculture through publicity campaigns that seek to portray certain animal uses as cruel and unnecessary. The animal rights movement is also turning increasingly to courts and judges to try to achieve limitations that legislatures and the public are apparently unwilling to approve. Yet I think that scientists need to be able to articulate the reasons for what they're doing, and many are capable of doing it and do it quite well. I think they can't take for granted the continuing public support for what they do, because the public may not understand either what the scientists are doing or the reasons for it. I don't say defend; I say explain. And I think that is an important part of the process of being able to continue to have the support of the public, financially and morally. I do believe that the American public has a great deal of common sense. Surveys show that they support important medical and agricultural research, and they're sensible, good people. And sensible, good people should be able to respond positively to reasonable arguments. In the second edition of your book, Veterinary Ethics, you say the next wave of activism will be related to farm-animal welfare. Reasonably accurate statistics indicate that 20 million to 40 million animals are used in research in the United States each year, while at least 7 billion animals are used in agriculture. Many protesters believe that farm-animal issues will be the major thrust of activism in the 21st century, because some people want to apply their companion-animal values to farm animals. For example, much of agriculture today is intensive, meaning that animals are housed in group conditions that are not the way they would have been housed in family farms years ago. And many people wonder whether they are suffering and whether it's an adequate way of life for them. I think we can expect protests and questions about this. Because we have the finest veterinary school in the world, we should be ready with answers. If the animals are being treated appropriately, then we should be able to say so. If the animals' conditions could be improved, then we should be interested in how various improvements could be made. What are the most important issues to be explored in the coming decades in the field of veterinary ethics? There are many socially important and intellectually challenging problems ahead. One relates to how veterinarians and animal owners will deal with increasingly high-tech veterinary procedures, such as cancer chemotherapy, sophisticated orthopedic surgery, kidney dialysis, and organ transplantation. Such procedures can be expensive for owners and difficult for both animals and their owners. Today animal hospital intensive care units can keep pets alive long after they cease to have a good quality of life, and we must now ask as we do in human medicine whether there are ethical limits to what should be done. Veterinary ethics will also be increasingly concerned with issues relating to new technologies such as cloning of animals, xenotransplantation (the transplanting of animal organs and tissues into humans), and the production of genetically modified animals. Among the things we need to ask about such technologies is whether animal welfare will be sufficiently safeguarded. -- Sylvia Wright |
