Cargando…
A good life? A good death? Reconciling care and harm in animal research
Laboratory animal science represents a challenging and controversial form of human-animal relations because its practice involves the deliberate and inadvertent harming and killing of animals. Consequently, animal research has formed the focus of intense ethical concern and regulation within the UK,...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Routledge
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7614075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36655137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2021.1901977 |
_version_ | 1783605560131715072 |
---|---|
author | Roe, Emma Greenhough, Beth |
author_facet | Roe, Emma Greenhough, Beth |
author_sort | Roe, Emma |
collection | PubMed |
description | Laboratory animal science represents a challenging and controversial form of human-animal relations because its practice involves the deliberate and inadvertent harming and killing of animals. Consequently, animal research has formed the focus of intense ethical concern and regulation within the UK, in order to minimize the suffering and pain experienced by those animals whose living bodies model human diseases amongst other things. This paper draws on longitudinal ethnographic research and in-depth interviews undertaken with junior laboratory animal technicians (ATs) in UK universities between 2013 and 2015, plus insights from interviews with key stakeholders in laboratory animal welfare. In our analysis, we examine four key dimensions of care work in laboratory animal research: (i) the specific skills and sensitivities required; (ii) the role of previous experiences of animal care; (iii) the influence of institutional and affective environments and (iv) experiences of killing. We propose that different notions of care are enacted alongside, not only permitted levels of harm inflicted on research animals following research protocols, but also harms to ATs in the processes of caring and killing animals. Concluding, we argue for greater articulation of the coexistence of care and harms across debates in geography about care and human-animal relations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7614075 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Routledge |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76140752023-01-17 A good life? A good death? Reconciling care and harm in animal research Roe, Emma Greenhough, Beth Soc Cult Geogr Special Issue: Cultures of Care, Guest edited by Beth Greenhough, Gail Davies and Sophie Bowlby Laboratory animal science represents a challenging and controversial form of human-animal relations because its practice involves the deliberate and inadvertent harming and killing of animals. Consequently, animal research has formed the focus of intense ethical concern and regulation within the UK, in order to minimize the suffering and pain experienced by those animals whose living bodies model human diseases amongst other things. This paper draws on longitudinal ethnographic research and in-depth interviews undertaken with junior laboratory animal technicians (ATs) in UK universities between 2013 and 2015, plus insights from interviews with key stakeholders in laboratory animal welfare. In our analysis, we examine four key dimensions of care work in laboratory animal research: (i) the specific skills and sensitivities required; (ii) the role of previous experiences of animal care; (iii) the influence of institutional and affective environments and (iv) experiences of killing. We propose that different notions of care are enacted alongside, not only permitted levels of harm inflicted on research animals following research protocols, but also harms to ATs in the processes of caring and killing animals. Concluding, we argue for greater articulation of the coexistence of care and harms across debates in geography about care and human-animal relations. Routledge 2021-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7614075/ /pubmed/36655137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2021.1901977 Text en © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Special Issue: Cultures of Care, Guest edited by Beth Greenhough, Gail Davies and Sophie Bowlby Roe, Emma Greenhough, Beth A good life? A good death? Reconciling care and harm in animal research |
title | A good life? A good death? Reconciling care and harm in animal research |
title_full | A good life? A good death? Reconciling care and harm in animal research |
title_fullStr | A good life? A good death? Reconciling care and harm in animal research |
title_full_unstemmed | A good life? A good death? Reconciling care and harm in animal research |
title_short | A good life? A good death? Reconciling care and harm in animal research |
title_sort | good life? a good death? reconciling care and harm in animal research |
topic | Special Issue: Cultures of Care, Guest edited by Beth Greenhough, Gail Davies and Sophie Bowlby |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7614075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36655137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2021.1901977 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT roeemma agoodlifeagooddeathreconcilingcareandharminanimalresearch AT greenhoughbeth agoodlifeagooddeathreconcilingcareandharminanimalresearch AT roeemma goodlifeagooddeathreconcilingcareandharminanimalresearch AT greenhoughbeth goodlifeagooddeathreconcilingcareandharminanimalresearch |