What is it about?
This article explores the application of Professor David Fraser's practical ethic, based on four principles (providing good lives to animals in our care, treating suffering with compassion, being mindful of unseen harms and protecting the environment and life sustaining processes), in veterinary and one welfare scenarios.
Featured Image
Photo by Haseeb Jamil on Unsplash
Why is it important?
A number of surveys have found that ethically challenging situations are common in veterinary practice, and that these can be a source of moral stress or moral distress which may contribute to mental health morbidity and mortality. Traditionally, veterinary ethics texts recommend application of frameworks including utilitarianism, deontology, Mepham's ethical matrix and the principles of biomedical ethics to ethically challenging situations. Such frameworks tend to emphasise individual stakeholders and known consequences of decisions, but often overlook unseen harms and the environment. Fraser's "practical" ethic for animals explicitly requires that we consider these. One Welfare is an approach based on recognition of the inextricable links between animal welfare, human wellbeing and environmental sustainability. In this paper we argue that Fraser's "practical" ethic is compatible with the One Welfare approach. Both Fraser’s “practical” ethic and a One Welfare framework require veterinarians to consider the impacts of animal ethics decisions on a broader scale than most other ethical frameworks have prepared them for. We apply the practical ethic to three situations that veterinarians may encounter in practice: animal hoarding, animal neglect, and treatment of wildlife. This paper discusses the strengths and limitations of Fraser’s “practical” ethic when applied in veterinary contexts.
Perspectives
As someone who has been studying veterinary ethics for some time, and co-written a textbook on the subject, I was well-versed with commonly used ethical frameworks to navigate ethically challenging situations or ECS as I call them. ECSs are a major source of stress in veterinary practice and may contribute to the attrition of veterinary team members. But they are of interest because they may also disclose issues relating to animal welfare and the environment. Thus a veterinarian, animal health technician or veterinary nurse may find dealing with an animal hoarding situation stressful because they are aware of its impact not just on themselves, but also on the animals, other stakeholders and the environment itself. As a teacher of veterinary ethics Fraser's practical ethic appeals because its four principles are articulated in plain language; they are practical and relatable; and I believe they are comprehensive. They consider the wider contexts in which ECSs occur. This paper provided an opportunity to apply those principles to real-world scenarios and explore their strengths and limitations. There is a growing awareness that as veterinarians, we need to think beyond the patient in front of us. To maintain and improve animal welfare, we are going to need to have to act locally, but also tackle some major existential threats including climate change, antimicrobial resistance, poverty and inequality and food security. In doing so we need to be mindful of One Welfare because if we neglect one aspect - animal welfare, human wellbeing or environmental sustainability - we cannot succeed. I think that Fraser's "practical" ethic for animals offers not just a decision making approach but also an important framework for discussions and development of policy.
Anne Fawcett
University of Sydney
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Application of Fraser’s “Practical” Ethic in Veterinary Practice, and Its Compatibility with a “One Welfare” Framework, Animals, July 2018, MDPI AG,
DOI: 10.3390/ani8070109.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
