Legal and Ethical Aspects of ‘Best Interests’ Decision-Making for Medical Treatment of Companion Animals in the UK

Abstract

Medical decisions for young children are made by those with parental responsibility, with legal involvement only if the decision is potentially detrimental to the child’s welfare. While legally classified as property, some argue that animals are in a similar position to children; treatment decisions are made by their owners, posing a legal challenge only if the proposed treatment has the potential to cause harm or unnecessary suffering, as defined by animal protection legislation. This paper formulates the approach to a ‘best interests’ calculation, utilising the factors included in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and relying on exchange of information between the human parties involved. Although this form of decision-making must primarily protect the animal from unnecessary suffering, it recognises that the information provided by the owner is critical in articulating the animal’s non-medical interests, and hence in formulating what is in the animal’s best overall welfare interests. While statute law does not mandate consideration of ‘best interests’ for animals, this approach might reasonably be expected as a professional imperative for veterinary surgeons. Importantly, this version of a ‘best interests’ calculation can be incorporated into existing ethical frameworks for medical decision-making and the humane treatment of animals.

Navigating the legalities of canine castration

“…The issue of what is in an animal's best interests is discussed elsewhere (Gray and Fordyce 2020), but involves obtaining genuinely informed consent. This requires discussion of alternative treatment options and the likely risks and benefits involved (including failure to change the dog's behaviour).…”

Managing conflicting ethical concerns in modern small animal practice—A comparative study of veterinarian’s decision ethics in Austria, Denmark and the UK

“…Other models have been developed to explain how decision-making processes can be shaped that are based on theoretical considerations [21,22,25]. For instance, the ethicist Bernard Rollin distinguishes between two models that veterinarians can refer to during the care of their patient: first, veterinarians can act as the "garage mechanic" or second, take the role of "paediatrician" and prioritize the patient's interest [25].…”

“…The methodological approach falls within the field of empirically informed veterinary ethics by describing how veterinarians actually manage expectations and concerns emerging in modern small animal practice. In contrast to the normatively determined approach, where authors, for instance, make a normative claim to the effect that veterinarians should focus on patientcentered factors in decision-making processes [21][22][23][24][25], the current study does not aim to promote a certain view on how veterinarians should act. Rather, the four hypothesized DEOs allowed us to identify, present and explain how veterinary decision-making is actually shaped.…”

Welfare and legal aspects of making decisions on medical treatments of pet animals

“…8 Hence, the "best interests" choice for the kid cannot be founded exclusively on the maintenance of living, implying that addition of lifetime at any cost to the kid welfare is of itself not an explanation for medical intermediation, and can not only be founded exclusively on the evasion of harm. 9 Setting to the pet animal patient, there is a concern arise that various veterinary choices are founded on precisely two parameters. One of them is extending the life of the pet and the second one is to avoid the pet's harm.…”

“…611-656. 9 Vaughan Brakman, S. According to some research, 11 a pet animal's death is not considered to harm a pet animal's welfare. Once the animal brain has stopped working, the pet will have no consciousness of any reactions that might be portrayed as aversive suffering.…”