Researching consent in veterinary practice: The use of interpretive description as a multidisciplinary methodology

Abstract

Informed consent in the veterinary sphere has been surprisingly under-researched, despite it being a professional ethical requirement. As consent is given by animal owners on behalf of patients who are unable to consent for themselves, its underpinning ethical basis cannot exactly mirror consent given by adult human patients with capacity. Any attempt to research consent in the veterinary context requires consideration of its legal, ethical and practical applications. This investigation of consent practices in veterinary settings in the United Kingdom was undertaken using interpretation of medicolegal cases, together with three discrete empirical studies comprising the textual analysis of consent forms, consent discussions for the elective neutering of companion animal patients, and interviews with key participants in the consent process. The chosen approach required a methodology that would facilitate triangulation between empirical data analysis and doctrinal legal research. Here, I describe the first use of interpretive description as a methodology of veterinary socio-legal studies, in the context of practice-based research. With foundations in traditional social science methodologies such as hermeneutics, grounded theory, ethnography and symbolic interactionism, interpretive description provided a multi-disciplinary methodological perspective. Its underpinning methodologies informed the methods that were used for data collection, and for subsequent analysis. I combined interpretation of legal decisions and professional ethical guidance with thematic surveys of empirical data to reach higher levels of analysis. The resulting conceptual description of consent in veterinary practice enabled the production of normative guidance appropriate for those in practice, thus fulfilling the methodological aims of interpretive description. Specifically, the key findings were that the consent form should act as a fuller record of the consent discussion, that attention should be paid to achieving an appropriate balance between client autonomy and patient ‘best interests’ and that consent should provide protection to all three parties (client, patient and veterinary professional).

Medicine, Value, and Knowledge in the Veterinary Clinic: Questions for and From Medical Anthropology and the Medical Humanities

“…Complementing this research focus on the animal as communicative, agentive subject, a second area of ethnographic research could lie in analyzing the notion of “consent.” Consent is usually performed as a human to human contract, but as Megan Donald ( 34 ) has argued, the co-presence of the non-human animal at decision making time implies that consent decisions have the potential to be multi-species events (We saw this explicitly in my opening example of Cubby the snake who was not consenting to start her exam). Similarly, in a different context of UK lab animal research, Gail Davis et al have posed the question of whether animals can consent to be research subjects ( 55 , 56 ).…”

“…In addition, new research on consent in the UK by veterinarian and scholar Carol Gray demonstrates that consent is under-researched in veterinary medicine and that clients generally perceive it to be merely legal protection for the doctor ( 56 , 57 ). She argues that consent forms should create the conditions for and document fuller discussions of procedures and risks, and provide protection for client, patient, and doctor.…”

Reviewing a Decade of Change for Veterinarians: Past, Present and Gaps in Researching Stress, Coping and Mental Health Risks

“…Therefore, veterinarians have responsibilities towards the animal, animal handlers/owners and regarding animal welfare in general. Daily work is based on a fundamental ethical dilemma, even described as the “fundamental problem in veterinary medicine” [ 1 ]: the person who gives consent to any form of treatment is not the patient who is undergoing that treatment, as Gray [ 2 ] describes. Rollin [ 3 , 4 ] points out that veterinarians have additional obligations to several other stakeholders as well as peers of the profession, society in general, themselves and potential employees.…”

Coalitions of touch: Balancing restraint and haptic soothing in the veterinary clinic

“…In line with guidance on video‐based research (Heath et al, 2010), we gained the consent of clients through a systematic process described in the terms of reference agreed with practice owners. Of course, “consent based on the autonomy of the patient, as is predominantly the case in medicine, is unsuitable for the veterinary context” (Gray, 2020: 1). So, where possible, the study was discussed with clients when they booked their appointment; and they were advised they may be approached to discuss the possibility of filming their consultation.…”