Welfare, law and ethics in the veterinary intensive care unit

Fordyce, Peter

doi:10.1016/j.vaa.2016.06.002

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of these exemptions relate to fulfillment of the purposes of other acts, such as the Conservation Act 1987 ( 191 ) and the Biosecurity Act 1993 ( 192 ) (Animal Welfare Amendment Act (No.2) 2015 ( 193 ) subsection 30A4) or the Animal Welfare Act, Section 181, relating to the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act 1997 ( 194 ), when the activity involves the use of any substance for direct management or eradication of vertebrate pests. Nonetheless, the question arises: “is the suffering caused to these wild animals ‘necessary'?” ( 41 , 52 , 195 ).…”

Section: Whether And/or How To Consider Information In Development Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Feelings and Fitness” Not “Feelings or Fitness”–The Raison d'être of Conservation Welfare, Which Aligns Conservation and Animal Welfare Objectives

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasingly, human activities, including those aimed at conserving species and ecosystems (conservation activities) influence not only the survival and fitness but also the welfare of wild animals. Animal welfare relates to how an animal is experiencing its life and encompasses both its physical and mental states. While conservation biology and animal welfare science are both multi-disciplinary fields that use scientific methods to address concerns about animals, their focus and objectives sometimes appear to conflict. However, activities impacting detrimentally on the welfare of individual animals also hamper achievement of some conservation goals, and societal acceptance is imperative to the continuation of conservation activities. Thus, the best outcomes for both disciplines will be achieved through collaboration and knowledge-sharing. Despite this recognition, cross-disciplinary information-sharing and collaborative research and practice in conservation are still rare, with the exception of the zoo context. This paper summarizes key points developed by a group of conservation and animal welfare scientists discussing scientific assessment of wild animal welfare and barriers to progress. The dominant theme emerging was the need for a common language to facilitate cross-disciplinary progress in understanding and safeguarding the welfare of animals of wild species. Current conceptions of welfare implicit in conservation science, based mainly on “fitness” (physical states), need to be aligned with contemporary animal welfare science concepts which emphasize the dynamic integration of “fitness” and “feelings” (mental experiences) to holistically understand animals' welfare states. The way in which animal welfare is characterized influences the way it is evaluated and the emphasis put on different features of welfare, as well as, the importance placed on the outcomes of such evaluations and how that information is used, for example in policy development and decision-making. Salient examples from the New Zealand and Australian context are presented to illustrate. To genuinely progress our understanding and evaluation of wild animal welfare and optimize the aims of both scientific disciplines, conservation and animal welfare scientists should work together to evolve and apply a common understanding of welfare. To facilitate this, we propose the formal development of a new discipline, Conservation Welfare, integrating the expertise of scientists from both fields.

show abstract

Section: Whether And/or How To Consider Information In Development Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Feelings and Fitness” Not “Feelings or Fitness”–The Raison d'être of Conservation Welfare, Which Aligns Conservation and Animal Welfare Objectives

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…29 This concept is further complicated in veterinary medicine owing to the legal standing of animals in society as both property and their recognition as sentient beings, with the precise role for veterinarians left ambiguous. 15 In the present study, 60% of respondents agreed with the statement that all treatment options should be presented to owners, whereas nearly 30% disagreed. This finding is consistent with the established movement away from a paternalistic approach to medicine in favor of a more patient-oriented approach.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 49%

“…[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] The concept of futile or nonbeneficial care as it relates to veterinary medicine has been lightly explored in recent years. [13][14][15][16] However, there currently is no accepted definition for futile or nonbeneficial care in veterinary or human medicine. The authors consider the essential concept of futility to entail continuing treatment for a patient when relevant goals can no longer be reached.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Medical futility is commonly encountered in small animal clinical practice

Peterson

Boyd

Moses

2022

javma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE To document veterinarians’ perceptions and understanding of medical futility and determine the frequency with which medical futility occurs in small animal practice. SAMPLE 477 veterinarians in small animal general and specialty veterinary practice. PROCEDURES A cross-sectional study was performed with a 25-question, web-based, confidential, anonymous survey distributed through various professional veterinary specialty associations. RESULTS Nearly all respondents (469/474 [99.0%]) believed that futile care occurs in veterinary medicine, and 42.4% (201/474) felt it occurred commonly (> 6 times/y). A similar percentage (471/475 [99.2%]) reported encountering futile care within their careers, and 85.0% (402/476) reported encountering it within the past year. A majority (293/477 [61.4%]) reported witnessing futile care occurring in both inpatient and outpatient settings. Most respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed (320/463 [69.1%]) with a statement that providing futile care is always wrong, and only 38 (8.2%) agreed or strongly agreed. Over 70% (329/464 [70.9%]) of respondents agreed that there are situations in which provision of futile care is appropriate. CLINICAL RELEVANCE The importance of reaching a consensus definition for medical futility in veterinary medicine is evident given the frequency with which such care is being provided. Most small animal specialist veterinarians will encounter futile care, and the establishment of an ethical framework to navigate questions surrounding medical futility may help reduce moral distress.

show abstract

“…Indeed, clinical interventions which do not induce harm have no need to be justified; however, such procedures are rare, hence it is important to clarify possible lines of justification which refer to the ‘best interest of the patient’. 38 39 In human medicine, the principles of patient benefit (act in the patient's best interest) and ‘do no harm’ obligate the physician to seek the balance in favour of potential benefit to the patient over potential harm 1 . This approach runs parallel to the veterinary companion animal practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drawing the line in clinical treatment of companion animals: recommendations from an ethics working party

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern veterinary medicine offers numerous options for treatment and clinicians must decide on the best one to use. Interventions causing short-term harm but ultimately benefitting the animal are often justified as being in the animal’s best interest. Highly invasive clinical veterinary procedures with high morbidity and low success rates may not be in the animal’s best interest. A working party was set up by the European College of Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia to discuss the ethics of clinical veterinary practice and improve the approach to ethically challenging clinical cases. Relevant literature was reviewed. The ‘best interest principle’ was translated into norms immanent to the clinic by means of the ‘open question argument’. Clinical interventions with potential to cause harm need ethical justification, and suggest a comparable structure of ethical reflection to that used in the context of in vivo research should be applied to the clinical setting. To structure the ethical debate, pertinent questions for ethical decision-making were identified. These were incorporated into a prototype ethical tool developed to facilitate clinical ethical decision-making. The ethical question ‘Where should the line on treatment be drawn’ should be replaced by ‘How should the line be drawn?’

show abstract

Welfare, law and ethics in the veterinary intensive care unit

Cited by 12 publications

References 13 publications

“Feelings and Fitness” Not “Feelings or Fitness”–The Raison d'être of Conservation Welfare, Which Aligns Conservation and Animal Welfare Objectives

“Feelings and Fitness” Not “Feelings or Fitness”–The Raison d'être of Conservation Welfare, Which Aligns Conservation and Animal Welfare Objectives

Medical futility is commonly encountered in small animal clinical practice

Drawing the line in clinical treatment of companion animals: recommendations from an ethics working party

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About