Moral expertise: a problem in the professional ethics of professional ethicists

Philosophers, particularly moral philosophers, are increasingly being involved in public decision-making in areas which are seen to raise ethical issues. For example, Dame Mary Warnock chaired the 'Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilization and Embryology' in the UK in 1982-4; the Philosophy Department at Auckland was commissioned by the Auckland Regional Authority to report on the ethical aspects of fluoridating the public water supply in 1990; and many of us are serving on ethics committees of various sorts. Not only are philosophers actually being called on or consulted, but many of us would argue that a philosophical contribution in such areas is essential. The involvement of moral philosophers in public policy decisions raises a question of professional ethics, viz, what role should a philosopher's own moral perspective or judgements play in the advice s/he gives, or contribution s/he makes, to public decision-making on ethical issues. Like most problems in professional ethics, this prompts reflection on the nature of the profession, and in particular on the expertise we take moral philosophy to offer. It also prompts reflection on how processes of public decision making in ethically problematic areas should be understood. I explore these issues in this paper.     

MORAL EXPERTISE: A PROBLEM IN THE PROFESSIONAL ETHICS OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICISTS

Philosophers, particularly moral philosophers, are increasingly being involved in public decision-making in areas which are seen to raise ethical issues. For example, Dame Mary Warnock chaired the ‘Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilization and Embryology’ in the UK in 1982–4; the Philosophy Department at Auckland was commissioned by the Auckland Regional Authority to report on the ethical aspects of fluoridating the public water supply in 1990; and many of us are serving on ethics committees of various sorts. Not only are philosophers actually being called on or consulted, but many of us would argue that a philosophical contribution in such areas is essential. The involvement of moral philosophers in public policy decisions raises a question of professional ethics, viz, what role should a philosopher's own moral perspective or judgements play in the advice s/he gives, or contribution s/he makes, to public decision-making on ethical issues. Like most problems in professional ethics, this prompts reflection on the nature of the profession, and in particular on the expertise we take moral philosophy to offer. It also prompts reflection on how processes of public decision making in ethically problematic areas should be understood. I explore these issues in this paper.     

On the need to redress an inadequacy in animal welfare science: toward an internally coherent framework

The time is ripe for a greater interrogation of assumptions and commitments underlying an emerging common ground on the ethics of animal research as well on the 3 R (replacement, refinement, reduction) approach that parallels, and perhaps even further shapes, it. Recurring pressures to re-evaluate the moral status of some animals in research comes as much from within the relevant sciences as without. It seems incredible, in the light of what we now know of such animals as chimpanzees, to deny that these animals are properly accorded high moral status. Barring the requirement that they be human, it is difficult to see what more animals such as chimpanzees would have to possess to acquire it. If the grounds for ascribing high moral status are to be non-arbitrary and responsive to our best knowledge of those individuals who possess the relevant features, we should expect that a sound ethical experimental science will periodically reassess the moral status of their research subjects as the relevant knowledge demands. We already can observe this reassessment as scientists committed to humane experimental science incorporate discoveries of enrichment tools and techniques into their housing and use of captive research animals. No less should this reassessment include a critical reflection on the possible elevation of moral status of certain research animals in light of what is discovered regarding their morally significant properties, characteristics or capacities, or so I will argue. To do anything short of this threatens the social and moral legitimacy of animal research.     

Ethics and Embryo/Foetus Research

Research with embryos and foetuses raise moral problems. In this article the origins of these moral intuitions are analyzed and discussed at four levels: moral problems regarding the treatment of the foetus and the mother animal; ethical problems experienced by the moral actor (researcher); ethical problems related to a justification based upon a balance between means and goals; and ethical problems raised by society.     

Ethics and Embryo/Foetus Research

Research with embryos and foetuses raise moral problems. In this article the origins of these moral intuitions are analyzed and discussed at four levels: moral problems regarding the treatment of the foetus and the mother animal; ethical problems experienced by the moral actor (researcher); ethical problems related to a justification based upon a balance between means and goals; and ethical problems raised by society.     

Concepts of Animal Welfare in Relation to Positions in Animal Ethics

When animal ethicists deal with welfare they seem to face a dilemma: On the one hand, they recognize the necessity of welfare concepts for their ethical approaches. On the other hand, many animal ethicists do not want to be considered reformist welfarists. Moreover, animal welfare scientists may feel pressed by moral demands for a fundamental change in our attitude towards animals. The analysis of this conflict from the perspective of animal ethics shows that animal welfare science and animal ethics highly depend on each other. Welfare concepts are indispensable in the whole field of animal ethics. Evidence for this can be found by analyzing the structure of theories of animal ethics and the different ways in which these theories employ welfare concepts. Furthermore, the background of values underneath every welfare theory is essential to pursue animal welfare science. Animal ethics can make important contributions to the clarification of underlying normative assumptions with regard to the value of the animal, with regard to ideas about what is valuable for the animal, and with regard to the actions that should follow from the results of animal welfare science.     

The ethics of animal research: a UK perspective

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics, an independent body in the United Kingdom, has published a 2005 report titled The Ethics of Research Involving Animals. The Report, produced by a Working Party that represented a wide range of views, seeks to clarify the debate that surrounds this topic and aims to help people identify and analyze the relevant scientific and ethical issues. The Working Party considered the arguments surrounding whether animal research yields useful results, and recommends that its predictability and transferability should be evaluated more fully, particularly in controversial areas. Commonly encountered ethical questions and arguments were considered in order to understand what lies behind disagreement on the moral justification of animal research. Four possible ethical positions on animal research, which represent points on a continuum, are described. Despite the range of views that exist among members of the Working Party, the Report presents a "Consensus Statement" that identifies agreement on several important issues. Building on this statement, recommendations are made for improving the quality of the debate and promoting the 3Rs (refinement, reduction, and replacement).     

Reducing sample size in experiments with animals: historical controls and related strategies

Reducing the number of animal subjects used in biomedical experiments is desirable for ethical and practical reasons. Previous reviews of the benefits of reducing sample sizes have focused on improving experimental designs and methods of statistical analysis, but reducing the size of control groups has been considered rarely. We discuss how the number of current control animals can be reduced, without loss of statistical power, by incorporating information from historical controls, i.e. subjects used as controls in similar previous experiments. Using example data from published reports, we describe how to incorporate information from historical controls under a range of assumptions that might be made in biomedical experiments. Assuming more similarities between historical and current controls yields higher savings and allows the use of smaller current control groups. We conducted simulations, based on typical designs and sample sizes, to quantify how different assumptions about historical controls affect the power of statistical tests. We show that, under our simulation conditions, the number of current control subjects can be reduced by more than half by including historical controls in the analyses. In other experimental scenarios, control groups may be unnecessary. Paying attention to both the function and to the statistical requirements of control groups would result in reducing the total number of animals used in experiments, saving time, effort and money, and bringing research with animals within ethically acceptable bounds.     

Mapping out structural features in clinical care calling for ethical sensitivity: a theoretical approach to promote ethical competence in healthcare personnel and clinical ethical support services (CESS)

Clinical ethical support services (CESS) represent a multifaceted field of aims, consultancy models, and methodologies. Nevertheless, the overall aim of CESS can be summed up as contributing to healthcare of high ethical standards by improving ethically competent decision-making in clinical healthcare. In order to support clinical care adequately, CESS must pay systematic attention to all real-life ethical issues, including those which do not fall within the 'favourite' ethical issues of the day. In this paper we attempt to capture a comprehensive overview of categories of ethical tensions in clinical care. We present an analytical exposition of ethical structural features in judgement-based clinical care predicated on the assumption of the moral equality of human beings and the assessment of where healthcare contexts pose a challenge to achieving moral equality. The account and the emerging overview is worked out so that it can be easily contextualized with regards to national healthcare systems and specific branches of healthcare, as well as local healthcare institutions. By considering how the account and the overview can be applied to i) improve the ethical competence of healthcare personnel and consultants by broadening their sensitivity to ethical tensions, ii) identify neglected areas for ethical research, and iii) clarify the ethical responsibility of healthcare institutions' leadership, as well as specifying required institutionalized administration, we conclude that the proposed account should be considered useful for CESS.     

A practical framework for ethics assessment in wildlife management decision-making

Wildlife professionals lack a framework and process for incorporating ethical considerations in a systematic and transparent way, along with ecological and social science, to support wildlife management decision-making. We provide such a framework and process based on 3 of the major theoretical branches ethicists have developed in Western culture: consequentialist moral theory, which focuses on consequences and outcomes; principle- and rule-based approaches that deal with what is considered right or wrong; and virtue ethical theory, which considers factors such as character, virtue, and aesthetics. The framework can be used to anticipate the ethical consequences of alternative courses of action or taking no action. If wildlife professionals use this framework as an assessment tool to provide input into decision-making, resulting decisions will be more transparent, better understood by stakeholders, and more consistent with public trust responsibilities.     

Expanding the moral circle: farmed fish as objects of moral concern

Until recently fish welfare attracted little attention, but international and national legislation and standards of fish welfare are now emerging and an overview of these developments is presented in this study. Whereas animal welfare legislation is based on public morality, animal ethics does not automatically accept public morality as normative and elaborates arguments regarding the way humans should treat animals (referred to as moral standards). In this study we present the most common animal ethics theories. For most of these, sentience is considered a demarcation line for moral concern: if an animal is sentient, then it should be included in the moral circle, i.e. receive moral consideration in its own right and some basic welfare should be ensured. As for fish, research has revealed that the sensory system of teleosts can detect noxious stimuli, and that some kind of phenomenal consciousness, allowing the fish to feel pain, seems to be present. This raises the ethical question as to how much evidence we need in order to act on such indications of fish sentience. A simple risk analysis shows that the probability that fishes can feel pain is not negligible and that if they do indeed experience pain the consequences in terms of the number of suffering individuals are great. We conclude that farmed fish should be given the benefit of the doubt and we should make efforts that their welfare needs are met as well as possible. Finally, the way forward is briefly discussed: efforts must be made to understand what fish welfare means in practical fish farming. This will involve the development of research and education, greater accountability and transparency, compliance with and control of policies, and quality assurance schemes.     

Reduction through education: the insight of a trainer

One of the articles contained within European Council Directive 86/609/EEC states that "Persons who carry out experiments or take part in them, and persons who take care of animals used for experiments, including duties of a supervisory nature, shall have appropriate training". In effect, this article stipulates that only competent individuals are allowed to work with laboratory animals. At least three groups of individuals can be identified with different responsibilities toward experimental animals: animal technicians, scientists, and veterinarians/animal welfare officers. The responsibilities and duties of the individuals within each of these categories differ. This paper focuses on the training of scientists. The scientist designs, and often also performs, animal experiments. Therefore, scientists must be educated to develop an attitude of respect toward laboratory animals, and must be trained so that, if an experiment must be performed with animals, it is designed according to the highest possible scientific and ethical standards. In The Netherlands, the law stipulates that scientists intending to work with animals must have completed a course in laboratory animal science. This compulsory course started in 1986. The Department of Laboratory Animal Science at Utrecht University is responsible for the national coordination of this course. Participants must have an academic degree (at the level of MSc) in one of the biomedical sciences, such as biology, medicine or veterinary medicine. Although the course is an intensive 3-week, 120-hour long course, which covers both technical and ethical aspects of laboratory animal experimentation, it cannot provide full competence. It is designed to provide sufficient basic training and knowledge to enable students to design animal experiments, and to develop an attitude that will be conducive to the implementation of the Three Rs. However, full competence will always require further training that can only be acquired as a result of practical experience gained while working in the field of laboratory animal research. Evaluations subsequent to the course have revealed that more than 98% of the students regard the course as indispensable for all scientists working in a research area where animal experiments are performed. They agree that the course not only contributes to the quality of experiments and to the welfare of animals, but also to a decrease in the number of animals used in experiments.     

Ethical issues concerning animal research outside the laboratory

Unique ethical issues can be associated with research outside the customary laboratory setting. Protocols involving wild animals must consider that any infringement on the wild nature of the species can be disruptive and may involve pain, fear, anxiety, and frustration, all of which constitute ethical harm that must be balanced with anticipated benefit. Agricultural and companion animal research, however, take place in a human-engineered environment and involves domesticated species adapted to human contact. Special animal welfare issues can be related to agricultural production goals that fail to deal adequately with moral concerns. Human/companion animal relationships, on the other hand, present unique moral obligations to animal owners. Other factors may present additional ethical issues when research is performed outside the laboratory. These factors include a required sensitivity to the environment of wild animals and an awareness that this outside research may to quite public and, therefore, vulnerable to community perception. The institutional animal care and use committee(IACUC) has the responsibility to ensure that research in outside settings is ethical and properly implemented. This responsibility requires that IACUC members have knowledge of the needs of a wide range of species and that a process is in place to allow effective monitoring of research in remote locations. Finally, and most important, there must be a sensitivity to the unique ethical considerations outlined here. Armed with these strengths, the IACUC will be effective in what may be unfamiliar surroundings and will have a significant opportunity to cause improvements in animal welfare.     

Strategies to Guide the Return of Genomic Research Findings: An Australian Perspective

In Australia, along with many other countries, limited guidance or other support strategies are currently available to researchers, institutional research ethics committees, and others responsible for making decisions about whether to return genomic findings with potential value to participants or their blood relatives. This lack of guidance results in onerous decision-making burdens—traversing technical, interpretative, and ethical dimensions—as well as uncertainty and inconsistencies for research participants. This article draws on a recent targeted consultation conducted by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council to put forward strategies for supporting return of finding decision-making. In particular, we propose a pyramid of decision-making support: decision-making guidelines, technical and interpretative assistance, and ethical assistance for intractable “tough” cases. Each step of the pyramid involves an increasing level of regulatory involvement and applies to a smaller subsection of genomic research findings. Implementation of such strategies would facilitate a growing evidence base for return of finding decisions, thereby easing the financial, time, and moral burdens currently placed on researchers and other relevant decision-makers while also improving the quality of such decisions and, consequently, participant outcomes.     

Animal Humanness,Animal Use,and Intention to Become Ethical Vegetarian or Ethical Vegan

The present study used relational and predictive approaches to build on past literature examining humanlike animal attributes. From the relational approach, it examined how five humanlike attributes ascribed to animals (Attributes Questionnaire) relate to one another and to attitudes toward 21 uses of animals (Attitudes Toward the Use of Animals Scale). From the predictive approach, it examined the predictive power of human affection toward animals and human perception of animal minds for granting animals moral consideration; additionally, it analyzed the predictive power of humanlike animal attributes for willingness to become an ethical vegetarian or ethical vegan. These analyses focused specifically on gender differences. The author used SPSS and SmartPLS 3.0, a Partial Least Square tool, for statistical analyses. Results from 481 Spanish university students responding to online and pencil-and-paper questionnaires revealed overall moderate correlations between different humanlike attributes and low correlations between those attributes and animal uses. Affection toward animals and perception of animal minds were good predictors for moral consideration of animals, especially when all four attributes were aggregated in the model (R² = 0.47; Q² = 0.32). Humanlike animal attributes directly affected students’ intentions to become vegetarian and vegan but the explanatory power was weak in both cases (R² < 0.19; Q² < 0.15). The study also revealed significant gender differences. Among women, humanlike animal attributes were more closely interrelated, better correlated with a greater number of animal uses, and stronger drivers of the moral status of animals. However, data showed no significant gender differences for path strength of humanlike animal attributes on the willingness to become vegetarian or vegan. In sum, perceiving humanlike attributes in animals has ethical consequences, but its influence on the adoption of pro-animal attitudes and behavior are still unclear. More research is needed to explore and explain causal relationships between the aforementioned variables and to uncover how gender differences may affect them.     

Xenotransplantation: a problematic world behind a glamorous facade

The discussion about the ethics of xenotransplantation seems to focus upon the benefits for individual patients and the potential risks for human society, in general, to contract a newly emerging retrovirus. In these risk-benefit considerations, the moral concern for the research animals involved appears to be absent. This is remarkable, because the presumed successful xenograft is not expected very soon. A lot of basic problems in pig and primate xenotransplantations still need solving. These new experiments in our own biomedical laboratories raise questions regarding animal welfare and ethical justification in the light of possible alternative strategies. In this article, I discuss some of the moral issues related to preclinical, fundamental xenotransplantation research.     

The experiments with laboratory animals from a bioethical point of view--history, modern time, perspectives

The origin of laboratory animal science was called forth by violent development of experimental biology and medicine in the XIX century on the one hand, and on the other hand by the necessity to have standard healthy animals for experiments with strictly definite biological characteristics. With this aim in view management technology and animal use in experiments have been constantly improved. "Laboratory animal" notion has been formed by the end of the XIX century. At the beginning of laboratory animal science development ethical problems were not as urgent as they are now. It is established that the three Rs bioethical conception of W.M.S. Russel and R.L. Burch (1959) has influence on modern state and perspectives of the development of animal experimental methods. It is shown that the existence of laboratory animal protection laws and the reflection in them of compulsory ethical review of scientific project and statistics of used laboratory animals is absolutely necessary.     

Ethical inspection about laboratory animals

Laboratory animals and animal experiments are foundations and important support conditions for life sciences, especially for medical research. The animal experiments have drawn extensive attention from the society because of the ethical issue. This paper takes Wenzhou Medical University as an example to give a brief introduction to the ethical review about laboratory animals in the university so as to further draw attention and concerns from the public about the ethical issue of laboratory animals. We successively introduce its scientific projects, nurturing environment and ethical review of laboratory animals.     

Current trends in teaching ethics of healthcare practices

The unprecedented progress in bio-medical sciences and technology during the last few decades has resulted in great transformations in the concepts of health and disease, health systems and healthcare organisation and practices. Those changes have been accompanied by the emergence of a broad range of ethical dilemmas that confront health professionals more frequently. The classical Hippocratic ethical principles, though still retaining their relevance and validity, have become insufficiently adequate in an increasing range of problems and situations. Healthcare that has been practised for centuries on the basis of a direct doctor-patient relationship has been increasingly transformed into a more complex process integrating the health-team, the patient (healthcare seeker) and the community. Systematic review of the specialised literatures revealed that Healthcare Ethics education has become a basic requirement for any training programme for health professionals, and should cover the different stages of undergraduate, postgraduate and continuing education. Both theoretical foundations and practical skills are required for the appropriate ethical reasoning, ethical attitude and decision-making abilities. There is growing evidence that physicians' professional and moral development is not only determined by the formal curriculum of ethics; rather more, it is determined by the moral environment of the professional practice, the 'hidden curriculum' which deserves serious consideration by medical education.