Deficiencies in the National Institute of Health's Guidelines for the Care and Protection of Laboratory Animals
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy. 1993 Aug; 18(4): 375-388.
This paper is a critique of NIH guidelines for the care and protection of laboratory animals. It exposes four serious deficiencies in these guidelines: (1) failure to make it clear that the mere pursuit of knowledge does not justify using animals; (2) failure to give any guidance concerning what constitutes human benefit or well-being; (3) failure to countenance trade-offs between human benefit or well-being and animal well-being; (4) failure to clearly specify what constitutes keeping animals in an 'environment appropriate to the species and its life history.' It concludes with the suggestion that the construction and revision of these guidelines is too important to be left to the professionals.
Animal Care Committees; Animal Experimentation; Decision Making; Environment; Ethicists; Evaluation; Federal Government; Goals; Government; Government Regulation; Guidelines; Health; Illness; Investigators; Knowledge; Laboratory Animals; Life; Moral Policy; Morality; Primates; Psychological Stress; Public Policy; Regulation; Research; Research Institutes; Self Induced Illness; Social Control; Speciesism; Standards; Technical Expertise; Values;
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Should Veterans With a Diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Be Considered a Vulnerable Population for the Purpose of Applying Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research? Report of a Work Group Convened by The National Center for Ethics in Health Care of the Veterans Health Administration on Behalf of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs Unknown author (Veterans Health Administration [VHA]. Work Group on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder [PTSD], 2008-10)