Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Experiment Videos

A compassionate autonomy alternative to speciesism.

C K Perry1

  • 1MCP Hahnemann University, Program in Humanities and Sciences, Philadelphia, PA 19102-1192, USA. constance.perry@drexel.edu

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
|August 14, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Interaural Attenuation of a Click Stimulus Using Deep and Shallow Placement of an Insert Earphone.

American journal of audiology·2015
Same author

Bankruptcy of mission. Transparency and critique: a case in organizational ethics.

HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues·2001
Same author

Effects of environmental noise on computer-derived voice estimates from female speakers.

Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation·2000
Same author

Measures of language proficiency as predictors of behavioral difficulties, social and cognitive development in 2-year-old children.

Perceptual and motor skills·1997
Same author

Accuracy of jitter estimates using different filter settings on Visi-Pitch: a preliminary report.

Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation·1996
Same author

Psychometric and descriptive perspectives of illness impact over the life span.

Nursing research·1991
Same journal

Flourishing within vulnerability: on human fragility and the conditions for a habitable environment.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

Camouflaging in autism as a dual-normative construct: a philosophical critique.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

The last low whispers revisited: a reply to Sulmasy on palliative sedation.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

Epistemic justice and the moral status of the dead.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

Practical wisdom in medicine: defending a multidimensional, integrated view of an indispensable virtue.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
Same journal

Do not harm: a minimal defense of conscientious objection in the medical profession.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2026
See all related articles
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

The ethical use of nonhuman animals in medical research is justifiable. Moral obligations and capacities like sentience support using animals to protect human health, not necessarily speciesism.

Area of Science:

  • Bioethics
  • Animal Research Ethics

Background:

  • The animal welfare community frequently argues that using nonhuman animals in medical research constitutes speciesism, akin to racism or sexism.
  • This perspective suggests an inherent moral objection to species-based discrimination in research subject selection.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate the argument that all use of nonhuman animals in medical research is necessarily speciesist.
  • To establish a morally justifiable rationale for the use of certain nonhuman animals in research.

Main Methods:

  • Philosophical analysis of ethical frameworks concerning animal sentience, autonomy, and relational obligations.
  • Comparative ethical assessment of human and nonhuman animal capacities in the context of medical research.
Keywords:
Analytical ApproachBiomedical and Behavioral Research

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • The argument for speciesism in animal research is deemed misguided.
  • A morally justifiable rationale for using nonhuman animals in research is proposed, based on combined capacities for autonomy and sentience, alongside relational obligations.
  • The use of nonautonomous animals in risky research is ethically defensible and does not equate to speciesism.

Conclusions:

  • The ethical use of nonhuman animals in medical research can be morally justified.
  • Distinguishing between speciesism and a reasoned ethical approach to animal research is crucial.
  • Prioritizing human safety through ethically sound animal research is supported.