Dr Jane Johnson1
1Department of Philosophy, Macquarie University, Macquarie University, Australia
Biography:
Jane is an ARC Future Fellow and field philosopher in the Department of Philosophy, Macquarie University. She researches ethical and epistemological questions in science and medicine, and her work is driven by a commitment to the vulnerable and to research that enhances lives.
Abstract:
There are compelling ethical and epistemological reasons why research on animals intended for human clinical benefit should change. To date, the practice of animal research has been overwhelmingly dominated by consequentialist approaches, operationalized via the 3 Rs (to Reduce, Replace and Refine the use of animals in research). Although the 3Rs may appear laudable and progressive, they generate significant challenges, including around implementation. We want to argue instead for a relational approach to animal research. Focusing on relations brings to the fore issues that have not been adequately considered in animal research, including regarding the vulnerability and dependence of animals. To unpack these issues and how they might be adequately addressed in research with animals aimed at human clinical benefit, we will focus on research in a different area, namely canine cognition. The growing body of work with dogs highlights promising approaches that attend to animal vulnerability and dependence in ways that are suggestive for biomedical research.
The paper will begin by briefly outlining the reasons why the practice of animal research should change, and articulating the vulnerability and dependence of research animals. We then turn to the case of cognitive research on dogs, and demonstrate how this research elevates consideration of the vulnerability and dependence of dog research subjects. Finally, we consider how lessons learned from this research might be applied to biomedical research with animals more generally, attending to both the strengths but also the limitations of our proposal.