This month marks the fortieth anniversary of the publication of the Belmont Report, a groundbreaking document written to protect children and adults from research abuses. Today, through its emphasis on informed consent and special protections for vulnerable individuals, the report’s reach and influence extends around the globe.
Recently, my colleagues and I penned a paper called “A Belmont Report for Animals?” asking the question of how principles that currently guide human research—such as respect for autonomy, obligations to avoid harm and promote justice, and special protections for vulnerable populations—could be applied to decisions about the treatment of animals. Under the current law, almost anything can be done to an animal in the name of research—primarily because they are seen as something rather than someone. Nonhuman animals of all species can still be subjected to the most severe forms of pain and suffering, without relief. This problem deserves particular reflection during the upcoming World Laboratory Animal Liberation Week beginning on April 22nd.
Although it could be easy to assume that the Belmont Report emerged without controversy, that is simply not the case for most achievements throughout history. One abuse after another—from torture to deceit—prompted the drafting of the Belmont Report. Throughout the twentieth century alone, researchers systematically targeted prisoners in Nazi concentration camps, African-American men living with syphilis in Tuskegee, Alabama, the Havasupai people living with diabetes in a remote part of the Grand Canyon, hospitalized children with cognitive disabilities, and many other individuals and communities. Only when people demanded and fought for change did such atrocities end.
Sadly many similar abuses continue today—and they are one of the many reasons that the time has come for a more honest evaluation of how humans treat other humans as well as how humans treat animals in society.
Our “A Belmont Report for Animals?” paper will be published later this year. But, in the meantime, as so many people and animals suffer around the globe, we are left with a clear mandate: We need a new, objective ethic—one that is principled, consistent, and inclusive. It is no coincidence that next week marks both Animal Cruelty and Human Violence Awareness Week. There are clear links between how we treat people and animals in society—connections that demand our focus and action.
Admittedly, it can be difficult to be mindful of the big picture, particularly when there are so many real and imagined distractions competing for our time and attention. But until we prioritize an objective ethic bound by key principles such as respect, compassion, and justice, we will continue to make ignorant, cruel decisions about the treatment of others. Arbitrary distinctions and values are responsible for the differential treatment of people and animals—whether in research or other areas of society. Bias and arbitrary distinctions also fuel prejudices such as ableism, classism, ethnocentrism, heterosexism, racism, and sexism. Unless we address one problem, we will not fully address the other. As Dr. Albert Schweitzer wrote, “[We] must oppose all cruel customs no matter how deeply rooted in tradition or surrounded by a halo. We need a boundless ethics which will include the animals also.”
With gratitude for the achievements that have been made, there is still so much left to be done. While we need to remain diligent about calling out and stopping abuses within research and other areas of society, we must also be forward thinking. We need to continually ask ourselves how we can ensure that such abuses never occur in the first place. Outside of an objective ethic, I can’t see how. Can you?