• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Animal Rights or Science

Extracts from this document...


Jeffrey Gaynes Animal Rights or Science? As we've seen in our introduction to psychology and really in any medical/biological/behavioral a lot of the topics we talked about have come from vigorous research; and most likely this research was derived from animal testing/study. Over the years the American Psychological Association (APA) has established guidelines - in a sense to provide regulations of animal testing. These guidelines established by the APA comes down to really three main topics; justification, care, and research controls (management). The APA has established characteristics of what's deemed as justifiable research for animal testing. Characteristics of justifiable research include. All research must be done with a clear scientific purpose; the research done will result in a increased knowledge of the processes behind: evolution, development, control, alternation, maintenance, and/or biological significance of behavior. ...read more.


If a proposal complies with all the guidelines addressed then it is OK in a sense to do. Along with animal testing guidelines the APA has established principals involved with the ethics of psychologist and the code of conduct. Stated by these principals a psychologist must comply and work to attain with following: Beneficial Information; psychologist must to all that is humanly possible to benefit those they work and care of, with no harm. Psychologist must take upon the duty to safeguard the rights and welfare of those they treat, when a problem arises they must act in a responsible manner to resolve the conflict to the best of their ability. In addition to act and treat one who requests treatment from them in a manner that involves the least possible physical harms and maintain a proper welfare of the patient in regard to their benefits. ...read more.


I do acknowledge that animals are cognitively different but I do not that effects how animals should be treated. Humane treatment is always appropriate in every type of research. All animals must be treated in a humane manner and the pain inflicted - if any must be minimal. If in research humane treatment is not present then I consider that study inappropriate and should be revised. The idea of dissection or euthanizing and studying animals I consider is appropriate. Dissection has been around for an indefinite amount of time and I believe is the only way we can get a legitimate idea on the internal physiological functions of an animal; as long as the dissection is done with respect to the animal and minimal damage is done to the body. Vivisection or invasively studying an animal with injury while it is living I believe is unjust. If an animal must be studied at such an intensive level out of respect for the animal should be euthanized - if it is necessary. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Social Psychology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work