What You Might Not Know
Students,
Science and Medicine Benefit from a Humane Science Education
Support Massachusetts H. 1252
– Dissection Choice
By Lorna Grande,
DVM
 As
a former student with a keen interest in science, a college
biology teacher, and a practicing veterinarian, I am convinced
that every student who has an ethical objection to dissection
should be provided with alternatives.
In high school, I was forced to dissect
fetal pigs, frogs and cats. This in no way contributed to
my future career as a veterinarian; and, in fact, nearly derailed
my dreams. All the passion and compassion that led me to want
to work with animals came in direct and disturbing conflict
with the demand that I dissect animal specimens.
It has been my experience that students
do not benefit from using dead animals for "hands on"
experience. In fact, dissection is more likely to cause some
high and grammar school students to lose interest in the sciences
rather than piquing their interest. Bright, interested students
are able to pursue biological/physiological concepts in greater
depth with, for example, interactive, dynamic CD-ROM computer
programs than by using dead, preserved specimens.
In the biological sciences, animals
are often viewed as mere "laboratory tools" or,
as one of my veterinary professors said, "laboratory
toys." This idea of animals as "disposable"
is firmly entrenched in the medical and scientific professions
through years of tradition. It is no small task to challenge
and change such rigid, deeply rooted obstacles.
I am proud to have been among the
12 students at Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine
who were instrumental in creating alternatives for veterinary
students. Surgery at Tufts had always been taught on live
"purpose-bred" dogs. Killing them after the lab
was mandatory. For next week’s lab, we’d simply get new dogs.
Few surgeons believed there was any other way to teach. They
were convinced that theirs was the only way. However, we students
were successful in creating and implementing a proven, better
method and the school then continued to offer alternatives
until the live dog labs were abandoned altogether.
Several science articles were published
about the success of these alternatives. If excellent humane teaching
methods can be found to train veterinary surgeons, then surely excellent
alternatives should – and can – be provided for grammar and high
school students who are beginning their journey in the sciences.
(See NEAVS'
and Tufts University's article.)
By the time I entered veterinary school,
I was a mature adult and knew I would not kill healthy dogs
in the name of "training" to save the lives of other
dogs. But when I was 14 years old I did not have the courage
and the convictions I had developed by the time I entered
veterinary school at age 30. Where did all the time in between
go? Derailed, I believed I could not become a veterinarian
without needlessly torturing animals during my training. Without
H. 1252, many young people interested in the sciences
will be forced to choose between going against their ethics
or ending their career aspirations.
What I now know, from being in the
medical field, is that not enough people in medicine have
true empathy for their patients, whether two- or four-legged.
Truly empathetic people are "weeded out" from the
sciences early in their education because we tell them they
are not "tough enough." "Don’t be a wimp"
and "get over it" are just a few of the demeaning,
negative comments directed to these students. Is it any wonder
they find other fields of interest?
Science is an amazing, ever-expanding
field with unlimited potential to help or to harm. Cloning,
genetic engineering, and many other issues require our best
ethical thinking. Do we want people in these fields who have
learned to "tough it out" by becoming desensitized
to the pain and suffering of others, or do we want caring,
empathetic scientists who know how to weigh both sides of
an issue?
Science is objective and data driven,
but the application of science is anything but! In
this age of technology, alternatives to dissection will provide
students with exceptional learning experiences – ones that
are not clouded by the emotion and guilt that accompany forced
dissection.
Others will testify to the validity
of these alternatives, the economics, and even the widespread,
documented abuse of the animals used in dissection; but I
wanted to speak to the broader picture. We need to nurture
– which is different from coddling – the best,
brightest and most empathetic of our country’s students. Desensitizing
these students or "weeding them out" is a tragic
mistake. I have seen this over and over again in the classroom,
laboratory and surgical suite.
Please
pass H. 1252 and enable Massachusetts to join other progressive
states in providing thoughtful, compassionate students with
a rigorous, demanding yet humane education.
|
