Quality Time: Temporal and Other Aspects of Ethical Principles Based on a “Life Worth Living”

Article

Abstract

The evaluation of whether an animal has a life worth living (LWL) has been suggested as a useful concept for farm animal policymaking. But there are a number of different ways in which the concept could be applied. This paper attempts to identify and evaluate candidate ethical principles based on the concept. It suggests that an appropriate principle by which to apply the concept is one that (1) is framed in terms of preventing an animal having a life worth avoiding (LWA), rather than ensuring they have LWL, (2) is based on a prospective, rather than retrospective, concept of a life’s worth, and (3) relates to both the perpetuation and creation of an animal at all times during its life. The paper concludes by endorsing an overarching principle that no animal should be unreasonably caused to be, or allowed to remain, in a position of having a prospective LWA.

Keywords

Animal welfare Creation Euthanasia Life worth avoiding Life worth living Quality of Life 

References

  1. Birch, K. (2005). Beneficence, determinism and justice: An engagement with the argument for the genetic selection of intelligence. Bioethics, 19, 12–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boissy, A., Arnold, C., Chaillou, E., Désiré, L., Duvaux-Ponter, C., Greiveldinger, L., et al. (2007). Emotions and cognition: A new approach to animal welfare. Animal Welfare, 16(S), 37–43.Google Scholar
  3. Bradley, B. (2004). When is death bad for the one who dies? Noûs, 38(1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Broom, D. M. (1988). The scientific assessment of animal welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 20, 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broom, D. M. (2008). Welfare assessment and relevant ethical decisions: Key concepts. ARBS Annual Review of Biomedical Sciences, 10, T79–T90.Google Scholar
  6. Buckland, R. B., & Guy, G. (2002). Goose production. FAO animal production and health: Paper 154. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  7. Edgar, A., Salek, S., Shickle, D., & Cohen, D. (1998). The ethical QALY: Ethical issues in healthcare resource allocations. Haslemere, UK: Euromed Communications.Google Scholar
  8. Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC). (2009). Farm animal welfare in Great Britain: Past, present and future. London, UK: FAWC.Google Scholar
  9. Faure, J. M., Guemene, D., & Guy, G. (2001). Is there avoidance of the force feeding procedure in ducks and geese? Animal Research, 50(2), 157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feinberg, J. (1987). Wrongful life and the counterfactual element in harming. Social Philosophy and Policy, 4, 145–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Feldman, F. (1991). Some puzzles about the evil of death. The Philosophical Review, 100(2), 205–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fraser, D. (1995). Science, values and animal welfare: Exploring the ‘inextricable connection’. Animal Welfare, 4, 103–117.Google Scholar
  13. Fraser, D., Weary, D. M., Pajor, E. A., & Milligan, B. N. (1997). A scientific concept of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Animal Welfare, 6, 187–205.Google Scholar
  14. Harris, J. (1987). QALYfying the value of life. Journal of Medical Ethics, 13, 117–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harris, J. (1995). Double jeopardy and the veil of ignorance—a reply. Journal of Medical Ethics, 21, 151–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harris, J. (2001). One principle and three fallacies of disability studies. Journal of Medical Ethics, 27, 383–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  18. Herissone-Kelly, P. (2005). Procreative beneficence and the prospective parent. Journal of Medical Ethics, 32, 166–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaplan, M. S., Berthelot, J.-M., Feeny, D., McFarland, B. H., Khan, S., & Orpana, H. (2007). The predictive validity of health-related quality of life measures: Mortality in a longitudinal population-based study. Quality of Life Research, 16, 1539–1546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Larrère, C., & Larrère, R. (2000). Animal rearing as a contract? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12, 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lund, V., Anthony, R., & Röcklinsberg, H. (2004). The ethical contract as a tool in organic animal husbandry. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17, 23–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McMahan, J. (2002). The ethics of killing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Newdick, C. (1995). Who should we treat? Law, patients and resources in the N.H.S. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  24. Parfit, D. (1984). Reasons and persons. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  25. Parker, M. (2007). The best possible child. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33, 279–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pluhar, E. B. (1995). Beyond prejudice. Durham, UK: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Prieto, P., & Sacristán, J. A. (2003). Problems and solutions in calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 1, 80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rawls, J. (1971/1999). A theory of justice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Regan, T. (1983). The case for animal rights. Berkeley, USA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  30. Rollin, B. E. (1981). Animal rights and human morality. New York, USA: Prometheus.Google Scholar
  31. Rowlands, M. (1998). Animal rights: A philosophical defence. Basingtoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  32. Salt, H. (1892/1980). Animal rights. Fontwell, UK: Centaur.Google Scholar
  33. Sandel, M. (2004). The case against perfection. Atlantic monthly April 2004. Available at http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200404/sandel. Accessed 5th Aug 2009.
  34. Sandøe, P., & Christiansen, S. B. (2007). The value of animal life: How should we balance quality against quantity? Animal Welfare, 16(S), 109–115.Google Scholar
  35. Sandøe, P., Christiansen, S. B., & Appleby, M. C. (2003). Farm animal welfare: The interaction of ethical questions and animal welfare science. Animal Welfare, 12, 469–478.Google Scholar
  36. Sandøe, P., & Simonsen, H. B. (1992). Assessing animal welfare: Where does science end and philosophy begin? Animal Welfare, 1, 257–267.Google Scholar
  37. Savulescu, J. (2001). Procreative beneficence: Why we should select the best children. Bioethics, 15, 413–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Savulescu, J. (2007). In defence of procreative beneficence. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33, 284–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Savulescu, J., & Kahane, K. (2008). The moral obligation to create children with the best chance of the best life. Bioethics, 23, 274–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schweitzer, A. (1929). Civilisation and ethics. London, UK: Black.Google Scholar
  41. Spruijt, B. M., van den Bos, R., & Pijlman, F. T. A. (2001). A concept of welfare based on reward evaluating mechanisms in the brain: Anticipatory behaviour as an indicator for the state of reward systems. Applied Animal Behavioural Science, 72, 145–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stoller, S. E. (2008). Why we are not morally required to select the best children: A response to Savulescu. Bioethics, 22(7), 364–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tannenbaum, J. (1991). Ethics and animal welfare: The inextricable connection. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 198, 1360–1376.Google Scholar
  44. Tooley, T. (1998). Value, obligation and the asymmetry question. Bioethics, 12, 111–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. VandeVeer, D. (1979). Of beasts, persons and the original position. Monist, 62, 368–377.Google Scholar
  46. Webster, J. (2005). Animal welfare: Limping towards eden. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yeates, J. (2009). Death is a welfare issue. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23(3), 229–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yeates, J. (2010). The application of veterinary stem cell technologies to dogs and horses. In A. V. Campbell & B. C. Capps (Eds.), Bioethics and the global politics of stem cell science: Medical applications in a pluralistic world. London, Singapore: Imperial College Press/World Scientific Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  49. Yeates, J. (in press). Is ‘a life worth living’ a concept worth having? Animal Welfare. Google Scholar
  50. Yeates, J. W., & Main, D. C. J. (2008). Assessment of positive welfare: A review. The Veterinary Journal, 175, 293–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yeates, J. W., & Main, D. C. J. (2009). Assessment of companion animal quality of life in veterinary practice and research. Journal of Small Animal Practice, 50, 274–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Clinical Veterinary ScienceUniversity of BristolLangford, BristolUK

Personalised recommendations