In the Swiss Animal Welfare Law, paragraph 20 (2) specifically requires the selection of those animal species for experiments that are “lower on the evolutionary scale”. From a biological perspective, however, the idea of an evolutionary scale is clearly outdated. In this bioethical article we will (1) analyse the potential meaning of the “evolutionary scale paragraph” in the Swiss Animal Welfare Law, (2) shed light on the consequences for animal model selection in animal research and (3) critically discuss alternative approaches to the regulation of animal model selection, including the suggestion of a case-by-case approach. Shifting from general species-specific animal properties such as the ability to feel pain to study-specific aspects such as being harmed by living in isolation or by being handled by humans in a particular way could lead to criteria that promote a selection of animal models that differs to some extent from the current research practice. Empirical data on the implementation of such animal welfare-related criteria in the actual planning of a study are, however, lacking.

One of the most challenging decisions that veterinarians and animal owners face is whether to treat or kill diseased or injured animals. While this decision is hard in any setting, it is pronounced in the context of farm animals, where the sheer number of animals amplifies the frequency of such decision-making. In Germany, animal welfare laws protect both the well-being and the life of the animal. However, these two protected goods can become mutually exclusive at times, for instance, when the animal’s well-being has deteriorated or is assumed to be deteriorating to a point where it becomes questionable if an extension in lifetime is in the animal’s best interest. In such cases, where inaction is ethically and legally untenable, animal owners and veterinarians must make a decision that considers not only the medical circumstances but also the moral and legal demands of the situation, in addition to the sometimes-opposing interests of the different stakeholders (animal, animal owner, veterinarian). To address this problem, we developed a decision-making tool and visualisations that help navigate the ethical dimension of these decisions. These tools can serve as a means for reflection about one’s own decision-making. Moreover, results serve as a precursor for developing more ambitious and holistic decision-making tools aiming to provide practical, medically and ethically sound recommendations. Notably, the aim of our decision-making tool and the ethical analysis is not to replace the individual decision-making process of the animal owner or veterinarian; it is to supplement it by providing structure and perspective.

Introduction:At first glance, human and (companion animal) veterinary medicine share challenging processes in end-of-life (EOL) decision-making. At the same time, treatment options in both professions are substantially different. The potential of an interdisciplinary exchange between both fields has been neglected by empirical research so far.Methods:In this qualitative study, professionals from both fields were brought together in interdisciplinary focus groups to investigate the ethical aspects of convergences and divergences in EOL situations in human and veterinary medicine. The authors present and discuss an innovative mix of materials and methods as stimuli for discussion and for generating hypotheses.Results:The results point toward a general convergence of issues, challenges, and judgements in EOL situations in both fields, such as professional ethos, communication with the family and the role thereof as well as the ideals of death, clearly exceeding the expectations of study participants. At the same time, the study highlights a few prominent differences such as the access to patients' preferences or legal and practical constraints.Discussion:The findings suggest that using social science methods in empirical interdisciplinary biomedical-veterinary ethics could help to shed more light on this new area. Animal as well as human patients can potentially benefit from this mutual, scientifically accompanied exchange and the resulting identification and corrections of misconceptions.

The here presented vignette study was part of a survey on ethical judgement skills among advanced veterinary students at the University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation. The vignette describes a fictitious dilemma in veterinary practice due to medication supply shortages. First, the students should make an ethically justified decision: who of the two patients in the waiting room gets the last dosage of a medication. Important factors were the animal patients’ characteristics (age, state of health, life expectancy), the patient owners’ wellbeing, and context-related criteria. Second, the students were asked for decisional changes if one of the patients was their own dog. They reacted in four different ways: (1) for a professional, this should not make a difference; (2) most likely being “egoistic” and preferring their own dog; (3) giving the medication to the other dog; and (4) avoiding a decision. Finally, the students judged a list of possible solutions to the dilemma on a 9-point scale. They preferred patient-related criteria to patient-owner-related criteria in this task. In the overall results, it became obvious that no “gold standard” or guidelines for situations of medication shortages exist, yet, which presents an important subject for future research and veterinary ethics teaching.

Although veterinary ethics is required in veterinary curricula and part of the competencies expected of a trained veterinary surgeon according to the European Association of Establishments for Veterinary Education (EAEVE), knowledge concerning the effects of ethics teaching and tools evaluating moral judgement are scarce. To address this lack of tools with a mixed-methods approach, a questionnaire with three case scenarios presenting typical ethical conflicts of veterinary practice was administered to two groups of veterinary students (one had taken ethics classes, one did not). The questionnaire contained both open-ended and closed questions and was analysed qualitatively and quantitatively. The qualitative part aimed at revealing different argumentation patterns between the two groups, whereas the quantitative part focused on the students’ approval of different roles and attitudes possibly relating to veterinarians. The results showed no major differences between both groups. However, answering patterns suggest a clear diversity among the students in their perception of morally relevant factors and the veterinary profession. Awareness of morally challenging elements of their profession was presented by students of both groups. With this exploratory study, the application of an innovative mixed-methods tool for evaluating the moral judgement of veterinary medical students is demonstrated.

Research on animals is essential for science and medical progress. While it is still necessary to conduct this research, it is essential to apply the highest standards in animal welfare, including animal husbandry and care. Furthermore, it is important to recognize the special relationship between research animals and the people who care for them. Caring for research animals can be extremely fulfilling and meaningful, but it also comes with challenges, particularly when caring for animals experiencing pain or distress. These challenges can lead to work-related mental stress. To get more insight into the challenges of working in animal research, we organized a panel discussion at the GV-SOLAS (German Society for Laboratory Animal Science) and IGTP (Interest Group Animal Caretakers) conference 2021 about work wellbeing. This discussion was the first of its kind in Germany. The active panel contributions included the view of an ethical philosopher, a scientist, a lecturer for laboratory animal science, an animal facility manager and an animal caretaker. They gave insights from their perspective into key factors that can affect human wellbeing in animal research. Keys ideas included stigmatization of work, tension between research aims and animal wellbeing, and the importance of supportive culture to overcome work-related strains, as well as lack of education and supportive environments to cope with emotional stress in the workplace. Overall, the discussion has shown that we must also promote human wellbeing when promoting culture of care in animal research, because there is strong relationship between culture of care and individual performance.

Veterinary and human medicine share the challenges of end-of-life decisions. While there are legal and practical differences, there might be parallels and convergences regarding decision-making criteria and reasoning patterns in the two disciplines. In this online survey, six variants of a fictitious thought experiment aimed at pointing out crucial criteria relevant for decision-making within and across both professional fields. The six variants introduced four human and two animal patients with the same disease but differing in age, gender and, in case of the human patients, in terms of their state of consciousness. Participants could choose between four different treatment options: euthanasia, continuous sedation, a potentially curative treatment with severe side effects and no intervention. Study participants were human and veterinary medical professionals and an additional control group of lay people. Decisions and justifications for the six variants differed but the three groups of participants answered rather homogeneously. Besides the patient's "suffering" as a main criterion, "age", "autonomy" and, to a lesser extent, "species" were identified as important criteria for decision-making in all three groups. The unexpected convergences as well as subtle differences in argumentation patterns give rise to more in-depth research in this cross-disciplinary field.

In the scope of slaughtering of pregnant animals, fetal sentience is a key com-ponent in the debate regarding the protection of farm animals' fetuses.To date, no scientific evidence for the existence of fetal sentience exists and the philo-sophical discussion on sentience lacks certainty as well.This article presents a model as a potential approach to accomplish a concept for fetal protection.This model serves as the foundation for the elaboration of such concept. Based on a pathocentric standpoint on animal protection, considering the precautionary principle with tutioristic position, the authors of this article suggest a more careful handling with these fetuses. In accordance with the different stages of fetal devel-opment, this article presents an approach concerning the implementation of a protection and the potential consequences regarding the handling with these fetuses.The result of these considerations is a concept that aims to protect the farm animals' fetuses from the beginning of the second half of pregnancy. This concept can be used as a basis to optimize the current practice in the future.

Background: Owners often feel the cost of veterinary care is too high, as there remains a limited understanding of the cost of health care in human and veterinary medicine alike. Pet health insurance is often seen as a universal solution. However, especially for patient owners with few financial resources, both the bill at the vet and the monthly premium for pet health insurance can become a challenge. Hypothesis: Pet health insurance can prevent or ease many price discussions at the vet, but it does not offer a solution for patient owners with little financial means. Methods: In order to verify for which patient owners pet health insurance can be a solution, four theoretical groups were formed depending on the patient owner’s willingness to pay and his/her dispensable funds based on a theoretical model. Results: Dispensable funds are a factor that cannot be influenced by the veterinary surgeon. However, low dispensable funds as a result of an insufficient willingness to save (whether due to a lack of financial education or a lack of will) can be solved by pet health insurance. Willingness to pay, on the other hand, can be influenced by empathetic communication from the veterinary surgeon and thus also from pet health insurance. Nevertheless, situations remain where pet health insurance is not a solution either, because owners can neither afford the veterinary costs nor a premium for a pet health insurance.

Mensch – Tier – Gott , Seite 181 - 202

Standard views of good death in human and veterinary medicine considerably differ from one another. Whereas the good death ideal in palliative medicine emphasizes the positive aspects of non-induced dying, veterinarians typically promote a quick and painless killing with the aim to end suffering. Recent developments suggest a convergence of both professions and professional attitudes, however. Palliative physicians are confronted with patients wishing to be ‘put to sleep’, while veterinarians have begun to integrate principles and practices from hospice care. We will argue that the discourses on good human and animal deaths are not distinct, but that they interact and influence each other. On the one hand, veterinary medicine adapts techniques like chemotherapy or sedation from palliative end-of-life care. On the other hand, philosophers, veterinarians, pet owners, patients and the general public alike make certain assumptions about the (dis)analogy of human and animal dying or killing. Unfortunately, these interactions have only scarcely been reflected normatively, especially on the part of human medicine. Conflicts and misattributions with potential serious negative consequences for the (animal and human) patients’ wellbeing are provoked. For these reasons, palliative physicians and veterinarians are invited to engage in the debate around human and animal end-of-life care.

The changed relationships between humans and animals, the increased social demands placed on animal welfare and the high moral expectations placed on the veterinary profession result in ethical challenges for both veterinarians and students. These dilemmas require the development of veterinary ethics and a profession with ethical standards of orientation that reflect different application scenarios. The necessary basics and competences must be acquired by the students in the study of veterinary medicine in order to meet the challenges in practice. This article sketches an overview of the scope of teaching ethics in academic education of veterinary medicine in Germany, Switzerland and Austria and shows the different formats and focal points. It becomes obvious that a stronger interdisciplinary cooperation in this field is desirable, because it leads to synergies and harmonization and further develops veterinary ethics and profession. The research network veterinary ethics (Netzwerk Tiermedizinische Ethik) meets this challenge.

The European bodies in charge of veterinary education, FVE and EAEVE, have declared ethics as a "basic science". The aim of the paper is to show how ethics fits into the education of veterinarians and why it is helpful, if not necessary, to deal with it for professionals. Several so-called "day one competences" are based on specific ethical operations. The paper gives a precise definition of ethics in relation to neighbouring subjects such as legal and moral reasoning. It explains how ethics can be applied in specific sets of conflict that veterinarians may face. The findings are exemplified by a paradigmatic case: The tricky task of deciding whether (or when) an animal should be euthanized demands familiarity with basic ethical categories such as values. These values are explained in the context of varying moral and legal traditions within Europe. This should demonstrate how concrete decision-making can be based on ethical considerations.

Die veranderten Mensch-Tier-Beziehungen, die gestiegenen gesellschaftlichen Anforderungen an das Tierwohl sowie die hohen moralischen Erwartungen an den Tierarztberuf fuhren sowohl bei Tierarzten und Tierarztinnen als auch bei Studierenden zu ethischen Herausforderungen. Die so entstehenden Dilemmata erfordern die Entwicklung einer veterinarmedizinischen Ethik, in der die Wertelandschaften in den unterschiedlichen Zustandigkeitsbereichen der Veterinarmedizin explizit gemacht und mit ethischen Orientierungsmasstaben reflektiert werden. Um den Herausforderungen in der Praxis gerecht zu werden, mussen die hierzu notwendigen Grundlagen und Kompetenzen bereits wahrend des Studiums der Veterinarmedizin von den Studierenden erworben werden. Der vorliegende Artikel gibt einen Uberblick uber den Umfang und die Lernziele der Ethik in der universitaren veterinarmedizinischen Lehre in Deutschland, Schweiz und Osterreich und zeigt die unterschiedlichen Formate und Schwerpunkte auf. Es wird deutlich, dass eine starkere interdisziplinare Zusammenarbeit in diesem Bereich wunschenswert ist, weil sie zu Synergien und zur Harmonisierung fuhrt und die veterinarmedizinische Ethik und die Profession weiterentwickelt. Dieser Herausforderung nimmt sich das Netzwerk Tiermedizinische Ethik an. The changed relationships between humans and animals, the increased social demands placed on animal welfare and the high moral expectations placed on the veterinary profession result in ethical challenges for both veterinarians and students. These dilemmas require the development of veterinary ethics and a profession with ethical standards of orientation that reflect different application scenarios. The necessary basics and competences must be acquired by the students in the study of veterinary medicine in order to meet the challenges in practice. This article sketches an overview of the scope of teaching ethics in academic education of veterinary medicine in Germany, Switzerland and Austria and shows the different formats and focal points. It becomes obvious that a stronger interdisciplinary cooperation in this field is desirable, because it leads to synergies and harmonization and further develops veterinary ethics and profession. The research network veterinary ethics (Netzwerk Tiermedizinische Ethik) meets this challenge.

Zusammenfassung Die Federation of Veterinarians of Europe (FVE) und die European Association of Establishments for Veterinary Education (EAEVE), also die Institutionen, die für die tiermedizinische Ausbildung in Europa zuständig sind, bezeichnen Ethik als eine „Grundwissenschaft“. Ziel des Beitrags hier ist es, zu zeigen, wie Ethik sich in die Ausbildung von Tiermedizinern fügt, und warum sie hilfreich oder gar notwendig sein kann für eine professionelle tierärztliche Berufsausübung. Mehrere der sogenannten „day one competences“ schließen genuin ethische Perspektiven ein. Der Beitrag gibt eine Definition von Ethik, die es erlaubt, sie gegen Moral und Recht abzugrenzen, aber auch die Verbindungen aufzuzeigen. Wie man sie anwendet, wird konkreter dargestellt an einem paradigmatischen Fragekreis: Die schwere Entscheidung, ob (oder wann) ein Tier euthanasiert werden soll, verlangt Vertrautheit mit fundamentalen ethischen Kategorien wie Werten. Diese Werte erklären sich auch im Kontext unterschiedlicher moralischer und rechtlicher Traditionen innerhalb Europas. An ihnen zeigt sich, wie konkrete Entscheidungsfindung auf ethische Überlegung gegründet sein kann.

Moral stress is a major concern in veterinary practice. Often, it is associated with the challenges in end-of-life situations. Euthanasia, however, is also meant to bring relief to animal patients and their owners. The reasons for the moral strain euthanizing animals causes to professional veterinarians need to be further clarified. This article investigates “euthanasia” from a philosophical, legal, and practical perspective. After introducing relevant aspects of euthanasia in small animal practice, the term is analyzed from an ethical point of view. That includes both a broad and a narrow definition of “euthanasia” and underlying assumptions regarding different accounts of animal death and well-being. Then, legal and soft regulations are discussed with regard to the theoretical aspects and practical challenges, also including questions of personal morality. It is argued that the importance of ethical definitions and assumptions concerning euthanasia and their intertwinement with both law and practical challenges should not be neglected. The conclusion is that veterinarians should clarify the reasons for their potential discomfort and that they should be supported by improved decision-making tools, by implementation of theoretical and practical ethics in veterinary education, and by updated animal welfare legislation.

Insects have become an interesting issue for research and development as they are increasingly seen as a future food source for both humans and animals. Their moral status is yet to be precisely determined. According to 1 of the German Animal Protection Act, they are reckoned as animals in the full sense. Therefore, some basic legal rules seem to be applicable to them. The paper traces the moral considerations behind these legal regulations. Thus (1) life and well-being of animals is to be maintained; (2) it is at least a matter of justification whenever they are made to undergo pain, suffering and damages; (3) they are seen as "fellow creatures" (Mitgeschopfe). It is a matter of dispute, how these legal and moral requirements are to be applied especially to insects. Therefore, we have to reconsider e.g. to what extent insects may feel pain or suffering. We may define or redefine how we can cause damage to insects. Finally, we have to see what is meant by calling them "fellow creatures", and what consequences may be drawn from this.