Connecticut students who have a conscientious objection to dissection may soon have the right to opt out if lawmakers pass An Act Concerning Dissection Choice.
Students have come forward to express their discomfort and objections to learning about the study of life by wasting the lives of innocent animals. Some are met with understanding and support, while others have had to struggle with criticism and ostracism from both educators and peers to have their ethical objections recognized as valid.
Students who do not want to participate should be afforded the opportunity to choose an alternative and be given the tools they need to learn and make humane decisions that show compassion and a respect for life, instead of being taught apathy and led to believe that treating animals as disposable objects is the norm. They should also not be made to feel guilty about this choice, especially by educators, and they shouldn’t have to worry about how it will affect their grades.
The bill in question will allow students to be excused from participating in, or observing, classroom dissections with a written request and parental permission.
Organizations including the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), the American Anti-Vivisection Society (AAVS) and the New England Anti-Vivisection Society (NEAVS) have all been campaigning to promote humane alternatives to dissection in the classroom, which are also supported by the National Science Teachers Association and the National Association of Biology Teachers.
[pullquote] According to Save the Frogs, at least 200 species of frogs have completely disappeared since 1980 and up to one-third of the world’s amphibian species are threatened with extinction due to a variety of factors, yet we continue to remove them from their habitats for use in dissection. [/pullquote]According to AAVS, millions of animals are dissected or vivisected in schools and universities every year, with an estimated six million vertebrates used in high schools alone. These numbers include an estimated 170 species ranging from cats and frogs to pigs, sharks, dogs, mink and various insects, among many others.
The animals that end up on lab tables can come from a number of sources. Some were taken from their habitat in the wild, while others are byproducts of the meat and fur industries. Still others may have been someone’s former pet who had the misfortune of being bought from a shelter or stolen by a Class B dealer, or animal broker who finds and sells animals to schools and research institutions for a profit.
According to Save the Frogs, at least 200 species of frogs have completely disappeared since 1980 and up to one-third of the world’s amphibian species are threatened with extinction due to a variety of factors, yet we continue to remove them from their habitats for use in dissection.
NEAVS also points out that the purchase of animal specimens wastes schools’ limited funding, while non-animal alternatives, including simulated models, plastic models and computer programs, are readily available at a one-time cost and can be even be tried for free first.
Currently, only 15 states and Washington D.C. have laws or policies in place that support a student’s right to opt out of dissection without having their grades affected. Hopefully Connecticut will be next.
TAKE ACTION!
Previous versions of this bill have been introduced, but never passed. The House just passed the latest version, HB 6329, by a vote of 131-8, but it now goes to the Senate where it died last time.
Please sign and share the petition asking Connecticut’s Senators to pass An Act Concerning Dissection Choice.
If you’re a student or educator who wants to promote humane learning and help end the use of animals in education or establish student choice policies and laws in your school or state, visit Animalearn.org to learn more about numerous alternatives and resources available. For more information on current laws in place, visit NEAVS’ webpage on Student Choice Laws and Policies.
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/connecticut-may-let-students-opt-out-of-dissection.html#ixzz2TnRrczgC
In theory and on paper this seems like an easy choice. Of course, we should strive to be as humane as possible to all creatures. Yet, somehow I wince at the prospect of a surgeon, trained at one of these “humane” institutions, putting a scalpel to my body. And, after classes each day, I wonder how many of them go out for a burger or perhaps some barbeque. I am for retaining the scientific method as intact as possible.
There is really nothing at all scientific about dissection. It is simply the study of anatomy that devalues compassion, as it encourages children to indulge in violence to animals… and by extension violence to other children. In India dissection is banned in every high school, in every state. Children are taught to think. They are taugh anatomy with computer models and no animals have to be sacrificed. The notion of animal sacrifice has its roots in the judeo.christian tradition… so that killing millions of animals a year for a futile exercise in anatomy can be justified by the profit margin.… Read more »
Mr Miller, I can appreciate your concerns. They are logical and certainly not arbitrary. However, as a young physician trained in Britain and currently practising in Sao Paulo, I can assure you that many of the fears and nightmares concerning the “inadequate” training of doctors who fail to dissect animals quickly vanish in both school norms and clinical routines. In terms of surgery, no one is ever allowed to operate on a human patient without a senior instructor being present, supervising, critiquing every step of the way and quickly taking over at the slightest—repeat—slightest variation from accepted norms. Most students… Read more »
Your reasoning sounds good but is that “senior” surgeon the that is trained in dissection. And, I want to bring up the notion that “science” is bad and merely relying on instruction from your seniors is adequate–sounds a bit medieval to me. If it weren’t for the scientists that dared test the Church or innovate then where would we be?
You cite the church for failure to innovate. Yet you adhere to church values which allow for the violation of animal lives to pursue a perceived benefit for humans. When offered the opportunity to innovate around the violence of vivisection you hold tight to the brutality of dominion. This contradiction is a clue into the confusion of a society which tortures and tyrannizes, as it mouths empty words of compassion. The bloodied knowledge you seek is not science. It is primitivism. The chinese believe that eating the penis of a tiger will make a man virile. Vivisectors believe that sacrificing… Read more »
“For there is nothing inaccessible for death All beings are fond of life, hate pain, like pleasure shun destruction. like life, long to live, To all life is dear.”Jain Acharanga Sutra JS, Thank you for all the information with alternatives to dissection and vivisection. However, even if all these alternatives did not exist, vivisection would still be a moral abomination obtained from the torture, maiming and killing of fully sentient beings. There can be no excuse for such sadism. We cringe at the thought of experiments on humans performed during the nazi era, as we celebrate similar atrocities with huge… Read more »
The bill in Connecticut to provide alternatives to dissection is limited to high school students, most of whom will never have to dissect an animal or make use of anatomy in their future careers. Therefore the hysteria of surgeons botching operations because they have not had exposure to dissect14ion is unwarranted.
In reality forcing sensitive and compassionate students to kill and dissect will do significantly more harm than good, as it will teach the lesson that we may kill the weak, defenseless and disenfranchised with moral impunity.
correction:
This confusion is surpassed only by your cynicism…. for it is likely that students seeking to opt out of dissection for moral reasons, are also likely to understand the violence in a meat based diet.
Perhaps if children were taught respect for life rather than the sadism of dominion, more would choose not to dissect or to NOT eat meat.
The question of dissection (on live animals) and/or cadavers (human and non-human), and the prevalence or decline in anatomy courses is a matter of discussion in many medical schools around the world. By now a considerable amount of data has been collected showing that while the study of anatomy—costly as it is for the medical schools to sustain—needs to be strengthened, animal models, by and large, can be retired as a matter of practical choice. Almost every study conducted on this area has shown parity of results or superiority for the non-live-animal models. This trend shows every sign of strengthening… Read more »