Comitês de Pesquisa em Animais - Avaliação na Suécia 1979-89

Studies in Research Ethics nr. 4

Research Ethics in Practice. The Animal Ethics Commitees in Sweden 1979-1989.

Written by Birgitta Forsman

113 pages in English. Centre for Research Ethics, Göteborg 1993.

About the author

Birgitta Forsman received a Ph.D. in Theory of Science and Research from University of Göteborg in 1992. Her dissertation was a comprehensive study of the animal experimental issue with a case study of the Swedish animal ethics commitees. The dissertation was published in Swedish. The present publication is an extended elaboration of the case study. Birgitta Forsman has followed the field of animal experimentation for several years and published papers about animal ethics, research ethics, and research policy.

Abstract

This is a study of the animal ethics commitees (AECs) in Sweden during the ten years from 1979 to 1989. The AECs were set up as compulsary commitees in 1979 after a decision in the Swedish parliament. They are organized on a regional basis, initially being connected to the six university regions in Sweden. Since 1 January 1989, there have been two commitees in the Stockholm area and thus seven in the country. The task of the AECs is to review applications of planned animal experiments.

This study concentrates on the period between the 1 July 1979 and 30 June 1989. During that time, a total number of 224 AEC meetings were held. The outcome of one meeting is unclear. At the remaining 223 meetings, 6,572 applications were approved and 13 were disapproved. 261 applications were returned for reconsideration, most of which were later approved. One written protest was made against a single disapproval. Written objections to approvals were made in 626 cases, that is, 9.5% of the approved experiments. These objections against approvals were made by fifty-two persons in the laymen member category of the AECs, by twelve in the technician category, and by four in the researcher category.

The main sources for the study are documents regarding the AECs, that is, unpublished documents such as applications, minutes, written protests, letters, and so on. Official printed materials including parliamentary and governmental bills, laws, and statues from authorities also have been used, as have books and articles regarding the subject.

Most attention is paid to patterns of disagreement and conflict revealed in the documents. This is motivated by an attempt to problematize the experienced self-evidence of opinions concerning animal experimentation. There have been many conflicts, especially between 1982 and 1986, both within and outside the AECs. These conflicts have concerned animal experimantation as well as the structure and function of the AECs. Criticism of specific animal experiments has been much more expressed than has possible defence of them. Therefore most of the written sources deal with criticism. This criticism is along three lines based on scientific, political, and, ethical considerations. In addition, there is a formalistic criticism regarding the structure and function of the AECs.

In spite of the conflicts within and around the AECs, there is by and large a consensus that the commitees hve served a purpose and have had mostly good consequences, both for science and for animals. The main consequences I have found are these: The discussion in the AECs has led to a rise in perception ofanimal experimentation as a moral problem. Within the laboratories, this has entailed enforced self-policing and an improvement of experimental procedures and care of animals. Outside the laboratories it has generated a discourse regarding animal experimentation as a morally significant issue. At the same time, animal experimentation has been consolidated as an enterprise that is here to stay. The abolitionists protets have abated, and a convergence of opinions has come about. The discussion of animal experimentation has been depoliticized and turned into a more technical discission concentrating on scientific and animal-welfare details. The AECs have led to no pernicious consequences for science and research.

Back to the Studies in Research Ethics page, please!