A&P prof's inappropriate response to request for alternative to animal dissection

[sarailyse]

I am taking online A&P II at a community college. The course includes a lab component, though lab is not a requirement for the nursing program to which I have been admitted. I am not squeamish (used to be an EMT), nor do I oppose human cadaver dissection. I do, however, object to animal dissection for ethical reasons. I contacted my professor to request an alternative to the cow eye and heart dissection activities citing my ethical objection to animal dissection, and the fact that I haven't eaten or worn animals for over two decades. I expressed my willingness to engage in an alternate activity, such as an interactive, multimedia software program (we already utilize such software to conduct experiments on virtual lab animals). My request was denied. I was informed that if I chose not to do the dissections, I would be penalized with a deduction in points.

In response to my e-mail asking my professor to reconsider, I received the following reply (excerpt):

Would you tell someone who is badly mangled in a auto accident and bleeding to death that you cannot work on them because you are a vegetarian? I would hope not. If so, then you should choose another career.

My professor also called my ethical opposition to animal dissection into question with the following statement:

I understand being a vegetarian but this assignment does not require you to eat these animal specimens.

I found his message to be inappropriate, offensive, and ridiculous. I would like to obtain some outside perspective and would appreciate any comments you may have about this situation. Thanks.

[cookderosa]

Interesting....veganism is a choice but a persons religion is not....ok

ETA - A person my be vegetarian/vegan because of their religion. The two are linked for many people. Several major religions of the world promote vegetariansim including several branches of Christianity, the seventh day adventists come immediately to mind.

Religion is a choice, but it is a legally protected choice- not the same thing. Also, the OP isn't a vegan due to religion, had he said he was- I would have answered quite differently.

[AZ_LPN_8_26_13]

There are cadavers that are donated by the family and the deceased has no knowledge of it. This, IMHO, is the same as the owner donating the animal.

The animal is already dead. That you will not prevent by your position. You will not bring it back to life. Maybe you can consider your disection as having given this animal's death meaning and value.

My online A&P required only the disection of a chicken which we were to purchase at our local grocery store. I guess this was far less an issue for me as I am an avid carnivore.

I tend to agree more with this point of view. While we don't want to see animals needlessly suffer, what's the alternative here? Considering the dissection as giving the animal's death meaning and value is a great way of looking at it, IMO. I am not a vegan BTW - I grew up in a Native American mileu on reservations, and though I'm not Indian by blood, I am somewhat by virtue of cultural exposure and upbringing. Everything has a God-given purpose. There is a time and a purpose to help give life, and a time and a purpose to take it. Everything in it's season, and for God's purpose. When Indians successfully brought down a animal to help feed their families, one of the first things they did was offer a prayer to the Great Spirit, and ask the dead animal's spirit for forgiveness, offering a piece of that animals flesh in the fire to atone for doing what was necessary. Life is a cycle......

[eeyorelov]

I think your teacher was out of line in telling you to pick a new career, I as a meat eater I found the dissection to me WAAAY more helpful then the simulated cd-rom crap. New technology is only as good as the maker and the topic being taught. If you feel this strongly about then be prepared to take the class somewhere else, or take up or case with dean. (BTW that may take a while so come up with plan B)

Also I have a question, what are you going to do when you become a nurse and are ask to take care of someone who life choices so against your beliefs? I know others on her say that has nothing to do with it, but it does. I not telling you what to believe or to copromise your morals, but suggesting that this small battle is one you may have to fight again. And you may have to come to point where you need to swallow your beliefs and care for someone anyway. Not trying to preach but I guess I'm trying to say is pick your battle, is not doing the dissection worth the bad grade and repeating the class? Food for thought good luck with your problem )

[sabrinat.]

I am sorry about your feeling , however it is not fair to other students who have to cut the animales and you don't. This is a part of nursing and it is something that everyone has to go through . I think if it bothers you may be you should try to take the science classes on line. I am going to school for my lvn. I would be very **** if a instructor gave a person a pass because they don't eat meat or just don't want to participate. The instructor is there to get you through the class ,and this does not include personal life styles or choices. I will not say you can't be a nurse but, it is what it is and the instructor is doing his or her job .

[scottrho]

"The course includes a lab component, though lab is not a requirement for the nursing program to which I have been admitted."

I'm sorry, but I cannot imagine a nursing program worth its salt that would not require a lab for A&P. It's just too important. IMHO

rhonda

[scottrho]

First of all, as a vegetarian, I must protest. The professor is obviously under the influence of embalming fluid....much too much time spent around that barrel of dead cats.

Secondly, please tell me honestly what the heck are students expected to learn by fishing through decaying cat flesh? I never have figured out where to put that bit of learning in my 20 year old career. Do you think we can move these nursing schools out of the dark ages? A simple plastic replica (just like the heart or lungs demonstrated every day somewhere in an up to date lab) would be sooooo much simpler and lord knows we won't have to worry about finding aunt nellie's missing cat in the anatomy class!

The class in which I studied A & P had tons of questions that should have been addressed - but oh, no, we were kept busy slicing. Gross. Vile and pathetic.

Sorry, but simply knowing where the heart and lungs are in the body (which you wouldn't even need the plastic model for) does not give you insight in how they work together. One of the most awesome sights for me was to see the cow lung expand when I shot air into it. At that moment I really understood how the alveoli work, and what atelectasis is.

I know where the engine in my car is, and I know where the transmission is, but I have no clue on how they work together.

True, nurses are not doctors/surgeons, and I am not a mechanic, however, we need to fully understand how the systems of the body work together, how they are connected, in order to properly care for our patients.

Dissection is part of A&P, and rightly so.

rhonda

[freeflowchi]

To answer your question, no his response was not inappropriate. Definitely poorly worded and maybe unprofessional, but not inappropriate. I admire you for your convictions and believe you are doing something you think is right. But a previous poster was correct in saying that the entire medical industry is rife with animal rights issues beyond an A&P class.

Because of this, your objection seems a little short-sighted.

And while the professor could have used different words, you could sacrifice some points and call it a day. Take a B instead of an A maybe. And do your best to smooth things over with the professor BEFORE taking things up with his/her superiors. You can take this lesson with you in your career as well.

I would also try to keep your animal rights opinions to yourself throughout any nursing school or job application process in the future. As a RN with a previous career in alternative medicine, I have learned the hard way that some thoughts are best left unsaid.

Good luck.

[PatricParamedic]

I absolutely despised dog lab at UCSD La Jolla school of medicine. It damned near sent me right out the door. And in fact, we did lose one intern because of it.

But those of such sensitivities probably should stay well clear of most areas of patient care. I'm thinking you need to grow another layer of skin, if for no other reason than to insulate your soul. And if you really plan to work around physicians, you seriously need an attitude adjustment. The crude talk hasn't even started yet.

[gkvegan, MSN]

I am vegan and I am completely opposed to dissection and animal testing. Those of you saying she should pick a new career are way out of line. There seem to be a lot of in-compassionate people responding to this post. Maybe you all are the ones who should be thinking about a different career because last time I checked nursing takes a lot of compassion.

In many states students cannot be forced to participate in dissection. Hopefully her state is one of them. The professor was WAY out of line with his comments and should be reprimanded.

The following responds to many of the points people are making and comes from the Physicians Comity for Responsible Medicine website: http://pcrm.org/resch/meded/ethics_med_point.html

Point-Counterpoint on Medical School Animal Laboratories

Following are some common justifications given for maintaining live animal laboratories and responses to those concerns.

"Students must be exposed to complex living systems."

This exposure can be to human patients undergoing necessary surgeries. Much more can be learned about human anatomy and pharmacological/physiological responses this way than via a terminal exercise with a dog, pig, or other animal. Computer programs can be useful adjuncts, simulating biological systems and their responses to varied stimuli.

"This is the students' first clinical experience, their first 'patient.'"

Shouldn't a student's first clinical experience be life-affirming? Dealing with patients involves much more than just physiology, pharmacology, and surgery; it involves counseling, listening to their needs and, above all, helping instead of harming them. This is part of the reason why top medical schools involve students in clinics and operating rooms (under close supervision) early on in their training, and have eliminated animal laboratories.

"We must show how drugs, alone and in combination, affect the body...it's important to see how some predictions made by computer programs or textbooks don't always come true."

This knowledge can be gained by observing how human patients react to drugs administered during routine care. Computer teaching programs are designed to provide variability as well, and even allow students to administer drugs to a "virtual patient." Case studies also clearly demonstrate this variability.

"Students need to see physiology in action, not out of a textbook."

Medical students need to see human physiology, not canine. There are ample opportunities to gain this experience from observing a variety of necessary procedures on human patients. Computer programs, CD-ROMS, and videotapes also provide this reinforcement.

"The institution would not be offering these laboratories unless the faculty thought they were important parts of the training."

Actually, many institutions may simply be continuing a tradition whose time has long passed. Many of the nation's top schools, such as Harvard, Columbia, Stanford and Yale, deem live animal laboratories unnecessary for medical training. If the laboratories were so crucial, why are countless doctors and other health care professionals educated every year, at top schools, without participating in them and with no detriment to their professional skills? Teaching techniques are constantly evolving and it is time for the schools that still have animal laboratories to join the 21st century.

"A deep understanding of the mechanisms and functions of living mammalian systems is essential in the education of a modern physician."

There are many ways to gain this understanding. Much comes from textbooks and lectures. Models, computer programs and simulators offer additional knowledge. In fact, computer programs, models, and textbooks offer much more detailed information on the function of various mammalian systems than can any short laboratory. Ultimately, students learn about humans by studying humans. Physicians never perform surgery without first assisting experienced physicians who can show them the ropes in the human operating room.

"Plastic models cannot duplicate the 'hands-on' feel, the sounds, and the responses that a physician will encounter when facing his or her first patients."

An animal laboratory will not duplicate this either. First, most animal labs are designed to demonstrate physiology or pharmacology and do not teach surgical technique. Second, the only way to produce all these phenomena is through observation of and ultimately supervised participation in human surgeries and clinical procedures. Students are poorly served by experimenting on dogs or other animals. Countless aspects--from the amount of incision pressure needed to break the skin to the size and placement of internal organs--on the dog are different from those of humans. Certainly, less care is taken to prevent scarring and collateral trauma on an animal than would be taken on a human patient.

"Students like the labs."

Many students do not. Many students simply do not voice their discomfort with or opposition to the procedure for fear of academic repercussions. Of course, compared to the tedium of classroom lectures, students enjoy putting on surgical gear and getting into the laboratory. They can gain this experience from observing needed procedures in the human operating room. Since this is often their first hands-on experience, students may enjoy that aspect of it, but they can experience this excitement by observing a human surgery.

"Dogs will often be killed anyway in the pound."

If so, they will not be subjected to the trauma of continued confinement, shipping, preparation, and experimentation before death in the laboratory. Additionally, dog laboratories undermine animal control efforts, since many people will not bring animals to a shelter if they might be given up for experimentation. Therefore, many more animals are simply abandoned or left to the elements. Not uncommonly, dogs begin to wake up during the laboratory or are further traumatized by a faulty procedure. This often traumatizes the students as well.

"The more opportunities to practice a procedure before using it on a patient, the better."

Students are best prepared for procedures on humans by observing and taking a limited role in those procedures, under close supervision, and by manipulating life-like human anatomical simulators and trainers. Most animal laboratories don't teach procedures anyway, they simply demonstrate the known effects of pharmacological or physiological agents. Computer programs, CD-ROMS, simulators, and videotapes also allow for repeated use and practice, according to the students' needs.

"It's not proper for students to question what the university thinks they need to know in order to be good doctors. They're not qualified to make that determination."

Students have a duty to speak up when asked to do something that violates their principles. Part of being a good doctor is living by the principles that first motivated one to pursue study in the healing arts, and those that come with ethical growth, such as "First, do no harm," Hippocrates' famous admonition. Every student is qualified to determine what is right and wrong according to his or her personal moral beliefs. Students, who pay for their education should be able to question and object to a part of their program that is unnecessary, outdated, and/or violates their ethics. The American Medical Student Association (AMSA) supports the right of medical students to opt out of animal laboratories.

"We allow students who oppose the animal laboratory to sit out, but every year the majority of the class participates."

Students will often participate in an animal laboratory for fear of standing apart from their fellow students and courting undue attention or disfavor from the professor. Many students also worry that they may be at a disadvantage during a test. However, the American Medical Student Association's policy is that the students should not be penalized for not participating in an animal laboratory.

[gkellie]

Wow I'm surprised at the response on this board.

The professor's response does not make any logical sense. How does not wanting to dissect animals have anything to do with "someone who is badly mangled in a auto accident and bleeding to death" ---it doesn't.

It's obvious that the professor has a complete lack of understanding that some vegetarians/vegans have ethics involving non-humans that go beyond simply eating or not eating them.

It is absolutely ridiculous to say that she should find another career.

The OP doesn't say anything about being squeamish and is willing to dissect on human cadavors. Human cadavors are actually a better learning tool since the OP will be working with HUMAN patients as a nurse. OP is willing to do human dissection----as in learning on the very same species she will need to help in the future---as in wanting to work hard and learn on the real thing without compromising her morals.

ONCE AGAIN let me state that the OP is not looking for a pass/to not to work/etc.

She wants to do the work just not on an animal.

Being ethically opposed to dissecting animals has nothing to do with working with people who have different life choices than her--where did that even come from. I'll work on someone who is polygamist with 10 wives---that has nothing to do with being ethically opposed to dissection! Never as a nurse will she need to deal with animals being killed for her learning.

http://www.dissectionalternatives.org/alternatives/

[juliaann]

Being ethically opposed to dissecting animals has nothing to do with working with people who have different life choices than her--where did that even come from. I'll work on someone who is polygamist with 10 wives---that has nothing to do with being ethically opposed to dissection!

That's what I'm sayin'! :) I'm glad to see there are a few of us in agreement on this issue, anyway. I spent most of my cat dissection labs studying from my textbook. My lab group (and every group in the class) had pretty much mangled the poor creatures beyond recognition. I personally do not feel like I gained anything by the experience. I passed anatomy with a near-perfect score and feel totally comfortable with my understanding of introductory HUMAN anatomy. I've learned much more in my hands-on patient-care job than I ever will in a class lab.

That's why we do clinicals, y'know. Applicable learning (with human bodies!), who'd've thought?

[sparketteinok]

Since when are animals' lives more important than humans' lives? Ok i like animals and all, but- seriously- the statement of being ok with dissecting a human cadaver but not an animal carcass?? Are u kidding me?? Come on- this has got to be a joke.

The day that the life of an animal takes precedence over that of a human will be a very sad day for us all.

If the op is animal passionate to the extent she says she is, then she should spend her $ and her time at the animal shelter, and find homes for them and bring home all of them that are set to be euthanized.