Resarch Prof. Dr. Peter Kunzmann

Funding: Landwirtschaftliche Rentenbank, 50.000 EUR

Project Details:
The projects`main question is if, why and how the welfare of farm animals is connected to the idea of sustainability and if animals`interests are playing a role in the present discussions on sustainability.

Results:

In current sustainability concepts, animals and animal welfare are only indirectly addressed in places, although this preliminary study has shown that their inclusion is socially desirable or even demanded. The extent to which the anthropocentric sustainability goals and the welfare of farm animals can be meaningfully linked will be the subject of a follow-up project.

Funding: Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wissenschaft und Kultur, 97.745 EUR

Project Details:
The ongoing dispute over the future of livestock has enormous economic relevance in a state like Lower Saxony; in the livestock-rich regions, the issue is also becoming socially explosive. The issue is a major concern for society.
The aim of the project is to objectify the debate and contribute to a deeper understanding of the positions. The core of the project consists of analyzing the content and positions of animal husbandry and relating them to their own ability to engage in discourse.

Results:

The project locates and analyzes reasons for moments of failure and escalation in the farm animal discourse. At the same time, perspectives for its improvement are identified in order to point out possible turning points towards a more peaceful, respectful and constructive discussion about so-called farm animals.

The main results of the project are a discourse path as a suggested outline and a flyer with rules for discussion, which can be viewed on the website https://wiemenschenuebertierestreiten.jimdofree.com/.

Funding: DFG, 299.250 EUR

Project Details:
At the level of research and therapy, human and veterinary medicine are closely interlinked. However, this hardly applies to the ethical discussions about the sensible use of available diagnostics, drugs and techniques in human and veterinary medicine. This is surprising, as pets have become so-called "family members". Experiences with sick and dying animals presumably have an effect on treatment decisions in human medicine (and vice versa). The project deals with this relationship between moral and ethical issues in human and veterinary medicine using the example of treatment decisions at the end of life. Firstly, this will be investigated at the level of descriptive ethics: How do experiences in dealing with moribund animals influence decisions on therapeutic goals in humans? To what extent are moral premises from human medicine reflected in the treatment of dying animals? Secondly, this is investigated at the level of normative ethics: What principles, goods and values do the ethical discourses in veterinary and human medicine draw on in equal measure? How do they differ fundamentally or in terms of weighting? To what extent are concepts such as dignity or humanity used metaphorically, analogically, univocally, etc.? Thirdly, this is examined at the level of metaethics: How are the disciplines of medical ethics and animal ethics related?Are they two aspects of a common bioethics?Are they two largely independent areas of ethics?What does this mean for the understanding of
medical, animal and natural ethics?The demarcation and entanglement of animal and medical ethics will thus be exemplified for the end of life, and convergent, divergent and/or time-delayed developments in morality, normative ethics and metaethics will be worked out.The studies will contribute to the understanding of possibly divergent assessments in everyday morality, clinical ethics counseling and moral philosophy.

Results:

The early decision to abandon the parallel investigation of human and veterinary medicine and medical ethics categories envisaged in the application had a formative influence on the course of the project. It quickly became clear: Medically, many end-of-life measures are not comparable on closer inspection: in terms of medical ethics, animals represent a different type of patient than consenting adult humans. Only marginal cases are comparable here. The project has therefore focused on those areas in which genuine convergences can be observed that can be implicitly and explicitly named.

The conceptual considerations in the first part of the project highlighted in particular the convergences from the fields of euthanasia (for humans and animals) and hospice (also for both patient groups), which at first glance appear contradictory, are currently being discussed anew and could be given greater significance in human and veterinary medical training and professional practice.

 

In a practical part of the project, a cross-disciplinary focus group study was carried out.It clearly showed that human and veterinary medicine can learn from each other and benefit from an exchange on end-of-life issues and that there are still common challenges despite the differences between patients.At the same time, dividing lines became clear, particularly when it came to the issue of actively killing patients and the associated ethical, personal and technical challenges.

In a further quantitative study, the context dependency of certain ethical evaluation schemes was examined, such as what is legally permitted or technically possible, but also the extent to which factors such as age, illness, state of consciousness or autonomy play a role in end-of-life decisions for human and animal patients - both from the perspective of medical laypersons and the professional groups involved. Here, too, it became clear that marginal cases in particular are used for comparison with animal patients and that pluralistic views on questions of ageing and a good death can be found for humans and animals.

Cooperation Partners:

Institut für Geschichte, Ethik und Philosophie der Medizin, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover,

Dr. Gerald Neitzke