TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Dissection of live dog in high school!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dissection of live dog in high school! - Page 2

post #31 of 59
I don't think there is EVER a good reason to dissect a living animal. It is barbaric, and I would think it would be against the law. My heart is breaking for that poor dog. It is so sad that so many furbabies are at the mercy of so many cruel and heartless human beings. I agree, why don't we give the school teacher a seditive and dissect him, so we can see how the human digestive system works.
post #32 of 59
okay, i read most of the post and i can tell most everyone is pretty pissed, but they do this in high schools and colleges ALL OVER the place... i have done it twice....

if you really know whats going on, i dont think it is that big of a deal...

In my physiology class last semester we did it again....

there is something, i have no idea what, that is put into the dog, that completley paralyzes it and knocks it unconcious, and it has no control over muscles anymore...

all of the organ systems keep working, and blood flows, but basically it is brain dead, cannot move or feel anything...

it is like when people get lethal injection, it is the first or second shot that paralyzes them and they are supposedly not supposed to be able to feel anything

we did it so that we can 'practice' operating on the animal and examine all of the organs as they are working... we do it so we can practice working around other 'active' organs while working on another organ...

example, we were doing heart surgery on one of the animals, and we opening the heart up and working on it.... after we got it sewn back together, the dogs heart stopped... and we had to revive it, i actually had to use my hands and pump the dogs heart over and over again while classmates added epinephrine and i think calcium directly to its heart until it started beating again

i really understand why you guys are upset, if was hard to see at first, but i think it is less of a liability for the school if the first time around we practice on an animal, rather than an actual human, especially when most of us are only 2nd and 3rd year student....

not that an animals life is not as valuable as a humans... i dont want you guys to start bashing me... people who want to become doctors have to start somewhere and unfortunatley that means with animals... they usually come from the spca, they are animals that are going to be put to sleep, instead they send them to us...

i read the article again, i do agree with the teacher, it is very very educational, although i think it is better saved for college aged, who are going into the medical feild....
post #33 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker
I don't think there is EVER a good reason to dissect a living animal. It is barbaric, and I would think it would be against the law. My heart is breaking for that poor dog. It is so sad that so many furbabies are at the mercy of so many cruel and heartless human beings. I agree, why don't we give the school teacher a seditive and dissect him, so we can see how the human digestive system works.
i mean no offense, but that would be the same as sedating him to do a liver transplant or something... dont forget, humans are ALIVE when we cut them open to work on them also...
post #34 of 59
Thread Starter 
Meagan, I personally am fine with a future MD or vet learning and practicing on an animal, if it is done with care so the animal is not in pain. However, for this method to be used to teach a high school kid seems CRAZY!

If it is so darned educational, we can tape the med students doing it and watch the video! Or take the kids on a field trip to watch the med students!

I am a nurse, and in nursing school we had to practice giving each other shots before we gave them to patients. So I had already given a few shots when I got to the pediatric (peds) floor. But when I was offered the opportunity to give a child a shot, I declined. I never planned to go into peds, and didn't feel I should practice on the kid!

Same goes for dissecting a live animal-if it is necessary or medically beneficial, do it. If it is just for kicks, don't.
post #35 of 59
I'd have to agree with Beckyboo. I think there could be a time and place after reflecting on this a little bit, but I still can't see how this would be anywhere nearly as educational for a high school student as watching a surgery on a human. Obviously you can't have 17 year olds operating on a person, but I've dissected more animals than I can even count and it was nothing compared to seeing a heart surgery. The surgeon even let me stand next to him as he pointed out the different parts of the gentleman's heart that was being operated on. I don't think that comparing surgery in people or animals is really all that relevant, because the dog is dying without having a choice in the matter because of human indifference and irresponsibility. The dog is a living reflection of a throw-away society and I just see that as exploitation, but I can understand others having different views. My undergraduate college has a cadaver lab for it's nursing and premed students and students from the local "gifted" high school go to observe. The anthro department has a heck of a skeleton lab- with a number of natural skeletons from various types of animals as well as humans. One of our senior projects involved taking skeletons and bones to local high schools. I just think that there are just better educational tools for high school students to use than to use a live dog.
post #36 of 59
How practical is it to have a hands on knowledge of a dog's intestine anyway? Reading a textbook on the subject is good enough. Unless you're a vet, you'll not use that information again. Sure the dog may have been sedated, but he was still alive! That's just wrong.
post #37 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsd
How practical is it to have a hands on knowledge of a dog's intestine anyway? Reading a textbook on the subject is good enough. Unless you're a vet, you'll not use that information again. Sure the dog may have been sedated, but he was still alive! That's just wrong.
I do think it is useful for high school students to do dissections, because it makes you much more aware of how the actual system looks. It broadens your understanding in a way that looking at color-coded, neatly separated and labeled organs in a textbook can't. However, I don't see that a vivisection would be any more useful than a dissection, so I do think it wasn't needed here, given that it wasn't a pre-med class. But I'm not clear on why people think this is wrong, rather than just useless. This was a dog slated for euthanization, so would have died regardless, and was sedated so as not to feel pain. So why was it wrong? Or, rather, why was it more wrong than a straight euthanization would have been? Do people feel it would be wrong in all circumstances, or is it because people feel teenagers are impressionable and may have taken away a bad message?
post #38 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckiboo
Meagan, I personally am fine with a future MD or vet learning and practicing on an animal, if it is done with care so the animal is not in pain. However, for this method to be used to teach a high school kid seems CRAZY!

If it is so darned educational, we can tape the med students doing it and watch the video! Or take the kids on a field trip to watch the med students!

I am a nurse, and in nursing school we had to practice giving each other shots before we gave them to patients. So I had already given a few shots when I got to the pediatric (peds) floor. But when I was offered the opportunity to give a child a shot, I declined. I never planned to go into peds, and didn't feel I should practice on the kid!

Same goes for dissecting a live animal-if it is necessary or medically beneficial, do it. If it is just for kicks, don't.
i completley agree with you about it not being neccessary for high school to do it!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by mferr84
i read the article again, i do agree with the teacher, it is very very educational, although i think it is better saved for college aged, who are going into the medical feild....
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsd
How practical is it to have a hands on knowledge of a dog's intestine anyway? Reading a textbook on the subject is good enough. Unless you're a vet, you'll not use that information again. Sure the dog may have been sedated, but he was still alive! That's just wrong.
a dogs digestive system works pretty much the same way as a humans... in college, i think they would rather give 2nd year students a dog rather than a human to use as a teaching tool...

it is not just for vet student, some animal systems work very similarly to human systems.... when these live dissections are done in college, not high school, and only for people who intend to go into a medical feild, learning the animal systems is information that you use again...

i do agree that a live dissection shouldnt be done in highschool... when i was in high school anatomy&phys. we did cats and pigs that had already been put to sleep, i think that is perfectly fine

but for people like myself, who are going into a field where i will be required to do surgery on LIVE people, just reading a text book or watching a video is not going to cut it
post #39 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by esrgirl
I don't think that comparing surgery in people or animals is really all that relevant, because the dog is dying without having a choice in the matter because of human indifference and irresponsibility.
i do think it is relavent... many things have been made much more clear by opening up an animal and actually working on it and seeing how it is working

yes, watching an actual surgery is a bit different, but you have to start somewhere... dead animals->live animals->dead humans->live humans

the teacher doesnt walk into class and say "hey, george, why dont you bring in your family pet for us to work on"...

animals that come to us are animals that are sick, or animals that have been declared to mean to be adopted out, so they are going to be euthenized no matter what, rather than just throwing them away, wouldnt it be good to donate them to a local college for learning purposes...

any irresponsibility would be a direct reflection of the owner who either beat the dog or ignored it and that is why it is sick or mean and has to be put to sleep

think of it as donating your body to science... and yes, i know they dont have a choice
post #40 of 59
I understand the arguement, but I guess it's just more of a philosophical or moral thing for me. I just think it's wrong- which may be a purely emotional response and I'm ok with that

I can understand it's purpose for folks going into professional fields, but as for doing it because it's educational for high school kids, I just don't buy it. It really does strike me as exploiting a suffering creature, a creature who should be offered some measure of dignity. I would never have let a science teacher cut up Abigail before she was put to sleep so some high school kids could learn a lesson. If my veternarian however had thought her death might bring about useful FeLv research for other cats I would have been ok with that. What is good enough for Abby is good enough for other cats as far as I'm concerned. I don't really see this as being for the greater good. It wasn't that long ago that I was a teenager taking anatomy/phys and advanced biology- I remember how the vast majority of the kids behaved with the animals they were dissecting and it certainly wasn't pretty and was often disturbing, but maybe that was just the kids I went to school with.

Anywho, yeah, I'm sure I'm mostly speaking from an emotional base, but it's just hard to explain. It just "feels" wrong, if that makes any sense and it makes me terribly sad and sick.
post #41 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by esrgirl
It wasn't that long ago that I was a teenager taking anatomy/phys and advanced biology- I remember how the vast majority of the kids behaved with the animals they were dissecting and it certainly wasn't pretty and was often disturbing, but maybe that was just the kids I went to school with.
Anywho, yeah, I'm sure I'm mostly speaking from an emotional base, but it's just hard to explain. It just "feels" wrong, if that makes any sense and it makes me terribly sad and sick.
understood, accepted, respected!

and no, it wasnt just you who went to school with immature jerks who treated the animals we were looking at like crap.... another reason for it to be stricly medical feild in collge...

i agree with you about what you said about not letting high schoolers, or anyone for that matter,cut on abby, just to look, not cool

and this is going to sound very contradicting, it is just that i am not sure how to say or explain what i am thinking... but i agree with you about it not being for a greater good, but i do think it is a good thing, of course when done appropriatley and with good intentions
post #42 of 59
I hope the dog was euthanized before he woke up.
post #43 of 59
I guess I'm at the extreme end of the spectrum on this subject. In my heart and in my soul I know that cutting open live animals for reasons other than promoting their health or saving their lives is wrong. All the logic, reasoning, and scientific justification cannot undo that intrinsic, deep rooted sense that it is wrong.

Do we as humans have the right to use animals however we want for our own benefit? Is it really necessary to use animals for medical education? Why can't med school students observe operations on human patients as they are being performed by doctors? Wouldn't that be much more educational than subjecting animals to vivisections? I really can't understand how looking at the organs of a live animal under anesthesia is all that different from looking at the organs of a dead animal. Under anesthesia there couldn't be a very significant movement of the animal's organs.

The following is a statement from the administration of Gunnison Valley High School:

"DOG MISCONCEPTION
We wish to clear up the misconception reported in the news. The dog in this incidence was found in our mountains, by a family who tried to give it a home. The dog was vicious and couldn't be kept, so it was taken to an animal clinic. The veterinarian kept the dog 14 days, but the dog was mean and not adoptable. It was determined that the dog would have to be euthanized.

The advanced biology class consisting of 7 seniors and 1 junior traveled to the animal clinic, after each parent was contacted by phone for parental permission. One parent elected to not have her daughter attend. The animal was anesthetized under sterile conditions. Students observed the digestive system of the dog. There was no dissection, nor did the teacher or students have any contact with the animal. Both the teacher and veterinarian are kind, gentle people and advocates of animals. We apologize for anyone we have offended and wish to go on record as stating this practice will not be repeated in our school."

This doesn't justify it for me. If the dog really was vicious, it was humans that made him that way. "Kind, gentle people and advocates of animals" do not commit atrocities like that. They say that they will not repeat the practice again, but who is to say that they won't do it again once the publicity dies down.

For those of you who are against what they did to that dog, please take the time to write them a letter of protest:

Gunnison Valley High School
35 E 600 S
Gunnison Valley, UT 84634

Or call (435) 528-7256
post #44 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by consumercity
Do we as humans have the right to use animals however we want for our own benefit? Is it really necessary to use animals for medical education? Why can't med school students observe operations on human patients as they are being performed by doctors? Wouldn't that be much more educational than subjecting animals to vivisections? I really can't understand how looking at the organs of a live animal under anesthesia is all that different from looking at the organs of a dead animal. Under anesthesia there couldn't be a very significant movement of the animal's organs.
so basically, someone who watches 'trauma:life in the er' on TLC could be a qualified surgeon then, if watching is just as educational as doing it... i couldnt have been a surgeon when i was 8!

however, that is not so, i dont know about you, but i wouldnt want someone cutting on me that doesnt have any hands on experience

this is a bit stronger than anesthesia, seeing as how it is not reversible... when we first did a frog, we opened it up and were examining everything, when we were done, we were instructed to completley remove the frogs heart... it was still beating, we were instructed to cut the heart into its four chambers.... it was still beating.... even under any kind of anesthesia, yes, organs slow, but they are still alive and functioning... you cannot examine and learn from a dead organ... it doesnt do anything...

i understand where everyone is coming from being angry that this happened... but the fact that i have done it multiple times, and i have full knowledge of why it is being done and what we are benefiting from doing it, i really dont understand why anyone could be against it...

and rockcat, you said you hope they are euthenized before they wake up... they never wake up... once this liquid is injected into them, they are done, there is no way to reverse it... i know at my college, when we are done with them... we sew them back up, and we give them another injection that does end their life, then we give them back to the spca or whoever to dispose of them like they normally would...

this has been happening forever, med-students have been cutting open animals since the dawn of time to learn about organ systems before they are given the go ahead to start slicing up humans, this is not a new thing

i dont understand, animals are not capable of making the decision to dontate themselves to a lab full of med students to learn from, so we make the decision for them... if the animal is going to be killed anyway, why not let someone benefit from learning before they are destroyed
post #45 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obi
I do think it is useful for high school students to do dissections, because it makes you much more aware of how the actual system looks. It broadens your understanding in a way that looking at color-coded, neatly separated and labeled organs in a textbook can't. However, I don't see that a vivisection would be any more useful than a dissection, so I do think it wasn't needed here, given that it wasn't a pre-med class. But I'm not clear on why people think this is wrong, rather than just useless. This was a dog slated for euthanization, so would have died regardless, and was sedated so as not to feel pain. So why was it wrong? Or, rather, why was it more wrong than a straight euthanization would have been? Do people feel it would be wrong in all circumstances, or is it because people feel teenagers are impressionable and may have taken away a bad message?
I have not done any vivisections, dissections, etc, in high school-and now I work in a scientific field. There is no need for it. It's one thing for medical students to do those things, it's quite another for high school students to do those things. I am completely against high school students dissecting anything, even if it's frogs. There is no reason to teach them how to kill animals.
post #46 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by consumercity
Do we as humans have the right to use animals however we want for our own benefit? ...

The following is a statement from the administration of Gunnison Valley High School:

"DOG MISCONCEPTION
We wish to clear up the misconception reported in the news. The dog in this incidence was found in our mountains, by a family who tried to give it a home. The dog was vicious and couldn't be kept, so it was taken to an animal clinic. The veterinarian kept the dog 14 days, but the dog was mean and not adoptable. It was determined that the dog would have to be euthanized.

The advanced biology class consisting of 7 seniors and 1 junior traveled to the animal clinic, after each parent was contacted by phone for parental permission. One parent elected to not have her daughter attend. The animal was anesthetized under sterile conditions. Students observed the digestive system of the dog. There was no dissection, nor did the teacher or students have any contact with the animal. Both the teacher and veterinarian are kind, gentle people and advocates of animals. We apologize for anyone we have offended and wish to go on record as stating this practice will not be repeated in our school."

This doesn't justify it for me. If the dog really was vicious, it was humans that made him that way. "Kind, gentle people and advocates of animals" do not commit atrocities like that. They say that they will not repeat the practice again, but who is to say that they won't do it again once the publicity dies down.

For those of you who are against what they did to that dog, please take the time to write them a letter of protest:

Gunnison Valley High School
35 E 600 S
Gunnison Valley, UT 84634

Or call (435) 528-7256

1) But we do use animals for own benefit on a large global scale.
We eat alot of meat and we wear them.

2) So, these students didn't actually take part in the dissection? They observed at an animal clinic?
post #47 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by elizwithcat
I have not done any vivisections, dissections, etc, in high school-and now I work in a scientific field. There is no need for it. It's one thing for medical students to do those things, it's quite another for high school students to do those things. I am completely against high school students dissecting anything, even if it's frogs. There is no reason to teach them how to kill animals.
I don't think that the purpose of education is simply to equip people for jobs (which is what I take you to mean by "need"; I apologize if I have misunderstood). It should also be about teaching them about the world. If we wanted to eliminate from school all of the things that they don't use later in a job, then many people would never take chemistry or physics, we could abolish all but basic math classes, many people would never take a literature class (only grammar, writing skills and reading comprehension being critical for a job), biology would probably be truncated, and some would also argue for large portions of history classes to be eliminated as well. I think things like dissections and other teaching tools that don't rely strictly on text books, are valuable ways to teach students. I don't think that dissections are about teaching students how to kill things any more than I think eating meat is about that. However, I do understand why this issue can be emotionally charged for some, and I don't mean to invalidate your feelings on the issue.
post #48 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by consumercity
"DOG MISCONCEPTION
We wish to clear up the misconception reported in the news. The dog in this incidence was found in our mountains, by a family who tried to give it a home. The dog was vicious and couldn't be kept, so it was taken to an animal clinic. The veterinarian kept the dog 14 days, but the dog was mean and not adoptable. It was determined that the dog would have to be euthanized.

The advanced biology class consisting of 7 seniors and 1 junior traveled to the animal clinic, after each parent was contacted by phone for parental permission. One parent elected to not have her daughter attend. The animal was anesthetized under sterile conditions. Students observed the digestive system of the dog. There was no dissection, nor did the teacher or students have any contact with the animal. Both the teacher and veterinarian are kind, gentle people and advocates of animals. We apologize for anyone we have offended and wish to go on record as stating this practice will not be repeated in our school."

This doesn't justify it for me. If the dog really was vicious, it was humans that made him that way. "Kind, gentle people and advocates of animals" do not commit atrocities like that. They say that they will not repeat the practice again, but who is to say that they won't do it again once the publicity dies down.

For those of you who are against what they did to that dog, please take the time to write them a letter of protest:

Gunnison Valley High School
35 E 600 S
Gunnison Valley, UT 84634

Or call (435) 528-7256
For me this makes a very vast difference. I personally would not want to participate as I have a weak stomach, but it would appear that this dog was to be put down before the teacher had the idea of using the dog for education. The fact taht they watched a trained veterinarian handle the dog, that none of them touched it, and that it was being put to sleep anyway (as countless homeless animals are every day) is a completely different idea than a bunch of high school students doing a dissection on a live animal who may or may not be able to feel any pain. I feel that at least this dog was able to contribute to the education of a small group of advanced students. Too many animals are put down daily without any care or thought from most people, at least this dog was able to have a small purpose to his life instead of being one of those countless faceless (for most people) animals killed on a daily basis. Just IMO.
post #49 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obi
I don't think that the purpose of education is simply to equip people for jobs (which is what I take you to mean by "need"; I apologize if I have misunderstood). It should also be about teaching them about the world. If we wanted to eliminate from school all of the things that they don't use later in a job, then many people would never take chemistry or physics, we could abolish all but basic math classes, many people would never take a literature class (only grammar, writing skills and reading comprehension being critical for a job), biology would probably be truncated, and some would also argue for large portions of history classes to be eliminated as well. I think things like dissections and other teaching tools that don't rely strictly on text books, are valuable ways to teach students. I don't think that dissections are about teaching students how to kill things any more than I think eating meat is about that. However, I do understand why this issue can be emotionally charged for some, and I don't mean to invalidate your feelings on the issue.
Teaching the students about the world doesn't have to include lessons on how to kill animals. It's just plain wrong. The teacher could have taken them to observe animal surgery designed to save the animal. Why did they had to watch the dog being dissected while she was still alive? What is it going to tell them about treatment of pets they might have?
post #50 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by elizwithcat
Teaching the students about the world doesn't have to include lessons on how to kill animals. It's just plain wrong. The teacher could have taken them to observe animal surgery designed to save the animal. Why did they had to watch the dog being dissected while she was still alive? What is it going to tell them about treatment of pets they might have?
Remember, though, it has been pointed out that the dog was about to be euthanized regardless, and once sedated the dog never woke up again. So the dog was not dying just so that they could do this exercise. And I really don't think that any of the students would honestly say that they learned how to devalue life, or learned how to kill from this. I can't say that's what I learned from dissection, anyway.
post #51 of 59
This is one of the worst things I have heard in a very long time not including bombings and genocide etc. How anyone can justify this in a high school is beyond me. People with this casual view on life were the same type of sick people performing experiments during WWII on humans. This teacher needs to go through what the dog went through and then tell everyone how wonderful of an experience it was to have HIS organs removed before he was dead. Utterly disgusting. With todays computers and everything already learned from past terrible experiements there is absoutly NO reason this should have happened and I pray to God it does not continue.
post #52 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirque
This teacher needs to go through what the dog went through and then tell everyone how wonderful of an experience it was to have HIS organs removed before he was dead. Utterly disgusting.
*remember, humans do go through what the dog went through, it is called surgery, we have organs removed all the time, and then worse, we HAVE to wake back up...

this is alot more humane than i think people are realizing, i have never seen an animal treated less than god-ly when we are doing this
post #53 of 59
Although I still don't like it, it does make me feel better knowing that a vet did this in his/her office with a handful of advanced students. I have my own opinions on dissection (I don't like it) but I think really that is a personal, moral decision that people make. It's like politics and abortion- no one is really going to change their minds unless they feel led to. I'm just happy the poor dog wasn't dissected in front of your average group of high school students and by these students. I just wish that everyone had the opportunity to see live surgeries, as I did. I'm telling you, it's an amazing experience- plus you don't have that nasty smell in your nose and on your hands, before lunch no less! My last anatomy class was right before lunch
post #54 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirque
How anyone can justify this in a high school is beyond me.
Precisely.
Cirque, where have you been?
post #55 of 59
Well, I have finally had time to read this whole thread. At first I was disgusted, but there have been some good points made about the need for medical/vet students to gain experience of working on live bodies.

However, it still leaves me feeling bad for the dog. Also the students. How did they feel, watching this dog being cut about, knowing it would be pts later?

Sue
post #56 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by elizwithcat
The teacher could have taken them to observe animal surgery designed to save the animal. Why did they had to watch the dog being dissected while she was still alive? What is it going to tell them about treatment of pets they might have?
Good question! Why couldn't they observe a surgery designed to save an animal?

The dog was going to die anyway. He was under anesthesia so he felt no pain. Why waste the educational opportunity that was there? The vet is the only one who touched the dog and no organs were removed. How can future surgeons learn their job if they can't use animals for hands on training?

These are all excellent points, so why does this still bother me so much? Why do I feel an ache in my heart and why do I feel ashamed to be human?

Picture a 20 year old woman on life support. There is no hope of recovery. They are going to unplug the machines. Would it be right to use her for medical education before she passes on? No one would ever stand for that. Yet it would be ok to do that to an animal? Why do so many humans regard the lives of animals as so much less important than the lives of humans?

In driver's education classes students first use a simulator. Then they get behind the wheel with an instructor seated next to them. Like just about everything else, there is risk involved. For medical training, students could first observe a surgeon performing operations. Then they could dissect humans and animals that are already dead. After that they could perform operations under the careful supervision of a surgeon. They could start with the simpler, routine procedures and work their way up to the more complicated ones.

Do we own all the animals on this earth? Are they our property? Do we have the right to use them for any purpose we choose and not try to find alternatives? Is it the sole purpose of an animal's existence to serve mankind.

They couldn't ask the dog to sign a consent form for the so called educational display he was subjected to. If they could have , do you think he would have signed it? I don't.
post #57 of 59
Somehow I think that if the average person were told that the surgeon working on them, no matter how minor the surgery were, had never performed the surgery before on anything but a corpse . . . . I don’t think people would be OK with that. Even if a whole team of experienced surgeons were there to monitor things.

What about asking consent for a medical procedure? I think our dogs and cats would not be willing to sign on the dotted line to have their reproductive abilities removed, or even to have a life-saving procedure performed in many cases. They are like children, so we don’t ask consent because they do not have the adult understanding required to make such a profound decision . . . we do it “for their own goodâ€. But don’t you think there might be times when a dog would say, “No, I’d rather just live or die with this than get treatmentâ€? But we can’t ask, and even if we could, just like with our kids, we might still do it anyway because they just don’t understand the stakes. So, the best we can do is ask, “Would I want this for me? How would I feel about this?†In this case, if your answer is that you wouldn’t want to be used for medical purposes prior to death, then you absolutely should be against what happened here. Because that is the best you can do. But, see, my answer would be yes. I intend to donate my body to science, and if I were to fall into a coma or some other circumstance where I was beyond recovery, or be set for execution on death row (like the dog was, for being too aggressive; and yes, humans made him that way, but I would argue that humans also make other human murderers, etc, too, so there isn’t much difference), I would absolutely be OK with being sedated, surgically examined or worked on, and then have them complete euthanization.
post #58 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obi
Somehow I think that if the average person were told that the surgeon working on them, no matter how minor the surgery were, had never performed the surgery before on anything but a corpse . . . . I don’t think people would be OK with that. Even if a whole team of experienced surgeons were there to monitor things.
If the average person were told that the surgeon had never performed surgery on a human, but had performed surgery on countless live animals, I would imagine that they would have just as little confidence in the surgeon.
post #59 of 59
Theres a big difference in training surgeons vs. educating a high school class.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Dissection of live dog in high school!