PrefacenIntroductionnPART I. The Science of Laboratory Animal Care and WelfarenChapter 1. IntroductionnChapter 2. The Roots for the Emerging Science of Laboratory Animal Welfare in Great BritainnChapter 3. The Historical Roots of the Science of Laboratory Animal Welfare in the USnChapter 4. Laboratory Animal Welfare Issue in the US. Legislative and Regulatory HistorynChapter 5. Mandated Institutional Animal Care and Use CommitteesnChapter 6. Do Regulators of Animal Welfare Need to Develop a Theory of Psychological Well-being?nChapter 7. ConclusionnPART II. The Emergence of the Science of Food Animal Welfare Mandated by the Brambell Commission ReportnChapter 8. IntroductionnChapter 9. Rollin's Theory of Animal Welfare and its Ethical ImplicationsnChapter 10. Duncan and the Inclusion of SubjectivitynChapter 11. Fraser on Animal Welfare, Science, and EthicsnChapter 12. Appleby-Sandoe and the Human Welfare ModelnChapter 13. Nordenfelt and Nussbaum on Animal WelfarenChapter 14. ConclusionnPART III. Giving Animal What We Owe ThemnChapter 15. Introduction to Part IIInChapter 16. The Fair Deal ArgumentnChapter 17. A General Theory of Our Moral Obligations to Nonhuman AnimalsnChapter 18. ConclusionnIndex.
Members of the "animal welfare science community", which includes both scientists and philosophers, have illegitimately appropriated the concept of animal welfare by claiming to have given a scientific account of it that is more objectively valid than the more "sentimental" account given by animal liberationists. This strategy has been used to argue for merely limited reform in the use of animals. This strategy was initially employed as a way of "sympathetically" responding to the abolitionist claims of anti-vivisectionists, who objected to the use of animals in research. It was subsequently used by farm animal scientists.nnThe primarily reformist (as opposed to abolitionist) goals of this community make the false assumption that there are conditions under which animals may be raised and slaughtered for food or used as models in scientific research that are ethically acceptable. The tendency of the animal welfare science community is to accept this assumption as their framework of inquiry, and thus to discount certain practices as harmful to the interests of the animals that they affect. For example, animal welfare is conceptualized is such a way that death does not count as harmful to the interests of animal, nor prolonged life a benefit.
Challenges the accepted distinction between animal welfarists and animal liberationistsnProvides a philosophically sophisticated account of the concept of welfare applied to "animal welfare"nProvides a unique and hitherto undocumented history of the animal care and animal welfare movement