Special Issue "Animal Advocacy: Legal Status, Rights & Responsibilities"

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615). This special issue belongs to the section "Animal Ethics".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 August 2022 | Viewed by 1511

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Alexandra Whittaker
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Animal and Veterinary Science, Faculty of Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
Interests: animal behaviour; animal neurobiology; brain; comparative law; humane animal treatment
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

This issue entitled “Animal Advocacy: Legal Status, Rights, and Responsibilities” is devoted to papers relating to animals with a particular focus on the progression of thinking or law relating to animals’ status, and our consideration of their interests. The issue will also consider papers focusing on methods of driving the reform process for example those that describe animal advocacy work.

There is a growing recognition of the impact of human–animal relationships and our industries using animals. Many researchers and animal advocates, whether through a welfarist or abolitionist approach, are striving to increase society’s consideration of animals on a global scale. These considerations may be apparent through advancing philosophical thinking around animals, campaigning for law reform or disseminating awareness of issues to drive consumer pressure on industries.

In this issue, I invite authors to submit original or review manuscripts which may consider legal reforms around animal status, the history of animal legal reform, philosophical analysis of our relationships with animals, societal attitudes toward animal status, and practical considerations for animal advocates. I particularly encourage papers embracing a transdisciplinary approach which is likely to accelerate understanding and reform.

Dr. Alexandra Whittaker
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • animal legal reform
  • animal ethics
  • philosophy of animal use
  • societal viewpoints
  • animal advocacy

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

Article
Is Pet Health Insurance Able to Improve Veterinary Care? Why Pet Health Insurance for Dogs and Cats Has Limits: An Ethical Consideration on Pet Health Insurance
Animals 2022, 12(13), 1728; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12131728 - 04 Jul 2022
Abstract
Background: Owners often feel the cost of veterinary care is too high, as there remains a limited understanding of the cost of health care in human and veterinary medicine alike. Pet health insurance is often seen as a universal solution. However, especially for [...] Read more.
Background: Owners often feel the cost of veterinary care is too high, as there remains a limited understanding of the cost of health care in human and veterinary medicine alike. Pet health insurance is often seen as a universal solution. However, especially for patient owners with few financial resources, both the bill at the vet and the monthly premium for pet health insurance can become a challenge. Hypothesis: Pet health insurance can prevent or ease many price discussions at the vet, but it does not offer a solution for patient owners with little financial means. Methods: In order to verify for which patient owners pet health insurance can be a solution, four theoretical groups were formed depending on the patient owner’s willingness to pay and his/her dispensable funds based on a theoretical model. Results: Dispensable funds are a factor that cannot be influenced by the veterinary surgeon. However, low dispensable funds as a result of an insufficient willingness to save (whether due to a lack of financial education or a lack of will) can be solved by pet health insurance. Willingness to pay, on the other hand, can be influenced by empathetic communication from the veterinary surgeon and thus also from pet health insurance. Nevertheless, situations remain where pet health insurance is not a solution either, because owners can neither afford the veterinary costs nor a premium for a pet health insurance. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Animal Advocacy: Legal Status, Rights & Responsibilities)

Review

Jump to: Research

Review
Bestiality Law in the United States: Evolving Legislation with Scientific Limitations
Animals 2022, 12(12), 1525; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12121525 - 12 Jun 2022
Viewed by 717
Abstract
Societies have proscribed bestiality, or sex between humans and nonhuman animals, since the earliest recorded legal codes. In the early American colonies, religious prohibitions against bestiality provided the grounds for punishing those who engaged in such acts. In the 1800′s, Henry Bergh imported [...] Read more.
Societies have proscribed bestiality, or sex between humans and nonhuman animals, since the earliest recorded legal codes. In the early American colonies, religious prohibitions against bestiality provided the grounds for punishing those who engaged in such acts. In the 1800′s, Henry Bergh imported the animal welfare approach to the United States, which modernized the legislative treatment of animals in the country. Until recently, however, many laws in the U.S. have been outdated and vague and have utilized moralistic terminology. Since the 1960′s, a growing body of literature has developed suggesting that individuals who harm animals may also interpersonally offend. This concept, known as the Link, has served as a major motivation for advocates to promote new legislation criminalizing bestiality, to modernize old state statutes, and to expand penalties for individuals convicted of having sex with animals. Unfortunately, data supporting the Link between bestiality and interpersonal violence are limited and of questionable generalizability to the broad public. The Link’s weaknesses can assist in guiding further research. This article summarizes the history of bestiality law, the current state of bestiality legislation in the United States, the body of Link-related literature on bestiality and interpersonal violence and other problematic sexual behaviors, and the empirical weaknesses and needs revealed by this legislation. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Animal Advocacy: Legal Status, Rights & Responsibilities)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop