Search Results (2)

The ethical and legal governance of Animal-Assisted Interventions (AAIs) remains conceptually and normatively fragmented. Although animals engaged in therapeutic, educational, and assistive activities make valuable contributions to human well-being, they continue to be defined by law as property or welfare objects, despite their meaningful yet limited forms of relational participation within structured human-controlled environments. This perspective obscures their context-dependent responsiveness and their institutional embeddedness. The present paper addresses this gap by adopting a normative and interdisciplinary approach grounded in relational legal theory and vulnerability scholarship. The concept is developed by drawing on Jennifer Nedelsky’s notion of relational autonomy and Martha Fineman’s theory of universal vulnerability. This results in the conceptualisation of AAI animals as correlated subjects: beings whose ethical and legal significance derives from the relationships and institutional contexts that shape their participation. The analysis identifies weaknesses in current medico-legal practices that frame veterinary certification and welfare assessment as static technical acts, ignoring their relational and systemic dimensions. The paper puts forward a relational ethical–legal framework for Animal-Assisted Interventions, centred on relational vulnerability, context-sensitive oversight and continuous institutional accountability. A number of practical recommendations are put forward, including the introduction of renewable ethical licences, inter-institutional monitoring and the establishment of multidisciplinary oversight mechanisms. By redefining animals’ normative status through relational ethics, in alignment with the interconnected human, animal, and environmental dimensions emphasized by the One Welfare principles, the study advances a shift from welfare-based protection toward a model of justice grounded in interspecies interdependence and institutional responsiveness. Full article

What does One Health imply for veterinary ethics education? In order to answer this question, we will first have to establish what One Health itself involves. The meaning and scope of One Health, however, cannot be established without reference to its values—whose health matters? Veterinary ethics education is well equipped to facilitate such an open-ended inquiry into multispecies health. One Health also widens the scope of veterinary ethics by making salient, among other fields, environmental ethics, global health justice, and non-Western approaches to ethics. Finally, One Health requires students to engage with interdependence. Discussing three levels of interdependence, we argue that veterinary ethics stands to benefit from a more contemplative pedagogy. Full article