Studies indicate that more students are opposing the use of invasive procedures on animals.
When students are forced to use animals in ways that they view as harmful, painful, stressful or lethal to
the animals, several reactions may occur. Such students may suffer psychological trauma as the result of
seeing themselves or others engaged in behaviour that they find ethically objectionable. Their cognitive
abilities may become impaired, resulting in less learning. They may withdraw and lose interest in science
when not given the option to conscientiously object. Students – even those who believe they are willing
participants – can become desensitised and may develop a utilitarian view of animals, thereby diminishing
their capacity for compassion and ethical decision-making. Qualified, compassionate people _ especially
women – often decide to end their career in science rather than compromise their values. This loss
contributes to the gender gap in science and to individuals feeling disappointed and derailed in their career
aspirations. The psychological consequences to individuals combined with social, environmental, educational
and scientific consequences present a compelling argument for the 100% replacement of the harmful
use of animals in education.
