Towards an understanding of the veterinary profession: A manifesto for social science and ethics (post-conference version)

Transcription

1 Towards an understanding of the veterinary profession: A manifesto for social science and ethics (post-conference version) Pru Hobson-West Centre for Applied Bioethics 20 th May 2016

2 Outline Background and confession Introduction: The rising veterinary interest in social science Myth 1: Social science is (just) a research method Myth 2: Social science is not normative Myth 3: Social science (just) identifies public misunderstandings on ethical issues Conclusions

3 Introduction: Rising interest in social science? Within veterinary research, the inter-relationship between society and animal care has not been well examined (Litva et al, 2010, Equine Vet J) Qualitative methods enable us to study what is important to our clients and as such qualitative research should be of particular importance to practicing veterinarians (Christley and Evans, 2010, Equine Vet J)

4 Increasing publication outlets? I started this section for three main reasons: 1) the intersection of social sciences and veterinary medicine is a major expanding element in asserting the societal relevance of veterinary medicine; 2) the Frontiers platform facilitates cross-disciplinary collaboration, offering a unique opportunity to bring social and veterinary scientists together in a new research community; and 3) to help stimulate high quality research in veterinary social sciences (personal communication).

5 Increasing social science of veterinary medicine? Traditional lack of social scientific work on vet medicine may reflect wider neglect of animals (Hobson-West & Timmons 2015; Hobson-West 2007). This relative neglect is starting to change with work on the social/ethical meaning of life as a veterinary surgeon

6 Myth 1 Social science is (just) a research method

7 Going beyond the myth Theory underpins your chosen research method Realist approach (interviewees describe an external reality or internal experience) versus. Constructivist approach (interviewees are actively monitoring and reflecting on their responses, so that meaning is coproduced during the interview)

8 Going beyond the myth Theory about your chosen ethical topic

9 Give me a veterinary example!

10 Myth 1 Social science is (just) a research method

11 Myth 2 Social science is not normative

12 Social science just describes? Partly based on the so-called split between descriptive ethics (scientific techniques to study how people reason and act) and normative ethics (what should be done) (Beauchamp and Childress, 2001) But, empirical inquiry is not just an exercise in scooping up the facts'. Social scientists would argue that those facts' are inherently tied to theories of knowing the world (Haimes 2002, citing Nelson) Social explanations go deeper than data for bioethicists to examine (Hedgecoe 2004)

13 Social science is normative Explore the social roots of ethics ethics as shaping, and being shaped by, major social forces; of ethics being historically and culturally located (Haimes 2002) Topic choice and impact as value laden Even the topic we choose to study is itself a value judgement Making policy recommendations or stating avenues for future study is normative Principle of symmetry can help when studying controversies

14 Going beyond the myth Principle of symmetry (Bloor 1991) When studying an ethically controversial topic, do not just try to explain one side of the debate. But, this means more than sitting on the fence or hearing both sides of the story. Do not assume that beliefs you think are true have internal, rational explanations whereas false beliefs require external or social explanations (Sismondo, 2004).

15 Give me a veterinary example! Drawing on qualitative interviews with Named Veterinarians in a UK commercial laboratory we argue that continuing to focus on biological sentience will not necessarily lead to better treatment for animals. We therefore question the assumption that sentience is the correct basis for ethics. (Hobson-West, Davies and Millar, under review)

16 Myth 2 Social science is not normative

17 Myth 3 Social science (just) identifies public misunderstandings

18 Myth 3 Why don t the public do X? Why don t the public know Y? Why don t the public understand Z?

19 Public understanding of science Since the 1990s, studies show that the public s attitude/ behaviour on matters involving science or medicine is not primarily due to a lack of (scientific) understanding Key report on GMOs in 2001 PABE (Marris et al) PABE report EU funded 5 EU countries Focus groups with lay publics (n=55) Stakeholder interviews (n=100) 10 Myths about the GM debate different-diseases/

20 Give me a veterinary example!

21 How to explain client behaviour? One narrow interpretation of the data is that some owners misunderstand the signs of obesity (and therefore need educating ). A wider interpretation is that owners provide (personalised) narratives of their dog s health over time, can reflect on the relationship between feeding and emotion, and question trust in the vet as the only source of authoritative knowledge. A deeper interpretation is that canine obesity is symptomatic of humanisation, where animals are treated as substitute love objects in a postmodern state of insecurity, flux (Franklin cited in Hobson-West 2007) and de-professionalisation.

22 The stakes are high Physicians, nurses, and others do not treat patients one at a time on the basis of textbook, evidence-based algorithms. In all their dealings with individual patients, the media and government, they carry with them a set of social assumptions. It is far easier to deal with everchanging health-care systems and public expectations if the sociology behind them is understood (Chard et al, The Lancet, 1999).

23 Myth 3 Social science (just) identifies public misunderstandings

24 Summary Myth Going beyond the myth Social science is (just) a research method Social science methods have underpinning theory Social science is not normative Social science is thoroughly normative Social science (just) identifies public misunderstandings Social science also identifies scientific misunderstandings of the public

25 Conclusions In addition to the rising profile of veterinary ethics, there is evidence of increasing interest in social science as applied to veterinary medicine and science. In parallel, there is increasing social science interest in the veterinary profession and what it means to practice animal medicine in contemporary society. However, to maximise the benefits of this shared interest, we need to move beyond several key myths about social science. This should allow a more radical future collaboration between veterinary surgeons, ethicists, and social scientists, where the deep dilemmas faced by veterinary professionals are just as deeply analysed and understood. So collaborate with social scientists earlier in the research/policy process!

26 Thanks to CAB colleagues: - Kate Millar, Vanessa Ashall, Clio Cartelet Comments are very welcome please contact: Pru.Hobson-West@nottingham.ac.uk For work on publics and science - please see: h/projects/making-science-public/index.aspx

27 Selected References Chard, J. et al (1999) Looking beyond the next patient: sociology and modern health care. The Lancet, 353, Christley, R.M. and Perkins, E. (2010) Researching hard to reach areas of knowledge: Qualitative research in veterinary science. Equine Veterinary Journal, 42, 4, Haimes, E. (2002) What can the social sciences contribute to the study of ethics? Bioethics, 6,2, Hedgecoe, A. (2004) Critical bioethics. Bioethics, 18, 2, Hobson-West, P. et al (under review) Public imaginaries and animal research: The key role of biological and societal sentience. Hobson-West, P., and Timmons, S. (2016) Animals and anomalies: an analysis of the UK veterinary profession and the relative lack of state reform. The Sociological Review, 64, Hobson-West, P., (2007), Beasts and boundaries: an introduction to animals in sociology, science and society, Qualitative Sociology Review, 3: Litva, A. et al (2010) Exploring lay perceptions of the causes of crib-biting/windsucking behaviour in horses. Equine Veterinary Journal, 42, 4, Marris, C. et al (2001) Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe Final Report of the PABE research project. Reeves, S. (2008) Why use theories in qualitative research? BMJ, 337, a949. Rushton, A., et al (2016) Challenges facing the farm animal veterinary profession in England: A qualitative study of veterinaian s perceptions and responses. Preventative Veterinary Medicine, 127, White, G.A et al (2011) Canine obesity: Is there a difference between veterinarian and owner perception? JSAP, 52,