![]() ![]() The Sentience Institute defines it as, “the capacity to have positive and negative experiences, usually thought of as happiness and suffering.” Some definitions also include self-awareness as an indicator of sentience. Merriam Webster defines a sentient being as, “one who perceives and responds to sensations of whatever kind-sight, hearing, touch, taste, or smell.” Some define sentience as the ability to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively (emphasis added). Finally, I will address the flaws in thinking that sentience should be a primary determination for increased protections.įirst, it is logical to ask, what is sentience? The basic definition is relatively universal. In this blog, I will explore how sentience is determined from a scientific perspective and will review examples of how laws that protect NHAs are evolving under the purview that NHAs are sentient. However, my fear is that by making sentience, as we currently understand it, a primary qualifier for expanding the likelihood of NHAs being afforded additional legal protections, we stand to leave countless species without any protections at all. This may cause one to conclude that conversations around NHA sentience are generally a positive development in the world of animal rights/protection. For instance, the EU has improved standards for certain NHAs based on the recognition of sentience. īut what does this new classification for a NHA really mean from a legal perspective? Some jurisdictions that recognize sentience in NHAs may still classify them as property, but this recognition has, in some cases, given NHAs increased protections. #ANIMAL SENTIENCE FULL#In 2009, the European Union (“EU”) enacted the Lisbon Treaty, which was an amendment to the EU’s Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and stated that “ the Union and the Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals…” In 2015, France went even further by amending its civil code to change the legal status of animals from “moveable property” to “living beings gifted sentience.” Today, more than 20 countries officially recognize NHAs as sentient beings. In 1976, France chose to connect the recognition of NHA sentience to a requirement that NHAs must be kept in conditions that met the biological requirements of a particular species. I believe that the reluctance to explore the undeniable conclusion that NHAs are sentient was likely secondary to a fear that opening that Pandora’s box could lead to a complete reevaluation of how we use NHAs to meet our needs and desires in everyday life and humankind was just not ready to go there. The idea that NHAs were non-sentient came into popularity in the 17th century by philosopher, René Descartes, and this idea persisted with gusto until the second half of the 20th century. For hundreds of years, there was no real legal or scientific consideration as to whether or not NHAs were sentient. ![]() ![]() This has historically meant that an animal only had worth that one could liken to that of a piece of clothing, and that their value was contingent upon ownership by a human being. Throughout history, a non-human animal (“NHA”) has been categorized as property in legal systems across civilized societies. Welcome to the 20th Century: Non-Human Animals Are Sentient All views expressed are those of the author. This piece was written for Lewis & Clark’s Emerging Topics in Animal Law course. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |