The Debated Role of Welfare Reforms in AR Advocacy

by Stephanie Ernst

category: Activism and Actions

Published October 04, 2008 @ 02:59PM PT

Veal calf, "by-product" of the dairy industry, on the auction floor. Image courtesy of Compassion Over Killing.

The Primer on Animal Rights describes briefly the distinction between animal welfare and animal rights:

Whereas animal welfare seeks to reduce animal suffering, while holding that human use and consumption of animals is acceptable in the absence of cruelty and unnecessary suffering, the animal rights position maintains that cruelty is inherent in essentially all animal use and that no use or conscious harm of animals is acceptable, whether the animal is a dog or a chicken, and that humans choose rather than need to use animals. There are philosophical differences within the animal rights movement as well, including in approaches to activism: for example, some groups are well-known because of highly publicized actions, but many other animal advocacy groups operate in less visible fashion and with different tactics.

A primary area of disagreement then between animal welfare advocates and animal rights advocates involves the very definitions of "necessary" and "unnecessary." All vivisection and animal agriculture, for example—even the most supposedly humane—inherently involve suffering, and the animal rights position is that no consciously inflicted suffering for human benefit is truly necessary. We do not need to kill and eat animals. We do not need to rob calves of their mothers' milk and turn them into veal. We do not need to conduct animal research.

But although the animal rights and animal welfare philosophies are quite distinct, animal rights and animal welfare groups do sometimes find themselves on the same side of an issue—for example, when it comes to unilaterally opposing dog fighting. And animal welfare reforms (as opposed to philosophy) play a role in some animal rights advocates' work. But the role and efficacy of animal welfare reforms in the fight for animal rights and liberation is a contentious issue.

The perspective of individual activists and groups that fight for and support welfare reforms—such as Proposition 2 in California, which aims to modify restrictive confinement practices—is that incremental reforms will eventually lead to a change in people's view of animals and to abolition of animal use and that, in the meantime, such reforms are a way to reduce the suffering of the animals still being exploited. Many advocates of welfare reforms argue that they still seek the ultimate abolition of animal use and abuse but see welfare reforms as one way of slowly moving toward that end.

The opposing position, however, is that such welfare reforms (1) do little if anything to reduce animal suffering (laws tend to be vague and to call for only minor changes, and enforcement is problematic), (2) distract movement resources and attention away from the true animal rights cause of abolition, and (3) actually reinforce animals' status as property and simply help people feel better about killing and eating them, even when in reality the animals are still suffering immensely before being killed prematurely—and unnecessarily. Furthermore, according to this argument, the industry is already moving toward more "humane" standards all on its own because this is more profitable for the companies, and there is no need for animal rights groups to help the companies and to essentially provide them with support and free advertising.

Indeed, particularly egregious from the animal rights perspective is the recent tendency of some groups to publicly endorse, praise, and essentially advertise for animal-abusing companies for making what are, in reality, very minor changes, while they are still engaging in wide-scale exploitation and cruelty.

For the positions of some other animal advocates on this issue, see the following links:

• “Happy” Meat/Animal Products: A Step in the Right Direction or “An Easier Access Point Back” to Eating Animals? by Gary Francione
• Invasion of the Movement Snatchers by James LaVeck of HumaneMyth.org
• Strategic Analysis of Animal Welfare Legislation: A Guide for the Perplexed (PDF) by Pattrice Jones of SuperWeed
• Do Welfare Reforms Lead to Abolition? and On the Two Prongs of Welfare Reform Consideration by Mary Martin of Animal Person
• Why We Need to Rethink Welfare by Ryan of Veg Blog
• The Battle over Welfare vs. Rights by Karen Davis of United Poultry Concerns