By Laura Hudson
Dissecting animals is a big concern for biology majors that goes beyond a simple dislike for cutting an animal.
For the past six years University students have been battling the curriculum that makes dissecting animals mandatory for biology majors to graduate. They are fighting to make dissecting optional and for the department to create alternatives.
“It’s a not a matter of students thinking it’s gross to cut open an animal,” Laura Lungarelli, a junior and vegan, said. “It’s the fact that these students who have a moral or religious objection to the operation, have no choice but to either go against their own beliefs, or change majors.”
Dissecting animals not only goes against animal rights, but also students’ entitlement to exercise the First Amendment.
“I was a biology major, but had to change,” Lungarelli said. “I had no other choice. I’m hoping we can get the answers we’ve been working for so I can just take those classes I have left.”
For years students have been working to persuade the University to acknowledge their request.
“The pastor wrote a letter on our behalf, stating that many students do in fact have an ethical objection to the issue,” junior Vanessa Cudabac said. “We’ve brought them several petitions and even organized a hunger strike a few years ago. Each time they brush us aside and tell us to meet with the biology department.”
It is a repeated cycle and the students always hear the same answer.
“Faculty and departments have control over their curriculums,” Steven Costenoble, associate dean for budgeting and planning said.
In the past, students have contacted outside organizations for assistance.
“We brought in a representative from Animalearn,” Cudabac said.
According to its Web site, Animalearn, “…works to foster an awareness of and respect for animals used in education and to eliminate their use through the utilization of alternative methods. Animalearn is dedicated to assisting educators and students find where possible, non-animal methods to teach and study science.”
The organization offers different methods to learning required material that does not harm animals. Highly technical models, computer animated labs and several in depth movies and computer programs are some of the alternatives.
There are some faculty members who are listening and agree students should have a choice regarding dissection, but only if they are not planning on making a career in the life and health sciences.
“I feel that a good education in biology includes experience with a number of hands-on experiences of which dissection of animals is one. Dissection teaches students the importance of manual dexterity and variability in structure among animals and plants of the same type,” Dr. Peter Daniel, associate professor of biology, said. “Imagine you are an art student and you take a course in painting, which approach do you think would teach you more, a software program simulating painting or the actual use of brushes, pigments and canvas? Dissection is much like this, currently there is no substitute to the look and feel of the real activity over a simulation. The faculty involved in course design are quite aware of this and design and upgrade lab courses to minimize unnecessary use of animals.”
Students have met with the Faculty Senate, but were once again redirected to the biology department.
“We were told that Hofstra would only step in the biology department was doing something outrageous,” Lungarelli said. “What is more outrageous that ignoring the rights of students?”
Those involved are aware it often takes large numbers to attract attention and be heard.
“We know that the majority of University students do not feel the same way as us,” Lungarelli said. “But every year there’s a group who believes in what we believe in and nothing is being done.”
“Let’s put it this way,” Cudabac said. “Harvard Medical School doesn’t require their students to take part in dissection.”
With all the possible alternatives brought to the attention of the biology department and University, the students involved feel little progress has been made.
“It is up to the biology department to decide whether the alternatives are sound and meet standards,” Costenoble said. “They look at them regularly, but they haven’t found an alternative for all of them yet.”
The problem is most biology majors and professors feel dissection is a necessary tool for learning.
“If you’re a biology major you should take part in dissections, no questions asked,” a senior biology major, who wished to remain anonymous, said. “We’re in college, and I highly doubt you can have the same understanding from charts and software than from actual hands on experience.”
“I teach one non-major course now in which the students were very disappointed to find there were no dissections,” Dr. Russell Burke, associate professor of biology, said. “My own personal opinion is that dissections are an essential part of the education of bio majors and are acceptable as long as the animals are humanely killed and do not deplete natural populations.”
Until an answer that meets the requests of both parties is found, students with moral objection and a passion for biology are at standstill.
“It’s hard for those who dissection goes against everything they believe in, to stand up to their professor and refuse to take part,” Cudabac said. “Because of pressure and fear of receiving a bad grade, many students go along with the requirement anyway, or end up dropping the class. All we want is for those students, who have a sincere moral, ethical, or religious objection, to have options, and to not be forced into doing something they can’t do,” Cudabac said.