Species justice and harm to animals - Environmental Harm: An Eco-justice Perspective - page 120

which one is referring. Is fishing a form of abuse? There are many
questions that can be asked regarding which animals 'deserve' protection
and freedom from abuse, and how abuse itself is to be defined in legal
and social terms (see for example, Sunstein and Nussbaum, 2006; Beirne,
2009; Sollund, 2012).
Legislation can cover a broad range of acts, such as protection from
cruelty, from abandonment and from poisoning, and ensuring that
animals are provided with necessary sustenance and shelter. There are
nevertheless major ambiguities in terms of how laws are framed, and
how they are translated into practice. For instance, the use of animals
in laboratory testing may involve systematic mutilation; yet, this type of
action is legally allowed as long as the animals are provided 'humane care
and treatment' generally (see Beirne, 2009; Sankoff and White, 2009).
Beirne (2009) asserts that the politics of selectivity is always at the
heart of any given criminalisation process, and this pertains to animal
abuse as well. He asks the questions, 'Which species are positively
valued? Which are deemed worthy of legal protection? Which species
are excluded from the circle of moral consideration?' The answer to
these leads us to consider some of the debates and differences within
the movements supportive of animal protection (Benton, 1998; Beirne,
2007).
Investigation of harm involving nonhuman animals generally begins
with the premise that the central issue is harm to animals, and that
humans are implicated in this process in varying ways and to varying
degrees. Within mainstream criminology, the so-called progressive
thesis, for example, inquires into how young people who abuse animals
progress to other types of criminal acts, including harm against humans
(Dadds et al, 2002; Ascione, 2001, 2010). Animal cruelty is linked to
anti-social behaviour generally. Thus, the one feeds the other.
Other research has argued that systematic abuse of animals via factory
farms ought to be considered at the same time as specific instances
of harm to particular animals (Cazaux, 1999; Beirne, 2004). Indeed,
recent criminological commentary on the social impact of working in
abattoirs suggests that those whose job it is to kill animals are probably
disproportionately more likely to be less empathetic towards their
fellow humans (see Beirne, 2004; MacNair, 2002). In other words,
where cruelty is in a sense built into the job (such as working in a
slaughterhouse), the ramifications are that the job itself perverts the
ordinary sensibilities of workers and takes them psychologically and
socially in an unhealthy and negative direction.
The animal rights approach argues for the abolition of animal
exploitation through both legal and non-legal change and for the legal