Why not engineer rice to outcompete weeds, to be "weed resistant' as it were, rather than to be capable of growing in different doses and mixes of herbicides? This question is presssing, especially in areas like Indiana and Iowa, where farm chemicals have been showing up in wells for years.

Second, it raises a specific question in international ethics. Why did the international research agency decide that HR rice was a bad idea for domestic U.S. production, but a good idea for Colombia? One answer might be that: (a) there was a fear that through outcropping the HR might be transferred to the red rice weed in the U.S. and (b) that rice production is more critical to the wellbeing of Colombians than it is to people in the U.S., rice being a staple crop for Colombians. But why allow HR rice to be used in Colombia if the potential for outcrossing is so severe? In the long run, the deleterious results of using HR rice in Colombia might be worse than the long term results of using HR rice in the U.S. if indeed rice is a more basic food for Colombians than for us.

Third, it raises a question about autonomy. Who should decide questions such as those posed above? The individual in charge of the project at the agency that is funding the research? The administrators of that agency? The U.S. government? The Colombian government? An international environmental regulatory committee? The farmers, U.S. or Colombian, who stand to profit or lose from using the technology?

The consumers, domestic or international, whose food bills and safety will be affected?

CASE STUDY: EUTHANASIA IN VETERINARY MEDICINE

Walt Weirich

SCENARIO ONE:

Jack B. Boomer brings in his dog for a consultation. You watch him drive up in his "beamer" and roughly extract the dog from the back seat. After he has the dog out on the parking lot he stops to brush the dog hair off the seat. The dog tangles the leash around Jacks leg and you notice Jack is wearing well shined loafers and expensive slacks, but, no socks.

When Jack is in your examination room he tells you that he wants "Clarence" put down. He explains that the dog has caused him grief one too many times and he wants Clarence put to sleep. You question him why and he says that his former girl friend liked the dog but that his current girl friend does not. Just when he and his girl friend get in a certain "mood" the dog interrupts and spoils everything. He will not listen to any of your suggestions and insists that you euthanize Clarence. Clarence is a neutered four year old Jack Russell Terrier in excellent health.

What do you do?

What are the consequences for Jack if you euthanatize Clarence?

What are the consequences for you if you euthanatize Clarence?

What are the consequences for Clarence if you do not euthanatize Clarence? (Remember Jack is determined)

TEACHERS GUIDE TO SCENARIO ONE

Objective: Introduce a very serious and very common problem in small animal veterinary practice. The student must make a decision on how he/she will deal with this kind of situation because it is so common.

Student may refuse to euthanatize Clarence. Or they may euthanatize him because there are no other alternatives.

The primary purpose of this exercise is to encourage students to sort out in their own mind how to deal with this kind of situation in a manner that is consistent with their over all personal philosophy.

Student should be asked to express themselves and then the teacher should help them to sort out valid premises that can lead to a valid conclusion.

SCENARIO FOUR:

Johnny Dollar of the Dollar Cattle Farms calls you to see a cow on his farm. The last two weeks before calving, the cow has fallen on the way to the barn and fractured her left femur and probably her pelvis. Johnny is very concerned that she deliver the calf she is carrying because the calf could be the basis of a new line of genetically improved dairy cattle. He wants you to do what you can to keep her alive until she calves naturally. After that he does not care what happens to the cow.

EuthenasiaContinued...