HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE CHANGE IN ANIMAL STATUS. TRANSFORMATION OF THE LEGAL AND ETHICAL STATUS OF ANIMALS AS A DEONTOLOGICAL CHALLENGE TO THE VETERINARY MEDICAL PROFESSION
Keywords:
veterinary deontology, change in companion animal status, animal welfare, sentient beingsAbstract
This article aims to provide a historical overview of the change in the status of companion animals and to analyze the deontological challenges faced by practicing veterinary surgeons when working with companion animals.
Using methods of analytical review, the article traces the historical transformation of animals from mere legal property (res) and "living machines" (according to Descartes) to sentient beings officially recognized by law and science from antiquity to the present day. The transformation of the legal and ethical status associated with this deontological challenge is analyzed from a deontological perspective.
The article achieves several key scientific, applied, and conceptual results:
Systematization of historical and legal evolution: The article successfully traces the historical transformation of animals from mere legal property and "living machines" (Descartes) to sentient beings officially recognized by law and science. Fundamental international and national acts (the Treaty of Lisbon, International and European conventions) that regulate this transition and its legal consequences for veterinary practice are analyzed.
Clarification of the modern ethical and conceptual framework: A transition is made from the "Five Freedoms" to the "Five Domains". The evolution of animal welfare concepts is explored—moving from the passive prevention of suffering to active care aimed at providing positive emotional experiences and psychological comfort for patients.
Identification of deontological conflicts in practice: The article defines the primary deontological conflict in which the veterinary surgeon is no longer merely an executor of the owner's (client's) will, but serves as the primary advocate and defender of their patient (the animal).
The publication can serve as a benchmark for veterinary professional organizations to update professional codes of ethics and establish clear deontological algorithms for managing complex clinical and ethical cases.
The transformation of companion animals from economic property into sentient beings necessitates the definitive abandonment of traditional paternalism and a transition toward formal bioethical analysis in daily clinical practice.
The change in the legal status of patients requires a rethinking of the traditional "veterinarian–client–patient" triad. The veterinary surgeon ceases to be a mere technical executor of the owner's wishes and establishes themselves as the primary ethical and legal advocate for animal welfare.
The discrepancy between traditional property law and modern neurobiological and deontological revelations gives rise to systemic ethical conflicts in clinical practice (economic euthanasia, cosmetic procedures, refusal of treatment). This mandates continuous updates to professional ethical codes and the development of clear deontological protocols to address moral distress.
Recognizing animal sentience and humane treatment is not an isolated veterinary issue, but a critical component of public health, human medicine, and social stability.
References
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2026). Principles of biomedical ethics (9th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Bentham, J. (1907). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Clarendon Press. (Original work published 1789)
Cohn, P. N. (1996). The injustice of animal welfare: A review of Animals, property, and the law. Animal Law Review, 2, 207–213.
Domingo, C. F. (2022, December 11). Marshalcy: The practice of veterinary medicine in the Late Middle Ages. [Incomplete reference—source/website and URL required]
Francione, G. L. (1995). Animals, property, and the law. Temple University Press.
Low, P., Panksepp, J., Reiss, D., Edelman, D., Van Swinderen, B., & Koch, C. (2012, July 7). The Cambridge declaration on consciousness. [Source/publisher or URL required]
Monov, D., Alexandrova, V., & Voynova, N. (2023). STUDY OF HUMAN INJURIES FROM ANIMALS AND PREVENTIVE MEASURES TO PROTECT AGAINST RABIES IN THE DOBRICH REGION FOR 2015-2021. KNOWLEDGE - International Journal , 59(4), 393–400. Retrieved from https://ojs.ikm.mk/index.php/kij/article/view/6230
Mathews, K., Kronen, P. W., Lascelles, D., Nolan, A., Robertson, S., Steagall, P. V., Wright, B., & Yamashita, K. (2014). Guidelines for recognition, assessment and treatment of pain. Journal of Small Animal Practice, 55(6), E10–E68.
Rollin, B. E. (2006). An introduction to veterinary medical ethics: Theory and cases (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Smječanin, E., Čaklovica, K., Pindžo, E., Žilić, A., Obradović, Z., & Fazlović, N. (2022). ATTITUDES AND PRACTICES OF CONSUMERS REGARDING FOOD LABELS. KNOWLEDGE - International Journal , 53(4), 711–717. Retrieved from https://ojs.ikm.mk/index.php/kij/article/view/5479
Villalobos, A. E. (2011). Quality-of-life assessment techniques for oncology patients. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice, 41(3), 519–529.
Webster, J. (1995). Animal welfare: A cool eye towards Eden. Blackwell Science.
Yeates, J. W. (2010). The ethics of influencing clients. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 237(3), 263–267.
