Rat dissection still a controversy

Oberlin Animal Rights (OAR) members and biology faculty have reached an impasse after several months of private discussions and concessions concerning dissection policies. As a result, OAR has publicized its cause in hopes of garnering enough student and faculty support to complete its agenda.

OAR instigated these discussions one year ago, in order to promote the interests of students with moral and ethical objections to the mandatory dissection of rats in Biology 118 and 119. OAR member Aaron Simmons said, "It's not just an animal rights issue, but also a students' rights issue."

OAR has lobbied the biology department primarily to create viable alternatives, without penalization, for students who cannot ethically participate in dissection labs.

As a result of requests made by OAR, the Biology department has agreed to excuse morally opposed students from dissection, as well as to announce both in classes and in their syllabi that this option is available upon request.

However, although progress has been made, Simmons said that now their primary concern is a test that requires students to use a previously dissected rat. Simmons said, "Some students feel that this is still supporting the use of a dissection specimen." Yet, if the students protest this exam, they currently receive a failing grade.

Because the Biology department has failed to change this, OAR has decided to enlist support for its cause by circulating petitions next week.

OAR hopes that this petition will help it accomplish its goals. According to Simmons, OAR's goal is "to have an actual policy instated that says students are not required to participate in dissections in any way, including on the exam, that the department will provide alternatives and that the students will not be penalized."

Biology department chair Dennis Luck declined to comment on the issue.