Biology teacher dissects live dog in front of science class

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-05-13 01:45pm

Local6.com wrote:A biology class lesson in Gunnison, Utah involving the dissection of a live dog has outraged some parents and students, according to a report.

"I thought that it would be just really a good experience if they could see the digestive system in the living animal," Biology teacher Doug Bierregaard said.

Biology teacher Doug Bjerregaard, who is a substitute teacher at Gunnison Valley High School, wanted his students to see how the digestive system of a dog worked.

Bjerregaard made arrangements for his students to be a part of a dissection of a dog that was still alive.

The dog was still alive, but the teacher said it was sedated before the dissection began.

With the students watching, the sedated dog's digestive system was removed.

"It just makes me sick and I don't think this should go on anywhere and nobody's learning from it," student Sierra Sears said.

The teacher said the lesson would allow students to see the organs actually working.

"I thought that it would be just really a good experience if they could see the digestive system in the living animal," Bierregaard said.

The school's principal, Kirk Anderson, said notifications went to parents explaining the dog was going to be euthanized and that the experiment would be done with the dog's organs still functioning.

The teacher is standing by his decision and calls it the ultimate educational experience.

Principal Anderson said he supports the lesson and it will be allowed to continue because the students are learning.

The dog used in the experiment was going to be euthanized despite the class project.

I can see why people would be upset, but really, the dog was a stray destined for euthanasia. Why not extract some good from it?

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2005-05-13 01:59pm

That's a crime. It's called "animal cruelty."

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2005-05-13 02:03pm

That's not "dissection", it's "vivisection"...

Zac Naloen · Post by **Zac Naloen** » 2005-05-13 02:04pm

Durandal wrote:That's a crime. It's called "animal cruelty."

the animal was going to be put down anyway, it was under anaesthetic, wheres the cruelty? it didn't feel anything.

SCRawl · Post by **SCRawl** » 2005-05-13 02:05pm

Durandal wrote:That's a crime. It's called "animal cruelty."

Is it really cruel? The article states that the animal was sedated. If we assume that this sedation (and subsequent dissection) was carried out in a competent manner, then the dog would feel no pain. I see no other obvious avenue to claim cruelty.

Don't get me wrong; I believe that the "gross-out" factor would tend to get in the way of the students learning something. Also, my knee-jerk reaction upon seeing the thread title was "what kind of sick twitch would dissect a live animal?" Upon hearing the facts, though, I have to wonder if anything more serious than a breach of decorum has been committed.

SCRawl · Post by **SCRawl** » 2005-05-13 02:06pm

Frank Hipper wrote:That's not "dissection", it's "vivisection"...

Good point. I think everyone knows what was meant, though it's good to use the right words.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » 2005-05-13 02:10pm

It's emotional and not entirely rational, but doing this with a dog just seems like a very poor choice, even in high school. Human empathy for this species makes it too likely that the experience will get in the way of learning instead of promoting it.

So ... use a cat!

I kid, I kid .... but, get a pig or something.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-05-13 02:32pm

While it doesn't say how far in advance students and their parents were notified of the planned vivisection, I can see giving the students time to prepare for the experience (and let any who didn't wish to view it opt out of class that day).

Since it was scheduled to be euthanized, and was under sedation, I really can't see a problem with it. Aren't frogs vivisected for lab assignments, as well?

Kuroneko · Post by **Kuroneko** » 2005-05-13 02:33pm

Something similar happened in a junior high school in my area, where the students had to mummify a chicken, and some of the students couldn't even think of chicken afterwards without grossing out, much less eat it. The typical high schooler is neither a nursing nor a medical student; what is a trivial fact of biology to some can be almost traumatizing to others. Despite being within ethical and legal limits, it is simply not a sound teaching practice for high schoolers.

Chmee wrote:So ... use a cat! I kid, I kid .... but, get a pig or something.

Those be fighting words! Actually, it's probably best to require parental consent (it's not clear whether this option was given to the parents in this case, or simply notification). It can be a learning experience to some, but obviously not so much for others.

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-05-13 02:45pm

Kuroneko wrote:Actually, it's probably best to require parental consent (it's not clear whether this option was given to the parents in this case, or simply notification).

The school's principal, Kirk Anderson, said notifications went to parents explaining the dog was going to be euthanized and that the experiment would be done with the dog's organs still functioning.

You may be right in that the lab should've been saved for at least freshman-level university bio students.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2005-05-13 02:46pm

SCRawl wrote:
Frank Hipper wrote:That's not "dissection", it's "vivisection"...
Good point. I think everyone knows what was meant, though it's good to use the right words.

You'd think a TV station has editors.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2005-05-13 03:11pm

There might not be an ethical or legal problem with this, depending on the circumstances, but this was just a bad decision on the part of Bierregaard. There's a substantial number of people who couldn't handle the emotional trauma of cutting apart a dead dog, let alone a living one, no matter if the dog was sedated.

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2005-05-13 03:24pm

RedImperator wrote:There might not be an ethical or legal problem with this, depending on the circumstances, but this was just a bad decision on the part of Bierregaard. There's a substantial number of people who couldn't handle the emotional trauma of cutting apart a dead dog, let alone a living one, no matter if the dog was sedated.

On that score, was there any actual reason the dog had to be alive for this as far as learning high school biology was concerned?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2005-05-13 03:43pm

I don't see what could have been shown from a live dog that couldn't be seen in a dead one. Bowel movements are hardly amazing and would be subdued somewhat by the calm and sedate animal. It just seems like a controversial move on behalf of the teacher to be different.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2005-05-13 04:02pm

Zac Naloen wrote:
Durandal wrote:That's a crime. It's called "animal cruelty."
the animal was going to be put down anyway, it was under anaesthetic, wheres the cruelty? it didn't feel anything.

So what happens when it comes out from the anaesthesia? Was the teacher going to sew it up or let the dog awake with its gullet cut open? Or was he going to smash the dog's head in with a hammer right after he was done?

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2005-05-13 04:13pm

Disecting an animal that many consider to be part of a family is NOT kosher.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2005-05-13 04:13pm

I would hope he'd have OD'd the dog soon after the demonstration, that'd have been the least hassle plan.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2005-05-13 04:15pm

Durandal wrote:So what happens when it comes out from the anaesthesia? Was the teacher going to sew it up or let the dog awake with its gullet cut open? Or was he going to smash the dog's head in with a hammer right after he was done?

Probably, the latter, or at least sending him to the vet right away. Trust me, that dog was never coming out of anesthesia.

Post by **Edi** » 2005-05-13 04:15pm

Kuroneko wrote:Something similar happened in a junior high school in my area, where the students had to mummify a chicken, and some of the students couldn't even think of chicken afterwards without grossing out, much less eat it. The typical high schooler is neither a nursing nor a medical student; what is a trivial fact of biology to some can be almost traumatizing to others. Despite being within ethical and legal limits, it is simply not a sound teaching practice for high schoolers.

Just to reinforce this, I remember how we were shown a video about some basic surgery to fix ankle and knee injuries in 8th or 9th grade, and about a third of the class was on the brink of upchucking their breakfast and unable to watch basic surgical cuts being made, never mind all the interesting stuff you can see inside the joint during the operation. Over half of the rest were suffering from various stages of squeamishness, and there were rather few people (I was one of them) who weren't affected at all. This from a simple video.

Vivisecting a live dog... BAAAAD idea! Wouldn't be allowed here anyway, fortunately.

Edi

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2005-05-13 05:28pm

Edi wrote:
Kuroneko wrote:Something similar happened in a junior high school in my area, where the students had to mummify a chicken, and some of the students couldn't even think of chicken afterwards without grossing out, much less eat it. The typical high schooler is neither a nursing nor a medical student; what is a trivial fact of biology to some can be almost traumatizing to others. Despite being within ethical and legal limits, it is simply not a sound teaching practice for high schoolers.
Just to reinforce this, I remember how we were shown a video about some basic surgery to fix ankle and knee injuries in 8th or 9th grade, and about a third of the class was on the brink of upchucking their breakfast and unable to watch basic surgical cuts being made, never mind all the interesting stuff you can see inside the joint during the operation. Over half of the rest were suffering from various stages of squeamishness, and there were rather few people (I was one of them) who weren't affected at all. This from a simple video.

Vivisecting a live dog... BAAAAD idea! Wouldn't be allowed here anyway, fortunately.

Edi

Y'see, now, showing footage of an operation taking place that's being performed in order to *help* someone...that's gross, but not ethically bankrupt.

Dissecting a living, domesticated mammal for the sole purpose of showing kids what its digestive tract looks like (especially when a graphic in a textbook would accomplish the same thing just as easily), that's just not a good idea. ESPECIALLY with something as close to a "person" as a dog.

Now, if it'd been frogs or something, I wouldn't be as mad at this guy...

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-05-13 05:30pm

So what precisely did they learn about science, biology, or medicine from dissecting a live dog that they wouldn't have learned any other way? Even if you don't have a problem with what happened to the dog, you traumatize a whole classroom full of kids for no fucking reason.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2005-05-13 05:35pm

Which is precisely my qualm against this sort of thing. The teacher seemed to be doing it differently just for the sake of doing so. There is nothing he could've shown that couldn't be seen via video or a dead animal even.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2005-05-13 05:58pm

Andrew J. wrote:
Durandal wrote:So what happens when it comes out from the anaesthesia? Was the teacher going to sew it up or let the dog awake with its gullet cut open? Or was he going to smash the dog's head in with a hammer right after he was done?
Probably, the latter, or at least sending him to the vet right away. Trust me, that dog was never coming out of anesthesia.

Honestly, how do you know? Was the biology teacher a trained veterinary anesthesiologist?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2005-05-13 06:01pm

The only system I can see where a vivisection might be justified in order to study is the circulatory system. I had a biology teacher who told us once about how he had a class vivisect a turtle and reverse the flow of its circulatory system with carefully applied electrical current. But hell, all that really taught them is you can reverse a turtle's circulatory system with electricity, and he taught us that by telling us.

Davis 51 · Post by **Davis 51** » 2005-05-13 06:14pm

I am a dog owner, and even though that dog was going to be killed anyways, that's just fucking sick. I don't see how that offers anything educational that the class couldn't have learned from a frog, or just by simply telling them. Ultimate learning experience my ass. Did the teacher give student's the ability to opt out? I think not.

Great fucking job, Doug Bjerregaard, you have just emotionally fucked up the class.

Oh, and showing the class something that could potentially make them throw up should not be allowed. Can't that constitute as assult, because it would inevitably cause harm to a few kids?