Would it be wrong for me to swim with dolphins if they were bred in captivity? Would I be a hypocrite and be giving my money to perpetuate something I am against? οΎ
K.S., New York
I sympathize. It’s been my lifelong dream to swim with Miss Meg Ryan, but I’ve come to realize that she — or any of our beloved actors –ought not be conscripted in such ways for my pleasure. The Humane Society of the United States, like other organizations concerned about animals, takes a similar stance on dolphins. It asserts that swim-with-dolphin programs ”pose an immediate threat to the safety of both human and dolphin participants.” And while the Humane Society regards the capture of wild dolphins to entertain humans as a greater sin than exploiting dolphins raised in captivity, the organization condemns both practices, noting that these marine mammals suffer and sometimes die in such programs.
You needn’t be a vegetarian to embrace this argument. There are times when we may, indeed must, exploit animals — for example, for food (although vegetarians will argue this point) or essential medical research — but vacation fun is not such a case. (Are there no water parks? Are there no casinos? Are there no underwater casinos?)
Some say that a dolphin swim offers autistic children therapeutic benefits unobtainable elsewhere. Were that so, the good done to children might outweigh the harm done to dolphins. But neither claim, of benefit or uniqueness, is persuasive. Indeed, dolphin encounters have been promoted for a flamboyantly broad assortment of maladies — manic depression, Rett syndrome, Tourette’s syndrome, A.D.H.D., Down’s syndrome, etc., according to one entrepreneur. This is not alternative medicine; it’s hucksterism.
Randy Cohen
Taken from a weekly column, The Ethicist, in this weekend’s New York Times Magazine
