STOP University of Wisconsin Maternal Deprivation Test on Baby Monkeys
Examples of types of maternal deprivation studies
It is a known fact that to capture a chimpanzee infant in the wild, his/her mother will inevitably have to be killed—so strong is her instinct to protect her baby—along with several if not all the adults of the group. Free-living chimpanzee mothers are exceptionally protective and caring, and any deviation from this is the result of aberrant behavior.
Ripping infants from their mothers to study the sad effect this has on their emotional, social, and cognitive development and well-being is like dropping apples again and again to continually prove the theory of gravity.
In conclusionHuman psychological and sociological data is replete with information about the importance of maternal bonding and the consequences to the human child when it is disrupted. Yet, apparently there are scientists who support “apple-dropping” types of experiments which simply show over and over an already-known phenomenon so that some researcher somewhere can continue to use animals, be funded, demonstrate already known facts, and call it “research.”
Article by, Project R&R: http://www.releasechimps.org/research/history/maternal-deprivation
Article from Dec. 2011
Dr. Allyson Joy Bennett has recently joined the UW, Madison Department of Psychology. She has been a frequent collaborator and co-author of a number of experiments using maternal deprivation as a "tool" to cause severe depression and anxiety in rhesus monkeys. The senior author on most of those papers has been Harry Harlow's star student, Stephen Suomi. For details about Suomi's career see Rick Bogle's essays Stephen John Suomi: A Lifetime of Sadism and Monsters: Harry Harlow and Stephen Suomi. Bennett is an outspoken critic of efforts to stop harmful experiments on animals.
It is unreasonable to assume that the UW-Madison was unaware of Dr. Bennett's regular use of maternal deprivation. When the university hired her, they knew she would be bringing with her the controversial experimental methods devised by Harlow but not approved for use at the university since the early 1980s.
Dr. Bennett removes infant monkeys from their mothers within 24 hours of birth. Prior to the widespread use of the fast-acting anesthetic ketamine in the monkey labs, taking a baby monkey from his or her mother required three or four workers to hold the mother while her baby was taken from her. The loss to the mothers must be profound.
Article by: Alliance for Animals Wisconsin
Infant monkeys are immediately removed from their mothers after birth and kept in total isolation. They will be given "surrogate" materials known to provoke heightened anxieties. For 42 days, the confused infants will be subjected to relentless fear and panic-inducing tests while totally isolated. These tests include being intentionally terrified by human researchers, being left alone with a live King snake, and being left alone in a strange room with a strange monkey. They will then be killed and dissected.
Haven't we done this before?
A 10-year study by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has already determined that isolating infant monkeys leads to self-mutilation. Surely we could establish this common-sense observation without tormenting monkeys. Mammals, particularly primates, rely upon their mother for safety and nurturance crucial to their psychological well-being. One only needs to observe humans, or animals in the wild, to see that distressing experiences, while deprived of one's mother, are terrifically destructive. There is no justification for continually frightening baby monkeys and depriving them of basic care.
n the late 1950s, Harry Harlow's infamous University of Wisconsin tests, in which he psychologically tortured baby monkeys by separating them from their mothers, caused a public outcry. Yet, here we go again.
By law, all university research must undergo approval by review committees, called Institutional Animal Care & Use Committee (IACUCs). These review committees are supposed to rigorously review research protocols to ensure compliance with the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). Yet, according to Lori Gruen, the University of Wisconsin's IACUC almost never denies a research plan, no matter how brutal the proposed test. Instead, they wonder whether they even have the authority to question NIH-approved research. They not only have the authority to do so, but they are legally required to ensure all research complies with the AWA, including NIH-funded research. Review committees are obligated to ensure that alternatives to the use of animals in experiments are thoroughly explored and that pain is minimized. And they are obligated to deny research protocols when these conditions are not met.
These tests will cause serious psychological torment to baby monkeys. That is the entire goal of these unnecessary experiments. Even among those researchers who support animal testing,these tests are highly controversial and consistently called into question by leading scientific authorities. Yet the University of Wisconsin proceeds, without listening to anyone.
ALDF thinks it is time that they do listen, and we hope you will make your voice heard
Article by: ALDF