Sexual and Reproductive Rights for Domesticated Animals: Beyond Population Control, Toward Affirming Bodily Integrity and Self-Determination

Abstract Political and legal theories of animal rights tend to raise the issue of domesticated animals’ sexuality and reproduction as a matter of population management and therefore concentrate too narrowly on providing justification for fertility restrictions. In this article, I argue that the normative logic underpinning the historical evolution and conceptual development of the fundamental right to health in international law, in its paradigm shift from population control to health rights, is consistent with initiating a similar transition in the domesticated animal case. Without the relevant legal rights protections in place, individual interests in having control over, and making decisions about, their sexuality and reproduction get subordinated to the imperative of achieving sustainable population goals, resulting in the violation of bodily integrity and self-determination. What is missing from the present discussion of domesticated animals’ sexuality and reproduction is a rights-based discourse. I seek to address this gap in the literature by drawing on the existing human rights law norms to develop a conception of sexual and reproductive rights for domesticated animals as a shared yet differentiated fundamental right to health. I show that the realization of this right for domesticated animals is conditional upon a set of freedoms and entitlements, such as the freedom of choice, association, and mobility, as well as access to a range of health facilities, goods, and services. The aim is to introduce a new way of thinking about domesticated animals’ sexuality and reproduction as a rights and agency issue not just a population and fertility control dilemma.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Animal Ethics
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.15.1.08
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Geographies of human-animal interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.72
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Sexual and Reproductive Rights for Domesticated Animals: Beyond Population Control, Toward Affirming Bodily Integrity and Self-Determination

Paulina Siemieniec
1 citations
Journal of Animal Ethics
Geographies of human-animal interactions
6.72
article

Sexual and Reproductive Rights for Domesticated Animals: Beyond Population Control, Toward Affirming Bodily Integrity and Self-Determination

Paulina Siemieniec
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Political and legal theories of animal rights tend to raise the issue of domesticated animals’ sexuality and reproduction as a matter of population management and therefore concentrate too narrowly on providing justification for fertility restrictions. In this article, I argue that the normative logic underpinning the historical evolution and conceptual development of the fundamental right to health in international law, in its paradigm shift from population control to health rights, is consistent with initiating a similar transition in the domesticated animal case. Without the relevant legal rights protections in place, individual interests in having control over, and making decisions about, their sexuality and reproduction get subordinated to the imperative of achieving sustainable population goals, resulting in the violation of bodily integrity and self-determination. What is missing from the present discussion of domesticated animals’ sexuality and reproduction is a rights-based discourse. I seek to address this gap in the literature by drawing on the existing human rights law norms to develop a conception of sexual and reproductive rights for domesticated animals as a shared yet differentiated fundamental right to health. I show that the realization of this right for domesticated animals is conditional upon a set of freedoms and entitlements, such as the freedom of choice, association, and mobility, as well as access to a range of health facilities, goods, and services. The aim is to introduce a new way of thinking about domesticated animals’ sexuality and reproduction as a rights and agency issue not just a population and fertility control dilemma.

Journal of Animal EthicsVol. 15(1)
Queen's University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Geographies of human-animal interactions
6.72
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.