Don't fence me in: managing psychological well being for elite performance horses.

This article posits that stereotypical behavior patterns and the overall psychological well being of today's performance horse could be substantially enhanced with care that acknowledges the relationship between domesticated horses and their forerunners. Feral horses typically roam in stable, social groups over large grazing territories, spending 16-20 hr per day foraging on mid- to poor-quality roughage. In contrast, today's elite show horses live in relatively small stalls, eat a limited-but rich-diet at specific feedings, and typically live in social isolation. Although the horse has been domesticated for more than 6000 years, there has been no selection for an equid who no longer requires an outlet for these natural behaviors. Using equine stereotypies as a welfare indicator, this researcher proposes that the psychological well being of today's performance horse is compromised. Furthermore, the article illustrates how minimal management changes can enhance horses' well being while still remaining compatible with the requirements of the sport-horse industry. The article discusses conclusions in terms of Fraser, Weary, Pajor, and Milligan's "integrative welfare model" (1997).

They talk the talk: Surveying attitudes and judging behavior about living anonymous kidney donation.

BACKGROUND: Over the past 30 years, numerous studies have reported that some individuals are willing to donate a kidney anonymously to a stranger; however, intentions are poor predictors of behavior. We surveyed individuals interested in being living anonymous donors (LADs), exposed them to an interview paralleling live-donor assessment, and measured their LAD commitment. Personality and donation decision factors were examined to corroborate cases of attitudinal and behavioral congruency. METHODS: A telephone survey of 1,002 randomly selected adults living in Vancouver, British Columbia, asked respondents how willing they were to donate a kidney, while alive, to particular individuals including a stranger. A subsample participated in a follow-up, which involved completing a mailed questionnaire and taking part in an in-depth interview. Expert raters judged respondents' commitment to being a LAD on the basis of the interviews. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-eight (26%) of those surveyed stated they would probably or definitely be willing to donate a kidney to a stranger. Fifty-two completed the follow-up. Sixteen of the 52 (31%) were judged to be "committed LADs." No demographic differences were found between the committed LADs and the 33 remaining "noncommitted participants." The committed LADs differed significantly from the noncommitted participants on personality measures and donation decision factors. These differences underscore the latter group's anonymous donation commitment. CONCLUSIONS: This study brings into focus the potential for a significant number of individuals coming forward as potential LAD candidates if they are informed about the need and given unbiased information about the procedure. We believe there is ethical latitude in allowing the promotion of LAD donation by interested third parties such as patient advocacy groups and professional bodies. We advocate public awareness of LAD programs as a first step followed thereafter by more provocative measures to engage the public in this endeavor.

The living anonymous kidney donor: lunatic or saint?

Studies indicate that 11% to 54% of individuals surveyed would consider donating a kidney, while alive, to a stranger. The idea of 'living anonymous donors' (LADs) as a donor source, however, has not been embraced by the medical community. Reservations focus on the belief that LADs might be psychologically unstable and thus unsuitable donors. Our goal was to inform policy development by exploring the psycho-social make up and motivations of the LAD. Ninety-three unsolicited individuals contacted our center expressing interest in living anonymous donation. Of these, 43 participated in our study, completing two extensive inventories of psychopathology and personality disorder and taking part in the Comprehensive Psycho-Social Interview (CPSI). From the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), the revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R), and the CPSI, coders assessed psychological health, psycho-social suitability, commitment, and motivations. Twenty-one participants passed the stringent criteria to be considered potential LADs. Content analysis of motivations showed that potential LADs were more likely than non-LADs (those who did not pass the criteria) to have a spiritual belief system and to be altruistic. Non-LADs were more likely than potential LADs to use donation to make a statement against their families. The authors conclude with a preliminary outline of eight policy recommendations.