People have recently contacted us expressing dissatisfaction and puzzlement with MCC's recently stated view that

animal 'dissection [is] a requirement critical to a true understanding of the complex subject matter' of human anatomy.

It is simply unbelievable to think that dissecting a cat is the best way to learn about human anatomy (or even the second-best, compared to human cadavers), given the wealth of computer-based learning tools.  Why would anyone want a health professional (who will work with humans!) to learn about cat anatomy, when the end goal is to learn about human anatomy ?

The scientific research on alternatives shows them to educationally sound, so why is MCC resistant to using them, especially since using alternatives would improve their students' understanding of human anatomy, they cost less, they don't conflict with anyone's religious or moral beliefs, and they don't alienate anyone from biology and science?

Below are some e-mail contacts for you to ask these questions to MCC administrators and instructors.  We have asked these questions and have never been given any plausible answers.  Perhaps if more people ask the questions, they will realize that the best answers are in favor of alternatives to animal dissection.

Also, it is in MCCs's interest to avoid a future lawsuit on this issue, which will likely happen if they ever try to violate another students rights again (and the public finds out again).  MCC's adopting an adequate Student Choice Policy would prevent future problems for them and for students.


BIO 142 Human-Anatomy has been the course in question, although BIO 165-General Zoology and BIO 265-Vertebrate Zoology also have animal dissection in their course descriptions.  BIO 143 - Human Physiology typically has animal dissection, but it is not listed in the course description.

The biology department's "big defense" of animal dissection in human anatomy has been that "if it says there's animal dissection in the catalog description, there must be animal dissection in the class, no matter what!" (which seems to imply that they couldn't use human cadavers in human anatomy, even if they were available, which is ridiculous!).  We do not know how they would respond to requests for alternatives in these non-health professions courses or any others that have animal dissection (but not in the catalogue description).
 
Course Title: BIOLOGY 142 Human Anatomy  (Biology Department)
Credits: 4 Credits
Description: The detailed study of the human organism at the tissue and organ system levels. The relationship between structure and function is covered with emphasis on structural relationships. Laboratory study includes microscope work along with substantial organ and animal dissection. The course is designed for students in Nursing, Dental Hygiene, Radiologic Technology, Physical Education, and other health related programs. Two class hours, one conference hour, three laboratory hours.
Prerequisite(s) Prerequisites: High school biology with a grade of C or higher, BIO 115 or BIO 126 or BIO 133 or permission of instructor.

It is exceedingly unclear who makes decisions at MCC.  If you have an opinion on this issue, here are the people to contact:
  1. Presidents Office (Tom Flynn) , Vice Presidents (esp. Glocker and Bartkovich), MCC Attorney (Diane Cecero) (CLICK HERE to E-mail the President, VPs, and Attorney)   Note: Vicky Smith is no longer the Academic Services VP: Janet Glocker is (see the main page for information about her, in her own words).
  1. Biology Faculty/Staff Directory , (CLICK HERE to E-mail the Instructors in the Biology Department)
      2.  
    See the main page for various things that members of the biology department have said on the issue.  You would think that, as scientists of sorts, they would know something about the educational (i.e., scientific) research on the educational value of alternatives to animal dissection, but, apparently, they don't and, thusfar, haven't been interested in learning.
     
  2. Nursing Department Webpage


    3. Many of the students taking Human Anatomy are nursing students, so they have the most to gain (in many ways) from having a Human Anatomy course that deals with human anatomy (not cat anatomy).  The National League of Nursing, the American Association of College of Nursing, and the National Student Nurses Association support the right to alternatives to animal dissection.  NY State Accrediation Requirements do not require animal dissection either.

    Nursing Chairperson Bonnie Petrosino, however, has expressed some misunderstandings about the legal and educational aspects of the issue: she has said that animal dissection is in the catalogue so they must have it.  This is not true (and this just shows that the Catalog is in violation of the law and MCC and SUNY's non-discrimination policies), this has troublesome implications (students couldn't study human anatomy in a human anatomy course), and, of course, results in less-adequately prepared nurses, compared to those who focused on human anatomy (not cat).
     

  3. Health Professions, Dental Hygiene, Radiologic Technology, Physical Education


    4. All these departments require Human Anatomy (with animal dissection) for their programs.
     

  4. Genovese, Peter, Associate Vice President, Curriculum and Program Development
Additional contacts will be posted later.  Other important people to contact include the attorneys at SUNY.  They know about this case and others.  SUNY Stonybrook was sued on this very issue (and the student won, for all practical purposes), yet some biology courses at Stonybrook still have on their course sylabbi, "You should not do the course if you object to dissections or the use of animals in research."  It is clear that even after a lawsuit, some biology instructors will still attempt to violate students' rights on these matters.  Hopefully MCC won't.  

http://mail.rochester.edu/~nobs/dissection
Posted 6/26/01.