Ch. 15— Institutional and Self-Regulation of Animal Use • 343 
Unaffiliated Members 
Most proposals for institutional animal review 
L committees require that one or more persons not 
affiliated with the research entity (e.g., members 
of the local community) be included. This would 
be someone who is primarily responsible for rep - 
resenting community concerns regarding the wel- 
fare of animal subjects. This person can bring 
objectivity to the committee because there is no 
financial tie between the person and the institu- 
tion and therefore no conflict of interest. The PHS 
policy requires one such unaffiliated member. 
(This person might also fill the nonscientific spot 
described below, but need not.) An unaffiliated 
member could well be a research scientist at a 
different institution. 
The unaffiliated members who have generated 
the most controversy are representatives of the 
animal welfare and animal rights community. 
Scientists have feared that the involvement of such 
people might delay or derail research projects. 
There have also been concerns about confiden- 
tiality and unwarranted disclosure of research 
ideas in progress, a fear exacerbated in the com- 
mercial setting. On the other hand, not unlike in- 
dividuals with strongly held views opposing capi- 
tal punishment (who may be challenged during 
the jury selection process for a capital case), some 
animal welfare advocates have refused to cooper- 
ate with these committees at all. 
This leads to another problem: How to certify 
the bona fides of such a committee member? Is 
membership in a local humane society sufficient 
or must it be a particular activist group? Some in- 
stitutions may have difficulty finding members of 
the general community, let alone animal welfare 
advocates, who are willing to expend the consid- 
erable time necessary to participate in the proc- 
ess . Animal welfare proponents have complained 
that the fact they are generally not remunerated 
for such activities (whereas other committee mem- 
bers maybe devoting salaried time to the commit- 
tee) tends to greatly discourage their participation. 
(This has generally not been a problem in the hu- 
man subjects area, however.) Paying unaffiliated 
members, which some schemes have proposed, 
would present a “Catch 22” situation: Payment 
would "affiliate” them with the institution and 
therefore disqualify them. Even with all these pos- 
sible problems, many committees have been very 
successful at opening their deliberations to un- 
affiliated members. 
Nonscientific Members 
The presence of nonscientifically trained peo- 
ple on the IACUC has rankled some scientists; 
others have speculated that the need to translate 
research questions for nonspecialists “may well 
necessitate [the investigator’s] use of a new vocabu- 
lary and new patterns of thought, especially if he 
is compelled to provide moral justifications for his 
use of animals” (34,37). Against the wishes of many 
scientists, the PHS policy requires that one mem- 
ber of the IACUC be from a nonscientific area. 
Although nonscientific members are often spo- 
ken of as lay members, often they are simply pro- 
fessionals with different backgrounds. Lawyers, 
members of the clergy, and philosophers with 
training in bioethics have all been suggested as able 
to bring relevant outlooks to bear. On occasion, 
committees may also rely on specialists on an ad 
hoc basis to review particular projects. A profes- 
sional statistician, for example, might be consulted 
in a determination of the appropriate number of 
animals to be used in a particular protocol. 
Animal Care Staff 
Many committees include an animal technician 
or a member of the technical staff who provide 
the daily service, health care, and personal care 
of the laboratory animals. Animal technicians, 
well trained in animal health care, animal mainte- 
nance, and facility design, can represent the view 
of the animal care facility on the committee. Ani- 
mal care committees with technical staff find these 
members helpful with issues of protocol review 
(including whether the protocol can be done within 
the facility), space allocation, and management is- 
sues. On some committees, animal technicians act 
as full voting members of the IACUC; in others, 
they act as ad hoc advisory members without vot- 
ing privileges. 
Institutional Representatives 
Representatives of the institutional administra- 
tion are often members of animal care and use 
committees because of the insights they may have 
