Nowadays, animal welfare is seen as a ‘common good’ and a societal expectation. Veterinarians are expected to promote and ensure the welfare of animals under their care by using their scientific knowledge and skills in ethical reasoning and advocacy. Veterinary education must equip veterinary graduates with the necessary competences to fulfil these roles. In 2013, the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe (FVE) and the European Association of Establishment of Veterinary Education (EAEVE) adopted the Day-1 competences on animal welfare science, ethics and law for veterinary undergraduate education after having surveyed European veterinary schools in 2012. In 2019, the FVE carried out a follow-up survey to monitor the evolution of animal welfare teaching in Europe. A total of 82 responses were received, representing 57 faculties from 25 European countries. Overall results showed that the teaching of animal welfare science, ethics and law has increased in response to growing societal needs, and that welfare is more and more internally embedded in the profession, which is reflected in the curriculum. Nevertheless, at least one quarter of European schools still only partially meet the 2013 Day-1 competencies. This indicates the need for greater efforts, both from the EAEVE and from individual schools, to ensure that the teaching of animal welfare across Europe is standardised.

The ability to meet the needs of each species in captivity is at the heart of the ethical debate on the acceptability of keeping reptiles and other animals as pets. Little is known about the ability of reptile owners to understand their pets’ behavior and to meet their welfare requirements. In this study, we surveyed pet reptile owners in Portugal (N = 220) to assess their behavioral knowledge and the provision of essential husbandry needs. Although two-thirds of respondents (68%) scored very good to excellent in terms of knowledge of their pet reptile’s behaviors, only 15% of respondents met four essential reptile husbandry needs (temperature, lighting, diet and refuge) and 43% met two or less. None of the respondents reported their reptile’s welfare as very poor, and only a single respondent reported it as poor. Logistic regression model showed that while snake owners had fourteen times higher odds of reporting adequate husbandry provision, lizard owners had the highest odds of reporting good or very good welfare despite providing less of their animals’ basic husbandry needs. These results suggest that many pet reptiles in Portugal live in, at best, ‘controlled deprivation’ and are at risk of suffering poor welfare throughout their captive lives. Moreover, behaviors indicative of poor welfare and captivity stress were considered ‘normal’ by up to one quarter of respondents. We suggest that the frequency of these behaviors in pet reptiles has led to their acceptance as normal, precluding the search for ways to prevent them. These results suggest that campaigns aimed at challenging the current norm for adequate reptile welfare are warranted.

Although it is widely agreed that veterinary students need to be introduced to ethics, there is limited empirical research investigating the reasons why veterinary ethics is being taught. This study presents the first extensive investigation into the reasons for teaching veterinary ethics and reports data collected in semi-structured interviews with educators involved in teaching undergraduate veterinary ethics at three European schools: the University of Copenhagen, the University of Nottingham, and the Technical University of Lisbon (curricular year 2010–2011). The content of the interview transcripts were analyzed using Toulmin's argumentative model. Ten objectives in teaching veterinary ethics were identified, which can be grouped into four overarching themes: ethical awareness, ethical knowledge, ethical skills, and individual and professional qualities. These objectives include recognizing values and ethical viewpoints, identifying norms and regulations, developing skills of communication and decision making, and contributing to a professional identity. Whereas many of the objectives complement each other, there is tension between the view that ethics teaching should promote knowledge of professional rules and the view that ethics teaching should emphasize critical reasoning skills. The wide range of objectives and the possible tensions between them highlight the challenges faced by educators as they attempt to prioritize among these goals of ethics teaching within a crowded veterinary curriculum.

Veterinary ethics is recognised as a relevant topic in the undergraduate veterinary curriculum. However, there appears to be no widely agreed view on which contents are best suited for veterinary ethics teaching and there is limited information on the teaching approaches adopted by veterinary schools. This paper provides an inside perspective on the diversity of veterinary ethics teaching topics, based on an in‐depth analysis of three European veterinary schools: Copenhagen, Lisbon and Nottingham. The case study approach integrated information from the analysis of syllabi contents and interviews with educators (curricular year 2010–2011). These results show that the curriculum of veterinary ethics is multidimensional and can combine a wide range of scientific, regulatory, professional and philosophical subjects, some of which may not be explicitly set out in the course descriptors. A conceptual model for veterinary ethics teaching is proposed comprising prominent topics included within four overarching concepts: animal welfare science, laws/regulations, professionalism, and theories/concepts. It is intended that this work should inform future curriculum development of veterinary ethics in European schools and assist ethical deliberation in veterinary practice.

Owning reptiles (e.g., chelonians, lizards, and snakes) poses a great deal of challenges in terms of welfare and care, as well as conservation and environmental concerns. However, despite the large scale of the reptile trade, little is known about the motives for acquiring and keeping these animals. This research provides the first empirical investigation on the motives for owning reptiles as pets in Portugal as well as on the nature of the human–reptile bond. Using a mixed-methods approach, an online survey was used to gather the views and opinions of 220 reptile owners. Respondents described their affection toward reptiles using terms that denote affective states of increasing intensity: “to like”, “to love,” “fascination,” and “passion.” Four main categories of motivations for the long-term keeping of pet reptiles were identified: convenience, entertainment, companionship, and duty of care. Respondents perceived their pets as family members (64%) and as sentient beings, including the ability to feel “stress or fear” (≥ 80%) and “pain or discomfort” (≥74%). Snakes differed from lizards and chelonians in the sense that they were less frequently considered a “family member” (χ²₍₂₎ = 7.14, p = 0.03) and were perceived as less able to communicate (χ²₍₂₎ = 9.91, p < 0.01). Results suggest that human–reptile relations are driven by the same feelings as those previously reported for mammalian pets, although they are more diverse and nuanced by a sense of admiration and fascination for their mysterious nature and unusual behaviors. Building on these strong emotional bonds, promoting early education about wildlife conservation, and responsible pet keeping could play a crucial role in improving captive-reptile welfare.