On March 21^st, a revision to the Animal Protection Act was implemented. Regarding the implementation of the revision, an official at the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs replied, "We have prepared regulations and procedures to raise awareness of animal protection.” In addition, he expressed expectations that unnecessary or unethical animal testing would be reduced through the revision of the enforcement ordinance. It is undeniable that many animals are sacrificed for humans due to animal dissection. This means that it is human beings that benefit the most from animal sacrifices in the name of science. The same is true of the recent unprecedented outbreak of COVID-19. In the horror of COVID-19, people all over the world want new vaccines and treatments. Animal testing is an essential step in the development of new vaccines and treatments for human consumption. The compulsory ban on anatomy practice by minors is the same as delaying preparedness for upcoming human crises. The uniform ban on animal dissection by minors is not right.

First, it should come up with measures to rule out unethical or unscientific processes, not a uniform ban on animal dissection by minors. Life science is a special study formed through laboratory practice, not only the study of theory. Some argue that they can carry out practical activities such as surgery with plastic animal models. But there is a huge difference between the actual animal body and the plastic models. The process of understanding the structure and organ function of animals through animal dissection experiments is indispensable to students studying life science. If a student who never participated in an actual animal dissection in his or her school days participates in actual surgery or research experiments later on, he or she may have a hard time performing the delicate tasks necessary. The essential problem is not the minors’ animal dissection itself. According to ‘A Study on the Animal Dissection Experiment of Minor Students’ written by Baek Kyung-hee, Inha Law School, there is currently no education on life ethics, animal rights, or animal experiment ethics before animal dissection experiments in South Korea. This is the crux of the issue. Rather than banning the unilateral practice of animal dissection by all minors, it should be prioritized to achieve educational purposes while allowing subjects of experiments to recognize the importance of bioethics autonomously in the experimental process.

Second, we need to respect students’ own autonomy. In some foreign countries, students are given the option to participate in animal dissection exercises that take place within schools, or they can choose not to. In the United States, the federal Animal Welfare Act does not directly restrict minors’ animal dissection practices. However, under the Student choice law, each state guarantees students the right to carry out alternative tasks. Italy also grants students the right to boycott animal or anatomy tests. The impact of participation in animal dissection practice by each minor will differ. Students dreaming of life-related careers will choose to participate in animal dissection practices that take place during their school years. However, students whose values do not allow them to dissect animals can ultimately reduce their possibility of trauma from unwanted dissection exercise by choosing the option of not participating in it. As such, the right to study can be guaranteed by giving them the right to make their own choices based on their own ethical and religious beliefs.

Third, minors will feel thankful for experimental animals through animal dissection practice and focus more on research and development. The Korea Research Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology (KRIBB) said that the annual memorial service for experimental animals that participated in animal testing honors and comforts their souls. In 2020, Kim Yoon-young, a freshman at Po-gok High School, said, "Who will be more concerned about the need for animal testing and the sacrifice of animals between those who have never experienced animal dissection practices in their school days and those who have?" It is true that dissecting and studying animals will come as a considerable trauma to minors who are still mentally immature. However, this experience will help humans to realize the importance of animals being sacrificed. In particular, students who realize the importance of animals through this process will grow up thinking about alternatives to animal testing, rather than sticking to animal dissection.

I would like to emphasize once again that minors’ animal dissection practice does not mean it is an indiscriminate and unethical process. However, since the practice is aimed at minors, who are not yet emotionally mature, discussions should be held first on how to protect animals through ethical practice and ease the emotional shock of participating students before and after the practice. It is also important, among other things, to create an atmosphere in which students can decide whether or not to participate in the exercise. It is not reasonable to ban the practice of animal dissection by minors outright.

This year marks the 41^st anniversary of World Experimental Animal Day, which was designated by the British Anti-Animal Experimentation Association on April 24^th, 1979. To this day, many animals are still victimized by animal testing that is often painful. The recent debate over the ban on animal dissection by underage students has also begun in earnest. Some oppose the practice, citing ethical problems and the emotional impact students will have. On the other hand, however, others argue that not all minors’ animal dissection practices are conducted in an unethical manner and that students should be given autonomous options. I believe that further regulations and policies on underage animal anatomy practice will be presented in the future.