A Mouse in a Cage by Carrie Friese explores the ethical challenges of using animals in scientific research. Through ethnographic case studies from UK labs, Friese probes the contradictory blend of care and harm that characterises the practices of researchers towards these creatures. The resulting book brings a thoughtful and humane perspective to contemporary debates around animal testing in scientific research, writes Luciano Magaldi Sardella.
Carrie Friese’s A Mouse in a Cage: Rethinking Humanitarianism and the Rights of Lab Animals confronts one of the most persistent ethical dilemmas in contemporary science: how to reconcile the undeniable benefits of animal research with growing recognition of animal rights and autonomy. This compelling work challenges conventional approaches to laboratory animal ethics whilst proposing a radical reconceptualisation of humanitarian practice in scientific contexts.
Friese, Associate Professor of Sociology at the London School of Economics, brings formidable expertise in medical sociology and science and technology studies to bear on this complex terrain. Her previous work on reproductive technologies and interspecies relations positions her to navigate the intricate relationships between humans, animals, and scientific institutions that define contemporary biomedical research.
More-than-human humanitarianism
The book’s central argument revolves around what Friese terms “more-than-human humanitarianism” – a framework that exposes the contradictory practices of care and killing, compassion and sacrifice that characterise laboratory animal research. Drawing on extensive ethnographic research conducted in animal facilities across the UK, the author demonstrates how traditional humanitarian approaches, predicated on the notion of caring for a “distant other,” perpetuate problematic forms of paternalism that obscure the agency and interconnectedness of all species involved.
The empirical foundation of this work is based on her ethnographic immersion in British laboratory facilities that provides intimate access to the daily practices of animal technicians, researchers, and caregivers who simultaneously nurture and terminate the lives of laboratory mice and rats. These detailed observations reveal the profound emotional and ethical complexities faced by those who work most closely with laboratory animals, challenging simplistic narratives about scientific detachment and institutional indifference.
Friese’s theoretical contribution extends beyond critique to offer substantive alternatives. Her concept of “more-than-human humanitarianism” draws on recent developments in multispecies studies and posthumanist theory while remaining grounded in the material realities of laboratory practice. This approach recognises that genuine ethical progress requires acknowledging the interconnectedness of all species and the ways human actions impact broader ecological and social systems.
The evolution of animal welfare
The chronological scope of the analysis encompasses the historical development of animal welfare regulations in the UK, particularly the evolution from the 1986 Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act to contemporary governance frameworks. The author traces how the famous “3Rs” principle – Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement – whilst representing genuine progress in animal welfare thinking, nonetheless preserves fundamental assumptions about human-animal hierarchies that limit their transformative potential.
Friese examines how regulatory frameworks, professional cultures, and economic pressures combine to create what she describes as “cultures of care”. These simultaneously express genuine concern for animal welfare whilst maintaining practices that subordinate animal interests to human scientific goals. This analysis avoids both naive celebration of incremental reforms and wholesale condemnation of scientific practice. Instead, Friese identifies specific mechanisms through which ethical contradictions are sustained and reproduced.
Complex relations with lab animals
One of the work’s most significant contributions lies in her attention to the experiences of animal care workers themselves. Far from depicting these individuals as merely implementing institutional policies, the author reveals how they develop complex emotional relationships with laboratory animals, create informal practices of care that exceed regulatory requirements, and struggle with the ethical implications of their work. These insights humanise debates about animal research whilst highlighting how current institutional arrangements create moral injury for humans as well as animals.
The implications of Friese’s analysis extend well beyond the laboratory. Her critique of traditional humanitarianism resonates with broader discussions about paternalism in development aid, conservation efforts, and other contexts where privileged actors claim to act on behalf of vulnerable others. The “more-than-human” framework she proposes offers valuable insights for rethinking ethical relationships across species boundaries in diverse contexts, from factory farming to wildlife conservation.
Friese weaves together theoretical analysis, ethnographic observation, and policy critique in ways that illuminate rather than obscure the fundamental issues at stake.
The book also engages productively with existing literature on animal ethics while drawing on more recent work in critical animal studies and multispecies ethnography. The author’s synthesis of these diverse theoretical traditions creates a sophisticated analytical framework that avoids the limitations of purely philosophical approaches by remaining attentive to empirical complexities and institutional constraints.
The writing throughout maintains scholarly rigour whilst remaining accessible to readers beyond academic specialisms. Friese weaves together theoretical analysis, ethnographic observation, and policy critique in ways that illuminate rather than obscure the fundamental issues at stake. The use of specific vignettes and case studies brings abstract ethical principles into dialogue with lived experience, creating a compelling narrative that engages both intellectual and emotional responses.
Balancing enquiry and ethics
The book’s concluding vision of transformed relationships between humans and laboratory animals may strike some readers as utopian, but Friese grounds her proposals in concrete examples of alternative practices already emerging within research institutions. Her ethnographic study of “the Institute,” a UK research facility notable for the extended lifespans of its experimental mice, exemplifies this grounded approach to reform. Here, Friese observed how laboratory workers navigated the fundamental tension of developing genuine care relationships with animals they must ultimately sacrifice for scientific purposes, creating “more-than-human humanitarianism.”
The Institute’s practices – which appeared to include enrichment activities, individualized attention, and protocols that honored animal agency even within experimental constraints – demonstrate how acknowledging animal subjectivity need not abandon scientific rigor but rather can deepen human responsibility through more sophisticated emotional and practical caregiving strategies. Her emphasis on recognising animal agency whilst acknowledging human responsibility offers a nuanced alternative to both uncritical anthropomorphism and mechanistic reductionism, showing how laboratory staff can develop meaningful relationships with research animals while maintaining their commitment to biomedical advancement.
In an era of increasing awareness about animal consciousness and environmental interconnectedness, this work offers crucial guidance for reimagining the foundations of biomedical research in ways that honour both scientific enquiry and ethical obligation.
A Mouse in a Cage is essential reading for anyone grappling with the ethics of animal research, from laboratory workers and regulatory officials to philosophers and policy makers. The book’s interdisciplinary approach makes it valuable for scholars in medical sociology, science and technology studies, animal studies, and environmental ethics. More broadly, it contributes to urgent contemporary debates about how societies should navigate the complex relationships between scientific progress, technological capability, and ethical responsibility.
Friese’s achievement lies not merely in documenting existing contradictions but in providing conceptual tools and practical insights that point toward more ethically coherent approaches to human-animal relationships in scientific contexts. In an era of increasing awareness about animal consciousness and environmental interconnectedness, this work offers crucial guidance for reimagining the foundations of biomedical research in ways that honour both scientific enquiry and ethical obligation.
Note: This review gives the views of the author and not the position of the LSE Review of Books blog, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Carrie Friese will speak about the event at an LSE Research Showcase event, A mouse in a cage: how relations with laboratory animals can inform understandings of care at 11am on Tuesday 21 October. Find out more and register to attend.
Main image: Gorodenkoff on Shutterstock.
Enjoyed this post? Subscribe to our newsletter for a round-up of the latest reviews sent straight to your inbox every other Tuesday.
The post Should lab animals have rights? first appeared on LSE Review of Books.
