Religious Slaughter Research Articles

Halal meat and religious slaughter: From spatial concealment to social controversy – Breaching the boundaries of the permissible?

Across the secular West, the slaughter of animals for food has become an almost clandestine activity. Very occasionally however, when slaughter comes into view, social and political controversy emerges. In this paper, I examine two such episodes in England and the controversies subsequently engendered: the controversy over kosher meat and the Jewish method of slaughter ( shechita) in the 19th century, and the contemporary controversy over halal meat and the Muslim method of slaughter ( dhabiha). These controversies are complex and double-edged in that, not only do they involve food, which often invokes anxieties about what is being ingested and what moral boundaries are being crossed, they also involve religion. Both episodes are also linked to periods of rapid migration into the UK, and to concerns about integration and the threats posed to British values and national identity by the food practices of outsiders. However, while concern over kosher meat production and Jewish migrants in the 19th century was largely concealed within the spatial boundaries of Jewish communities, from the late 20th century onwards halal meat has become increasingly visible in line with the demographic expansion of the Muslim population out of racialized community spaces. It is in this context, I contend, in line with a new and emerging geography of religious food practice, that halal meat has breached the boundaries of the permissible to challenge the ‘civilized’ values underpinning the hegemonic food discourse.

Diversity, not uniformity: slaughter and electrical waterbath stunning procedures in Belgian slaughterhouses

Data on slaughter and stunning protocols in Belgian poultry abattoirs were collected, and subsequently the survival rate after electrical waterbath stunning in 1,400 animals across 7 selected slaughterhouses was determined. The majority of the abattoirs applied electrical waterbath stunning (72%), whereas the other methods were gas stunning (13%), head-only stunning (6%), and dry stunning (3%). In 6% of the slaughterhouses, the birds were killed without previous stunning, according to religious rites (i.e., ritual or religious slaughter). Although religious slaughter occurred in a substantial number of abattoirs, the customers of the majority of them allowed stunning, provided the animals were not killed by the stunning procedure. Substantial variation both in electrical waterbath devices and technical settings (electrical current type, wave type, voltage, frequency) combinations was observed. These settings did not only differ between slaughterhouses, but also between subsequent visits to the same slaughterhouse. Despite this variation, all systems comprised a constant voltage, multiple bird stunner. The minimum average electrical current that every chicken should receive at a certain frequency, as stated by the European Regulation No 1099/2009, was not achieved for each animal monitored due to the bird's characteristics and the different applied stunning settings, with the exception of all ISA laying hens and broiler breeders in one particular slaughterhouse. The survival rate ranged from 96.0 to 100%, 97.0 to 100%, 68.0%, 72.0 to 85.1%, and 5.6 to 52.4% in 5-wk-old broilers, 6-wk-old broilers, LSL laying hens, ISA laying hens, and broiler breeders, respectively. Monitoring of unconsciousness after passing through the waterbath was not always performed and when it was, there was no uniformity in the applied criteria. It was concluded that a large variation in slaughter and stunning practices exists among slaughterhouses in Belgium. Further research should explore the effect of the different settings on inducing a successful stun and on carcass quality, and assess if the observed variation also exists in other EU member states.

The variations in religious and legal understandings on halal slaughter

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of different understandings regarding the concept of “what constitutes halal” and “who determines this concept?” In practice, this equates to contemporary legal understandings vs religious understandings. The paper further aims to provide an overview of competing Muslim understandings regarding the concept of “What does or does not constitute halal slaughter?” In practice, this equates to evaluating the application of no stunning at all upon an animal (unanimous acceptance) vs the application of reversible stunning upon an animal (contested).Design/methodology/approachThe study includes a review of prior literature and considers the current scenario of the halal poultry trade and raises important questions regarding Islamic dietary practices, halal food integrity, religious and animal welfare understandings. Three key questions were raised: “To what extent does stunning impact halal slaughter?”; “Who determines what is halal slaughter?”; and “What are the variations and tensions between legal and religious understandings of halal slaughter?”.FindingsThe examination of such requirements and concomitant consumer and provider expectations is underpinned by a study of an operational framework, i.e. industry practices with poultry (hand slaughter, stunning, mechanical slaughter, etc.), ethical values and market forces to appraise whether there is a point of convergence for these that can be beneficial for both seller and consumer concerns. This paper has considered different perspectives on the religious slaughter and provided an overview of competing understandings regarding the above concepts.Originality/valueThis study although academic and philosophical in nature, raises questions on route to suggesting future research directions. It provides real value in stimulating more research in the area of halal food production and contributes to the understanding of different slaughter requirements for religious slaughter and the meat industry. It further sheds light on not only the religious and secular legal frameworks on animal slaughter and welfare but also the variations in understanding between them and provides examples of attempts to bridge any gap. The paper highlights the importance of halal food based on religious values and its implications for wider society.

Religious slaughter in European union - Short review

The aim of this paper was to review current religious slaugtering processes and dillemas in EU. Stunning of animals before slaughter is a legally prescribed requirement in the EU intended to reach animal unconsciousness so that slaughter does not cause anxiety, pain, suffering or distress. In some European Union countries, religious slaughter is exceptionally allowed without stunning. Animals intended for religious slaughter must be healthy and undamaged. In order to meet these requirements, religious slaughtering in the EU is being implemented only in allowed and approved slaughterhouses. Slaughter can only be performed by authorized and educated operators. Regarding religious slaughter, there are many dilemmas in the EU about whether this methods of slaughter causes additional suffering of animals. Insofar as Muslim slaughter in some cases allows some methods of the preslaughter stunning, Jewish slaughter does not allow any stunning. Therefore, it is necessary to take into account the fact that in the future, it will be necessary to examine alternative stunning methods which will ensure the integrity of live animals before bleeding. At the same time, it is necessary to harmonize the guidelines for a harmonized procedures of handling animals before and after slaughtering and certifying of the meat originating from religious slaughter in order not to mislead consumers.

Abate de Bovinos: Considerações sobre o abate humanitário e jugulação cruenta

Conventional methods, such as humanitarian slaughter, use pre-bleeding desensitization so that animals are slaughtered without unnecessary suffering and bleeding is more efficient. Already the slaughters that are carried out according to the religious, Jewish or Muslim rituals, use the bloody slaughter. This work was developed with the aim of highlighting the difference between humanitarian slaughter and bloody slaughter, clarifying each method of slaughter used, how the slaughter line works, which animals can be used and how the slaughterhouses obtain the certificates. Humanitarian slaughter and bloody juggling are different methods, each with its own particularity, but with the same objective as guaranteeing animal welfare and obtaining quality meat for its specific consumers. The issue is of great relevance since Brazil has an economic interest in religious slaughter, and because of the added value in the negotiations, export rates that generate foreign exchange not only for the industries but also for the country as a whole increase.

Meat from cattle slaughtered without stunning sold in the conventional market without appropriate labelling: A case study in Italy

In the European Union, slaughter without stunning is allowed for religious slaughter to obtain halal and kosher meat. Especially in the case of Jewish slaughtering, cuts which are not deemed as kosher are sold to regular market without any specific labelling. This survey, conducted in Tuscany in 2016, aimed to quantify the carcasses rejected in relation to the type of religious slaughter. 656 bovines were slaughtered without stunning: 538 (82%) for halal and 118 (18%) for kosher. All carcasses slaughtered by the Islamic procedure (dhabiha) were considered halal, while 77.1% of carcasses slaughtered by the Jewish procedure (shechita) did not pass the approval. Carcasses were rejected after chest cavity inspection (50%) and after the lungs control (50%). This study provides an important insight in this field and postulates how to amalgamate the concepts of freedom of religion, as enshrined by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, with consumer rights and animal welfare.

In Search of the Missing Ingredient: Religious Slaughter, Incremental Failure, and the Quest for the Right to Know: A Response to Anna Joseph

Abstract This article examines Anna Joseph’s (2016) suggestion of introducing into United States law a requirement to stun an animal still found to be conscious after 40 seconds following initial cutting during religious slaughter. It is suggested that the proposed law fails to address significant ethical concerns based on scientific evidence. The conflict with human rights legislation, especially religious freedom, is discussed. A new consumers’ rights approach is proposed that highlights the life of the animal and may provide a universally applicable legal framework for meat production. This may avoid the pitfalls of conflicting with human rights, thereby enabling the revision of practices through education, information, and changing consumer behavior.

The perception and acceptability of pre-slaughter and post-slaughter stunning for Halal production: The views of UK Islamic scholars and Halal consumers

The importance of religious slaughter from economic, emotive and ethical viewpoints is significant. There are apparent economic benefits associated with trading in meats slaughtered according to religious traditions. Some religious authorities insist on the slaughter of animals without stunning, but this, according to many researchers, compromises animal welfare. We conducted a survey of Islamic scholars and Halal consumers, 66 scholars from 55 organisations and 314 consumers from 54 UK cities/towns were surveyed. Forty-nine scholars were interviewed through pre-arranged meetings, 17 surveyed online whilst all 314 consumers were either surveyed online or through the remote completion of copies of the questionnaire. Most of the scholars (>95%) (CI 86.9 to 98.4%) agreed that if an animal is stunned and then slaughtered by a Muslim and the method of stunning does not result in death, cause physical injury or obstruct bleed-out, the meat would be Halal and 53% (CI 47 to 58%) consumers also thought such meat would be Halal.

Death and prolonged survival in nonstunned poultry: A case study

Abstract EC Regulation 1099/2009, On Protection of Animals at Killing Regulations (PATOK), requires severance of the 2 carotid to ensure each animal dies rapidly (Annex 3, 3.2.). This requirement applies to stunned, nonstunned, manual, and automated methods of killing. I observed severance of carotid arteries in nonstunned, religious slaughter in a study of 250 nonstunned chickens. The birds were checked for aversive/anger-type behaviors at 10 and 30 seconds and for absence of corneal reflexes at 60 seconds after incision. Prolonged survivors were observed at 90, 120, 150, and 180 seconds after incision. Spontaneous behaviors in nonstunned birds surviving over 90 seconds were recorded on a digital videocamera. At postmortem, neck wounds were inspected for severance of blood vessels and findings were photographed. The studies were carried out by observing single birds, on a line running at less than 400 birds per hour, where meticulous technique was used. Of these nonstunned birds, 225 of 250 died at or before 60 seconds and 25 of 250 showed behaviors prolonged for more than 90 seconds after incision. These 25 birds had one or more intact carotid, as follows: 11 birds had 2 intact carotids, 2 birds had 2 carotids and 1 jugular intact, 5 birds had 1 carotid and 1 jugular intact, and 7 birds showed a single intact carotid. This failure to sever brain's blood supply may be linked to prolonged or resurgent, aversive or anger-type behaviors. Aversive/anger-type behavior was found in all checked birds from 10 seconds to over 40 seconds after incision of both carotids and both jugulars, before death at 60 seconds. The prolonged fear/anger-type behavior over 90 seconds indicated a risk of consciousness and sensibility. I offered individual instruction on improved carotid severance techniques to religious slaughterers to avoid these risks to bird welfare. This welfare at slaughter study was compared to cattle and sheep work previously undertaken.

Beyond barbarity and concealment: animal sacrifice and religious slaughter in Islamic responses to postdomesticity

In a society where animals to be consumed as food are produced using modern industrial animal farming system (described as postdomestic in Bulliet [2005]), most people who consume animals are very much removed from the production process. Most consumers do not participate actively or have intimate knowledge of the rearing and slaughtering of animals for food. In this article, I critically analyse existing Islamic responses to problems arising from the postdomestic condition with regard to consuming animal as food. In this article, my analysis focuses on making explicit the connection between the assumption of barbarity in the civilising discourse surrounding religious requirement for animal slaughter and the problem of postdomestic concealment of animals we consume. Furthermore, I analyse the role that the Islamic requirement for animal slaughter (zabiha) and the tradition of Festival of Sacrifice (eid al-adha) can have potential solutions that religion can offer to the problems of postdomesticity.

Efficient halal bleeding, animal handling, and welfare: A holistic approach for meat quality

Traditional halal slaughter and other forms of religious slaughter are still an issue of debate. Opposing arguments related to pre-slaughter handling, stress and pain associated with restraint, whether the incision is painful or not, and the onset of unconsciousness have been put forward, but no consensus has been achieved. There is a need to strike a balance between halal bleeding in the light of science and animal welfare. There is a paucity of scientific data with respect to animal welfare, particularly the use of restraining devices, animal handling, and efficient halal bleeding. However, this review found that competent handling of animals, proper use of restraining devices, and the efficient bleeding process that follows halal slaughter maintains meat eating quality. In conclusion, halal bleeding, when carried out in accordance with recommended animal welfare procedures, will not only maintain the quality and wholesomeness of meat but could also potentially reduce suffering and pain. Maintained meat quality increases consumer satisfaction and food safety.

Killing Animals for Food: How Science, Religion and Technologies Affect the Public Debate About Religious Slaughter

This paper discusses the ethics of killing animals for food by looking at current practices of conventional and halal slaughter in Egypt and in the UK. It addresses the role of animal science (with its recent advances on animal sentience), slaughterhouse technologies (with increased mechanization) and religion (with its multiple interpretations of religious rules in the case of halal slaughter) in affecting the public acceptability and the ethical questioning of these practices, as well as the controversy about the authenticity of halal meat in Europe

A note comparing the welfare of Zebu cattle following three stunning-slaughter methods

The objective of this study was to assess welfare of cattle during bleeding after slaughter with or without stunning. A total of 434 bulls were distributed across three slaughter treatments: penetrating captive bolt stunning followed by chest sticking (PCB, N=279), non-penetrating captive bolt stunning followed by halal slaughter (NPCB, N=67) and shechita without previous stunning (SHE, N=88). Four measures of possible consciousness and return to sensibility were recorded 20 and 60 s after bleeding as welfare indicators. They were the frequencies of responses to nostril stimulation and tongue pinch, spontaneous eye blinking, and rhythmic breathing. All responses were absent in stunned cattle at both 20 and 60 s, and in SHE cattle 7, 4, 10, and 100% of the animals presented these responses, respectively. Repeat shots were required for 46% NPCB and 2% PCB (P<0.05). The application of religious slaughter without previous stunning may result in greater risk of cattle suffering, pain and distress at slaughter.

Freedom of Religion versus Humane Treatment of Animals: Polish Constitutional Tribunal’s Judgment on Permissibility of Religious Slaughter

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Animal Welfare: Data from an Online Consultation.

This paper analyses data obtained from an online survey related to animal welfare and religious slaughter topics. The questionnaire was conducted with the purpose of examining the purchase behaviour of a group of consumers (with different religious orientation) and their views on animal protection and ritual slaughter. The main results of the consultation were two. The first evidenced the respondents’ great interest about the question on animal welfare, which is in accordance with the growing interest of European citizens concerning this issue. The second was the demand for a more transparent labelling of animal products, which would also reflect animal welfare and the slaughter method used. These results are in contrast with marketing analysis, which finds that consumers want to only receive positive information. Paradoxically, the more information is transmitted to reassure consumers, the higher is the risk to alarm them.

A comparison of blood loss during the Halal slaughter of lambs following Traditional Religious Slaughter without stunning, Electric Head-Only Stunning and Post-Cut Electric Head-Only Stunning

Blood lost at exsanguination during the Halal slaughter of lambs was compared between the slaughter methods of Traditional Religious Slaughter without stunning (TRS), Electric Head-Only Stunning (EHOS) and Post-Cut Electric Head-Only Stunning (PCEHOS). Two protocols were examined, Experimental (80 lambs) and Commercial (360 lambs), assessing varying periods of animal orientation during the 4min bleeding process (upright orientation before vertical hanging). Live-weight, blood weight (Experimental only), carcass weights and by-product weights were recorded. The Experimental protocol highlighted an increase in blood loss at 60s in EHOS and PCEHOS compared to TRS (P<0.001) but by 90s there was no significant difference. A post-slaughter change in animal orientation from an upright to a vertical hanging position aided the amount of blood loss. The bleeding of lambs is largely completed by 2min. There were no significant differences (P>0.05) in final blood loss between treatments. This research was undertaken to inform discussion on the merits of different slaughter methods compatible with Halal requirements.

The Priority of Suffering Over Life. How to Accommodate Animal Welfare and Religious Slaughter

Most contemporary Western laws regarding the treatment of animals in livestock farming and animal slaughter are primarily concerned with the principle that animal suffering during slaughter should be minimized, but that animal life may be taken for legitimate human purposes. This principle seems to be widely shared, intuitively appealing and capable of striking a good compromise between competing interests. But is this principle consistent? And how can it be normatively grounded? In this paper I discuss critically this principle (the priority of the minimization of animal suffering over animals’ right to life). I argue that this principle can be justified on the ground of respect for the value commitment toward animal welfare, which is held by many people. The advantage of this perspective is its inclusiveness: it can justify without contradiction the principle at stake and allow for the admissibility of religious slaughter while promoting animals’ interest in not suffering. This justification also has the advantage of being compatible with the cultural and religious pluralism of contemporary societies.

The Question Of Animal Slaughter In The British Straits Settlements During The Early Twentieth Century

Colonial law empowered British authorities to attempt to intervene in religious affairs. Rather than creating an atmosphere of open fruitful debate, colonial legal structures prevented useful discussions from occurring between colonial authorities and Muslim subjects that could lead to mutual understanding and useful consensus. In 1929, a Muslim butcher in the British Straits Settlement of Penang was fined in a British colonial court for causing unnecessary cruelty to a fowl, despite his claim that he had slaughtered the animal according to the proper Islamic method. The case forced the issue of religious slaughter into the public sphere, and sparked intense debates in the public press on the viability of Islamic method of animal slaughter. For Muslim subjects, animal slaughter was definitely a deeply religious issue. After all, the domain of the religious, generally envisioned as ‘private’ in British colonial imagination, enabled Muslim participation in the public sphere and civil society. Yet, religion sometimes fell out of the frame of discussion. Animal welfare groups robustly advocated stunning by electricity as a more effective, more humane method of slaughter. Other considerations such as general hygiene of slaughterhouses and economic considerations also played a large role in colonial intervention in animal slaughter since the early 20th century. British colonial policy put Muslim subjects on the high defensive that led to the stultification of transformations that were unlikely to stem from British colonial initiative. When discussions became acrimonious, colonial authorities would stifle dialogue by casting the issue as a religious one, thus removing it as a topic of sustained conversation.

Equality among animals and religious slaughter

Equality among animals and religious slaughter

A comparison of handling methods relevant to the religious slaughter of sheep

AbstractLegislation governing non-stun slaughter of sheep in England requires that they are individually and mechanically restrained for slaughter and not moved for at least 20 s post neck cut, until unconsciousness or insensibility occurs. Complying with the need for individual handling, in what is a flock animal, has the potential to adversely affect welfare, in turn contravening the general legislative requirement to reduce any avoidable distress at slaughter. This study investigated the effects of individually loading and restraining lambs compared with the normal practice of group loading and restraint of lambs prior to slaughter when using a V-shaped restrainer. Rotating and static design loading pens were also compared to represent the range of conditions and facilities found across English abattoirs. Plasma cortisol and lactate concentrations were significantly lower in group-loaded animals and significant reductions were observed in the time duration of a range of components of handling as well as the average total time to load each lamb. Loading pen type had a less marked impact upon results, however, individual loading and restraint of lambs within a V-shaped restrainer appears particularly stressful for sheep in comparison with group loading. The loading pen type had a mixed effect although the rotating crowding pen is likely to have minimised physical exertion in lambs during loading and restraint. Based on these findings, group loading in a V-shaped restrainer, whilst complying with the 20-s standstill, is likely to be preferable in religious, non-stun slaughter of sheep.