Slaughter without prior stunning raises significant animal welfare concerns due to evidence of pain during the bleeding period. Finding approaches that respect religious requirements while improving animal welfare is possible and important.
The welfare concern with non-stunned slaughter is the period between throat cutting and loss of consciousness, during which animals may experience pain. Research on this period is complex and contested. The most constructive welfare approach is dialogue with religious authorities about post-cut stunning methods that are acceptable within religious frameworks — and many halal certifiers have moved in this direction. A blanket ban risks driving religious communities towards less regulated supply chains. Engagement that respects religious freedom while offering welfare-compatible alternatives is more likely to improve outcomes.