I go with Donovan

When engaging in conversations about animal rights, naturally, humans unconsciously or consciously consider their lives more than other nonhumans. This presents a problem in regards to creating an ethic of care. Donovan's piece in the text obviously criticizes the reliance on reason by Regan and Singer. I feel that this touches upon the need to steer away from human centered conversations when speaking about animals. Her theory ultimately challenges us to consider and analyze what in our environment shapes our current attitudes towards the nonhuman animal kingdom and our approach to creating arguments for or against. Reasoning is important but over reliance will curtail efforts to begin to understand animals. 

Your thoughts will be greatly appreciated.