Article Text
Abstract
Objectives— To explore British community pharmacists' views on PAS , including professional responsibility, personal beliefs, changes in law and ethical guidance.
Design— Postal questionnaire
Setting— Great Britain
Subjects— A random sample of 320 registered full-time community pharmacists
Results— The survey yielded a response rate of 56%. The results showed that 70% of pharmacists agreed that it was a patient's right to choose to die, with 57% and 45% agreeing that it was the patient's right to involve his/her doctor in the process and to use prescription medicines, respectively. Forty-nine per cent said that they would knowingly dispense a prescription for use in PAS were it to be legalised and 54% believed it correct to refuse to dispense such a prescription. Although 53% believed it to be their right to know when they were being involved in PAS, 28% did not. Most pharmacists (90%) said that they would wish to see the inclusion of a practice protocol for PAS in the code of ethics of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (CE-RPSGB) in the event of a change in the law on PAS. In addition, 89% would wish to see PAS included in the Conscience Clause of the CE-RPSGB. Males were found to be significantly less likely to favour PAS than females (p<0.05), as were those declaring an ethnic/religious background of consideration when dealing with ethical issues in practice compared with their counterparts (p<0.00005).
Conclusion— Pharmacists view their professional responsibility in PAS to be more obligatory than a physician's, in having to provide the means for PAS. It is worrying that a proportion of the respondents prefer to remain in ignorance of the true purpose of a prescription for PAS; a finding at odds with current developments within the pharmaceutical profession. A practice protocol for PAS and an extension of the conscience clause should be considered in the event of PAS becoming legal. Such measures would allow the efficient provision of the pharmaceutical service whilst at the same respecting the personal beliefs of those who object to cooperating in the ending of a life.
- Professional ethics
- pharmacy ethics
- community pharmacy
- bioethics
- physician-assisted suicide
- euthanasia
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
-
Timothy R G Hanlon, MSc, MRPharmS, is a Hospital Pharmacist and a Former MSc student. Marjorie C Weiss, MSc (Clinical Pharmacy), MSc (Social Research Methods), DPhil, MRPharmS, is Lecturer in Primary Care, University of Bristol, Whiteladies Road, Bristol BS8 2PR. Judith Rees, PhD, MRPharmS, is Senior Lecturer in Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester. Address for correspondence: M C Weiss.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Australian pharmacists’ perspectives on physician-assisted suicide (PAS): thematic analysis of semistructured interviews
- The Assisted Dying Bill and the role of the physician
- Conscientious objection and physician-assisted suicide: a viable option in the UK?
- A plea for end-of-life discussions with patients suffering from Huntington's disease: the role of the physician
- When slippery slope arguments miss the mark: a lesson from one against physician-assisted death
- Assisted dying and medical practice: questions and considerations for healthcare organisations
- Young Kuwaitis' views of the acceptability of physician-assisted suicide
- Internists’ attitudes towards terminal sedation in end of life care
- Beneficence cannot justify voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide
- Reducing risks associated with medicines and lifestyle in a residential care population with intellectual disabilities: evaluation of a pharmacy review initiative in England