In the UK, parliament was to legalize physician assisted suicide in December 1997 when a private bill, ‘Doctor Assisted Dying’ was presented VX-809 datasheet by MP Joe Ashton which gained little publicity. The debate continues and there are several organizations seeking public support to legalize euthanasia and PAS. There have been some studies into the views of the medical and nursing profession towards these issues with little involvement
of pharmacists. Considering the diversifying role of the pharmacist and increasing contribution to palliative care, patient safety and medicines use, their input and subsequently attitudes to these practices warrants attention. A questionnaire adapted from Belnacasan purchase literature1 was administered to the level 4 MPharm cohort that investigated their views
on PAS. Students were asked to anonymously rate answers to questions about moral responsibility, personal beliefs, changes in the law and ethical guidance using a Likert scale, i.e. from 1 to 5, where 1 = strongly agree and 5 = strongly disagree . This was followed up by a focus group of a sample of 8 students selected conveniently to explore comments and issues that were found. Transcripts of the focus group were analysed by thematic analysis and constant comparison. Ethics was granted by the Ethics Committee of the University undertaking this research. 93 questionnaires were returned (53% response rate). There was a general consensus (median Mirabegron score 1, interquartile range (IQR) 1–3, 81%, n = 75) that a patient had the right to choose his/her death, and that assistance from their physician should be
allowed (median score 1, IQR 1–3, 72% n = 67). However, the use of prescription medicines to achieve premature death was not as acceptable with 52% (n = 48) disagreeing or strongly disagreeing (median score 4, IQR 2–5) and a further 26% (n = 24) unsure of their use for PAS. 40% agreed or strongly agreed (median score 2.5, IQR 1–5, n = 37) to the moral responsibility of the pharmacist to dispense medication for the purpose of PAS, but 78% agreed or strongly agreed (median score 2, IQR 1–4, n = 73) that legislation is required to regulate the practice appropriately, and specifically the GPhC should provide guidance to pharmacists on appropriate protocol for PAS (73%). Students (73%, n = 68) also claimed an encompassing statement within the conscience clause should allow pharmacists to abstain from involvement in this practice. This undergraduate cohort agrees that the practice of PAS should be accepted and legalised within the UK. However, despite agreeing that physicians have a role to play in this, the role of the pharmacist is less clear, with dispensing of medication for the use of PAS not generally accepted.
No related posts.