Assisted Dying

As the Group Leader of the Pharmacy Law and Ethics group at RGU, my job is to get pharmacy students engaged with all things related to pharmacy law and ethics.  Needless to say, law and ethics underpin the pharmacy profession.  It is not black and white but very much a grey area in which decisions vary with each individual, but that is what makes the subject so interesting!

Our recent event on the Assisted Suicide (Scotland) Bill was the perfect opportunity for a debate and to get students involved in the ethical considerations that surround the Bill.  Aileen Bryson from the RPS attended the event, and gave an introduction on how the Bill came around and RPS’s stance on it.  This was followed by a Q&A session in which the students were not short of questions.  We then separated into 2 groups: one student spoke ‘for’ the Bill and one student spoke ‘against’ the Bill.

Our main considerations were: ‘What would we do as a profession if the Bill was passed?’ ‘What extra training and guidance would be given?’ ‘How would it be dispensed and prescribed?’

Assisted suicide is a sensitive and emotional subject.  If passed, pharmacists would have an important role to play.  However, aiding a patient on ending their life won’t sit comfortably with many pharmacists, and it was not expected of them at the time they qualified.  The RPS has suggested a ‘conscience clause’ which would give the pharmacist the right to ‘opt-in’ rather than ‘opt-out’.  Therefore, those opposed to the proposals due to ethical, moral or religious reasons would be automatically exempt from dispensing the lethal medication.  It is important that ‘conscience clause’ is embedded into legislation and not just professional guidance.  It was also a concern that the pharmacist would need legal protection that would protect them from prosecution if they participated in an assisted suicide procedure.

By ‘opting in’, the pharmacist would declare their willingness to be trained in this scheme.  Once trained, doctors would be able to access details of the pharmacist confidentially, and start proceedings after a suitable patient’s request. This also means a pharmacist who is not willing to participate in the scheme would not be approached. The training is necessary to ensure the pharmacist has knowledge of the procedure, paperwork and legal requirements.

In an assisted dying request, we agreed that a regular prescription wouldn’t be enough.  The pharmacist must also have full access to the patient’s diagnosis and assisted suicide care plan.  With controlled drugs (which the lethal medication would fall under) it was noted that there would be a 28 day period.  This window would provide the patient with the opportunity to stop going ahead with the plan at any point.  If they chose to resume, they would require a new prescription. 

The students ‘for’ the Bill stated that respecting a patient’s wishes and giving them the right to choose where and when they die was the main reason for their support.  It was also raised that if a patient desperately wanted an assisted suicide procedure, they could go to other countries.; why not save the patient and their families the unnecessary burden of going abroad?

Those in the ‘against’ camp stated the possibility of a ‘botched suicide’ – one that had no effect or one that caused the patient extreme pain was one reason why they were opposed.  Another was that, instead of the Assisted Suicide Bill, we should have more effective palliative care in place.  By proposing improvements in this service, they felt it was a conflict of interest to then support the Bill.  They also questioned how the suitability of a patient would be determined.

We rounded off the debate with a vote and then proposing a motion.  The vote was for ‘those in favour of the Assisted Suicide Bill as it currently stands’.  Interestingly, every student was against this, even those who were originally ‘for’ the Bill.  The following motion was proposed – ‘We believe in the principle (autonomy) of the Assisted Dying Bill, however it requires further adjustment and clarification.’  This motion was supported by all students who attended.

Lara Seymour - 3rd Year, Robert Gordon University

Recommended

Your First Graduate Newsletter!

Boots Pharmacy Placement 2020




This website is for healthcare professionals, people who work in pharmacy and pharmacy students. By clicking into any content, you confirm this describes you and that you agree to British Pharmaceutical Students' Association's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

We use essential, performance, functional and advertising cookies to give you a better web experience. Find out how to manage these cookies here. We also use Interest Based Advertising Cookies to display relevant advertisements on this and other websites based on your viewing behaviour. By clicking "Accept" you agree to the use of these Cookies and our Cookie Policy.