Skip to main content

Conscientious Refusals in Pharmacy Practice

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Philosophical Issues in Pharmaceutics

Part of the book series: Philosophy and Medicine ((PHME,volume 122))

Abstract

It is widely accepted in the pharmacy profession that pharmacists have the right to conscientiously refuse to participate in certain practices on grounds of conscience. This is allowed in recognition of differences in moral and religious views and out of respect for moral integrity. However, the “conscience clause” does not necessarily sit easily in a professional code of ethics owing to the potential tensions between a professional’s personal moral integrity and her professional obligations. At the heart of these tensions are philosophical questions about the nature of conscience and integrity.

These in turn lead to important practical ethical questions about the adequacy of a conscience clause to protect integrity and patient’s rights and guard against wrongdoing, whether conscientious refusals should be publicly announced in advance and what the acceptable bases of a conscientious refusal might be. Such questions apply not just to the professional, but also to pharmacy students, who may hold conscientious objections to some aspects of their training.

It is concluded that the conventional compromise that is commonly in place in the pharmacy profession is a workable but imperfect solution and that better understanding of the concepts and competing obligations may be achieved by learning more about conscientious decision-making by pharmacists in practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For further explanation, see Cox et al. 2013, Palanski and Yammarino 2007, and Scherkoske 2013.

  2. 2.

    Suppose that, despite her efforts to engage with the subject, Sally has not heard all sides of the arguments in the debate and they are arguments that would persuade her to change her mind.

  3. 3.

    This may seem a particularly hard line when applied to those who find their values conflict with practices that have been introduced after they joined the profession due perhaps to innovations in medical treatment.

  4. 4.

    In Great Britain, the General Pharmaceutical Council requires pharmacists to ensure that referrals allow patients to access treatment within an appropriate timeframe that will not compromise contraceptive cover or effectiveness of the treatment. In making this assessment, pharmacists are advised to consider factors such as the practice opening hours and the patient’s ability to get there (Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain 2014: 136).

  5. 5.

    This is not necessarily a major concern for pharmacists. For instance, research has revealed moral passivity among some pharmacists who do not always engage in moral decision-making even when they regarded something as ethically problematic. Instead, pharmacists admitted shifting the moral responsibility to the prescribing doctor (Cooper et al. 2008b: 443).

  6. 6.

    Interestingly, this is not regarded as an insurmountable problem when similar criteria are applied in the third part of the conventional compromise.

  7. 7.

    However, it is worth noting that sharing one’s personal beliefs is not always regarded as appropriate. For example, the British Medical Association’s guidance for doctors who conscientiously object is that they should not share their moral views unless they are explicitly invited to do so (BMA 2015).

  8. 8.

    A similar criterion of goals of the profession has also been suggested (Wicclair 2006: 244).

  9. 9.

    I thank Dien Ho for raising this point.

  10. 10.

    For example, the accepted basis for conscientious refusals by pharmacists in Great Britain is broad: “make sure that if your religious or moral beliefs prevent you from providing a service, you tell the relevant people or authorities and refer patients and the public to other providers” (Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain 2014: 112).

References

  • Ashford, E. 2000. Utilitarianism, Integrity and Partiality. Journal of Philosophy 97: 421–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, G., and R. Harper. 2000. Health Professionals’ Attitudes to the Deregulation of Emergency Contraception (or the Problem of Female Sexuality). Sociology of Health & Illness 22(2): 197–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BBC News. 2010, March 10. Lloyds Pharmacy Probe over Pill Refusal in Sheffield. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/8557816.stm. Accessed Mar 2015.

  • Benn, P. 2007. Conscience and Health Care Ethics. In Principles of Healthcare Ethics, ed. R. Ashcroft et al., 345–350. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, A., A. Cribb, and N. Barber. 2009. Understanding Pharmacists’ Values: A Qualitative Study of Ideals and Dilemmas in UK Pharmacy Practice. Social Science & Medicine 68(12): 2223–2230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • British Medical Association. 2015. Expressions of Doctors’ Beliefs. http://bma.org.uk/practical-support-at-work/ethics/expressions-of-doctors-beliefs. Accessed Apr 2015.

  • Brock, D.W. 2008. Conscientious Refusal by Physicians and Pharmacists: Who Is Obligated to Do What, and Why? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29: 187–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brownlee, K. 2012. Conscience and Conviction: The Case for Civil Disobedience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cantor, J., and K. Baum. 2004. The Limits of Conscientious Objection—May Pharmacists Refuse to Fill Prescriptions for Emergency Contraception? The New England Journal of Medicine 351(19): 2008–2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Card, R.F. 2007. Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception. The American Journal of Bioethics 7(6): 8–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Conscientious Objection, Emergency Contraception, and Public Policy. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36: 53–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. Is There No Alternative? Conscientious Objection by Medical Students. Journal of Medical Ethics 38: 602–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chervenak, F., and L.B. McCullough. 2008. The Ethics of Direct and Indirect Referral for Termination of Pregnancy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 199(3): 232.e1–232.e3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Childress, J. 1979. Appeals to Conscience. Ethics 89(4): 315–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, C. 1968. Conscientious Objection. Ethics 78(4): 269–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R., P. Bissell, and J. Wingfield. 2008a. Ethical, Religious and Factual Beliefs About the Supply of Emergency Hormonal Contraception by UK Community Pharmacists. The Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care 34(1): 47–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper R, P. Bissell, and J. Wingfield. 2008b. Ethical Decision-Making, Passivity and Pharmacy. Journal of Medical Ethics 34(6): 441–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, D., M. La Caze, and M.P. Levine. 2003. Integrity and the Fragile Self. Aldershot/Burlington: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox D., M. La Caze, and M. Levine. 2013. Integrity. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2013 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/integrity. Accessed Apr 2015.

  • Deans, Z. 2013. Conscientious Objections in Pharmacy Practice in Great Britain. Bioethics 27(1): 48–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foggo D., and A. Taher. 2007. Muslim Medical Students Get Picky. The Sunday Times. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article2603966.ece. Accessed Jan 2011.

  • General Medical Council. 2006. Core Education Outcomes GMC Education Committee Position Statement. http://www.gmc-uk.org/Core_Outcomes_1.0.pdf_39260454.pdf. Accessed Mar 2015.

  • Giubilini, A. 2014. The Paradox of Conscientious Objection and the Anemic Concept of ‘Conscience’: Downplaying the Role of Moral Integrity in Health Care. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 24(2): 59–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harter, T.D. 2015. Toward Accommodating Physicians’ Conscientious Objections: An Argument for Public Disclosure. Journal of Medical Ethics 41: 224–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, T.E. 1998. Four Conceptions of Conscience. In Integrity and Conscience, ed. I. Shapiro and R. Adams. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hope, D.L., M.A. King, and H.L. Hattingh. 2014. Responses of Pharmacy Students to Hypothetical Refusal of Emergency Hormonal Contraception. The International Journal of Pharmacy Practice 22: 155–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J.F.M. 1963. Conscience. Mind LXXII(287): 309–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, I. 1955. The Significance of Conscience. Ethics 65(4): 261–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantymir, L., and C. McLeod. 2014. Justification of Conscience Exemptions in Health Care. Bioethics 28(1): 16–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, J. 2014. Conscientious Refusals and Reason-Giving. Bioethics 28(6): 313–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellema, G. 1985. Shared Responsibility and Ethical Dilutionism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 63(2): 177–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendus, S. 2009. Politics and Morality. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyers, C., and R.D. Woods. 2007. Conscientious Objection? Yes, but Make Sure It Is Genuine. The American Journal of Bioethics 7(6): 19–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millward, M. 2010. Should Pregnant Doctors Work in Termination of Pregnancy Clinics? British Medical Journal 340(7743): 425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordstrand, S.J., M.A. Nordstrand, P. Nortvedt, and M. Magelssen. 2014. Medical Students’ Attitudes Towards Conscientious Objection: A Survey. Journal of Medical Ethics 40: 609–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palanski, M.E., and F.J. Yammarino. 2007. Integrity and Leadership: Clearing the Conceptual Confusion. European Management Journal 25(3): 171–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. 2014. Medicines, Ethics and Practice. The Professional Guide for Pharmacists Edition 38. London: Pharmaceutical Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savulescu, J. 2006. Conscientious Objection in Medicine. British Medical Journal 332: 294–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherkoske, G. 2013. Whither Integrity I: Recent Faces of Integrity. Philosophy Compass 8(1): 28–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein R. 2005, March 28. Pharmacists’ Rights at Front of New Debate. Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5490-2005Mar27.html. Accessed Mar 2015.

  • Stokes P. 2008, October 3. Mother is Denied Pill by Muslim Pharmacist. Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3129625/Mother-is-denied-pill-by-Muslim-pharmacist.html. Accessed Mar 2015.

  • Strickland, S.L.M. 2012. Conscientious Objection in Medical Students: A Questionnaire Survey. Journal of Medical Ethics 38: 22–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sulmasy, D.P. 2008. What Is Conscience and Why Is Respect for It So Important? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29: 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicclair, M.R. 2000. Conscientious Objection in Medicine. Bioethics 14(3): 205–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. Pharmacies, Pharmacists and Conscientious Objection. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16(3): 225–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Is Conscientious Objection Incompatible with a Physician’s Professional Obligations? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29: 171–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Conscientious Objection in Health Care: An Ethical Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Managing Conscientious Objection in Health Care Institutions. HEC Forum 26: 267–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B. 1981. Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973–1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zuzana Deans .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Deans, Z. (2017). Conscientious Refusals in Pharmacy Practice. In: Ho, D. (eds) Philosophical Issues in Pharmaceutics. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 122. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-0979-6_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics