Conscientious objection in pharmacy practice and policy: An evaluation of the rights and duties of practitioners and regulators

药房实践和政策中的良心拒绝：对从业者和监管者的权利和义务的评估

• 批准号: 2746954
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: University of Strathclyde
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2022
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2022 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2746954
• 关键词: Conscientious; objection; pharmacy; practice; policy

My research investigates which tasks, if any, pharmacy professionals should be permitted to opt out of on grounds of conscience.In addressing this question I will:- examine current theoretical (legal and ethical) and practitioner understandings of the role of conscience in pharmacy;- examine current theoretical, policy and practical understandings of the rights and duties of pharmacy professionals and regulators in relation to Conscientious Objection (CO);- explore the relationship between CO and professionalism (both in theory and practice);- critically analyse the appropriate parameters of CO in pharmacy policy and, if appropriate, make recommendations for revising professional guidance; and- develop pedagogical tools/techniques for use in the education and training of pharmacy professionals, in collaboration with HEIs and industry partners (e.g. Health Education England, NHS Education for Scotland)Conscientious objection (CO) in pharmacy is an issue of both public and professional concern, often highlighted in both mainstream and pharmacy media. Topical issues include conscience-based objection to provision of abortion, assisted dying, and personalised medicines. Existing academic literature on the place of CO in healthcare focuses on doctors, however, and the pharmacy context has largely been neglected. The proposed research asks which tasks, if any, pharmacy professionals should be permitted to opt out of on grounds of conscience. Pharmacy professionals have always had a critical role in the supply of medication, and their roles are rapidly expanding, meaning that CO may arise for pharmacy professionals in an increasing number of novel contexts in future (for example, were assisted dying to be legalised). Ongoing debates around assisted dying and scant guidance for pharmacy professionals make this a very opportune moment to contribute to the growing academic, governmental and professional debates about the parameters of CO in pharmacy practice. This research will extend beyond current knowledge of the topic by capturing perspectives of the full range of professionals involved in pharmacy, instead of simply dispensing chemists, and analysing these findings in light of theoretical understandings of law, ethics and the professions. This will advance academic debate and inform future policy around CO in pharmacy.

我的研究调查哪些任务，如果有的话，药学专业人员应该被允许选择出于良心。（法律的和道德）和从业者对良心在药学中的作用的理解;-检查目前的理论，政策和药学专业人员和监管机构的权利和义务的实际理解有关良心反对（CO）;- 探讨CO与专业化之间的关系（包括理论和实践）;-批判性地分析《公司条例》在药剂政策中的适当参数，并在适当情况下就修订专业指引提出建议;和-开发教学工具/技术，用于药学专业人员的教育和培训，与高等教育机构和行业合作伙伴（如英格兰健康教育，苏格兰NHS教育）合作，药学中的良心反对（CO）是公众和专业人士关注的问题，经常在主流媒体和药学媒体上突出。热点问题包括基于良心的反对提供堕胎，协助死亡和个性化药物。现有的学术文献的地方CO在医疗保健的重点是医生，但是，和药学方面在很大程度上被忽视。拟议的研究询问哪些任务，如果有的话，药学专业人员应该被允许出于良心选择退出。药学专业人员一直在药物供应中发挥着关键作用，他们的作用正在迅速扩大，这意味着未来在越来越多的新情况下，药学专业人员可能会出现CO（例如，协助死亡合法化）。围绕协助死亡的持续辩论和对药学专业人员的指导不足，使这成为一个非常有利的时机，有助于不断增长的学术，政府和专业辩论的参数CO在药学实践中。这项研究将超越目前对该主题的认识，通过捕捉参与药学的全方位专业人士的观点，而不是简单地分配化学家，并根据对法律，道德和专业的理论理解分析这些发现。这将推动学术辩论，并为未来的政策提供信息，围绕制药公司。