Conscientious objection in pharmacist codes of ethics: An international comparison through document analysis

IF 1.8 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
L.S. Wong, S.L. Scahill, E. Barton, X.Y. Lim, J. Hikaka, J. Boey, D.J. Exeter, M. Hudson, A. Nu'u, Sanyogita (Sanya) Ram
{"title":"Conscientious objection in pharmacist codes of ethics: An international comparison through document analysis","authors":"L.S. Wong,&nbsp;S.L. Scahill,&nbsp;E. Barton,&nbsp;X.Y. Lim,&nbsp;J. Hikaka,&nbsp;J. Boey,&nbsp;D.J. Exeter,&nbsp;M. Hudson,&nbsp;A. Nu'u,&nbsp;Sanyogita (Sanya) Ram","doi":"10.1016/j.rcsop.2025.100609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Conscientious objection (CO) in pharmacy refers to the refusal to provide certain services based on moral or religious beliefs. Person-centred care helps to carve a way forward in balancing the duality of private conscience and public role expectations of the pharmacist. While individual conscience is a factor, pharmacists must also adhere to professional, legal, and regulatory standards. This interplay highlights the need for clear, context-sensitive guidance for both pharmacists and patients to ensure equitable access to services.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This review aimed to explore and understand the similarities, differences, and limits across international pharmacist codes of ethics in relation to CO clauses.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The document search focused on a list of OECD member countries. The International Federation of Pharmacists (FIP) website assisted with the identification of relevant regulatory pharmacist organisations (POs) within OECD countries. Information on Codes of Ethics and CO clauses published in English were gathered from POs' websites using specific keywords. Document analysis was employed to qualitatively examine individual Codes of Ethics.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A survey of OECD countries (<em>n</em> = 38) identified 96 relevant documents pertaining to pharmacist Codes of Ethics or legislation on CO. Of these, 24 Codes of Ethics in English were identified, 12 of which explicitly mentioned CO. Among these, nine explicitly permitted CO, while six inferred it through moral, religious, or personal grounds. Most (<em>n</em> = 11) emphasized the importance of maintaining continuity of care to ensure patient access to services.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>There are similarities and differences in Codes of Ethics governing pharmacists' CO worldwide, suggesting variability in practice norms. Consistent guidance across jurisdictions is needed to safeguard patients' rights to access treatment. Future studies on how pharmacists apply ethical codes in CO scenarios could provide valuable insights for updating professional regulatory standards.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73003,"journal":{"name":"Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy","volume":"18 ","pages":"Article 100609"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667276625000502","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Conscientious objection (CO) in pharmacy refers to the refusal to provide certain services based on moral or religious beliefs. Person-centred care helps to carve a way forward in balancing the duality of private conscience and public role expectations of the pharmacist. While individual conscience is a factor, pharmacists must also adhere to professional, legal, and regulatory standards. This interplay highlights the need for clear, context-sensitive guidance for both pharmacists and patients to ensure equitable access to services.

Objective

This review aimed to explore and understand the similarities, differences, and limits across international pharmacist codes of ethics in relation to CO clauses.

Methods

The document search focused on a list of OECD member countries. The International Federation of Pharmacists (FIP) website assisted with the identification of relevant regulatory pharmacist organisations (POs) within OECD countries. Information on Codes of Ethics and CO clauses published in English were gathered from POs' websites using specific keywords. Document analysis was employed to qualitatively examine individual Codes of Ethics.

Results

A survey of OECD countries (n = 38) identified 96 relevant documents pertaining to pharmacist Codes of Ethics or legislation on CO. Of these, 24 Codes of Ethics in English were identified, 12 of which explicitly mentioned CO. Among these, nine explicitly permitted CO, while six inferred it through moral, religious, or personal grounds. Most (n = 11) emphasized the importance of maintaining continuity of care to ensure patient access to services.

Conclusion

There are similarities and differences in Codes of Ethics governing pharmacists' CO worldwide, suggesting variability in practice norms. Consistent guidance across jurisdictions is needed to safeguard patients' rights to access treatment. Future studies on how pharmacists apply ethical codes in CO scenarios could provide valuable insights for updating professional regulatory standards.
药师道德规范中的良心反对:通过文献分析的国际比较
药学中的良心拒服兵役(CO)是指基于道德或宗教信仰而拒绝提供某些服务。以人为本的护理有助于在平衡私人良心和药剂师的公共角色期望的双重性方面开辟一条前进的道路。虽然个人良心是一个因素,但药剂师也必须遵守专业、法律和监管标准。这种相互作用突出表明,需要为药剂师和患者提供明确的、对具体情况敏感的指导,以确保公平获得服务。目的:本综述旨在探讨和理解国际药剂师道德规范中CO条款的异同和局限性。方法文献检索集中在经合组织成员国名单上。国际药剂师联合会(FIP)网站协助确定经合组织国家内相关的监管药剂师组织(POs)。以特定关键词从POs的网站收集以英文出版的道德守则和CO条款的资料。文献分析用于定性地检查各个道德规范。结果一项对经合组织国家(n = 38)的调查确定了96份与药剂师道德规范或CO立法有关的相关文件。其中,确定了24份英文道德规范,其中12份明确提到CO。其中9份明确允许CO, 6份通过道德、宗教或个人理由推断出CO。大多数(n = 11)强调维持护理连续性以确保患者获得服务的重要性。结论各国药师执业道德规范存在异同,执业规范存在差异。需要跨司法管辖区提供一致的指导,以保障患者获得治疗的权利。未来对药剂师如何在CO情况下应用道德准则的研究可以为更新专业监管标准提供有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
103 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信