Conscientious objection to assisted death: can pharmacy address this in a systematic fashion?

OBJECTIVE: To describe a legal structure for the accommodation of pharmacists' rights of conscience in the dispensing of drugs for pharmaceutically assisted death. BACKGROUND: Pharmacists have indicated that there is disagreement in the profession regarding the appropriateness of a practice known as "pharmaceutically assisted death," in which lethal medications are prescribed for terminally ill patients who want to end their lives. Pharmacists who object to pharmaceutically assisted death may be asserting a conscientious objection that threatens to create a conflict with their employers. In addition, pharmacists who support pharmaceutically assisted death, but whose employers forbid the dispensing of medications for this purpose, may face a similar conflict. Current laws and principles of professional ethics fail to adequately address the resolution of either of these conflicts. DISCUSSION: We propose a system within which the pharmacy profession could accommodate the right to conscientious objection without sacrificing the quality of patient care. At the heart of our proposal is the understanding that employers must respect an employee's right to beliefs that differ from those of the employer and, correspondingly, the understanding that employees must respect the employer's duty to provide products and services to those who seek them from the employer. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy associations can adopt policies for conscientious objection and have those policies become law through action of the state legislature or the state board of pharmacy. This approach could lead to the development of a clear policy and procedure for resolving the issue of conscientious objection within the pharmacy community, making it far less likely that institutions outside pharmacy would be required to develop a solution for pharmacy.