Jaclyn R Myers1, Mary E Kiersma2, Kimberly S Plake3. 1. Purdue University, College of Pharmacy, 575 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907, United States. Electronic address: myers18@purdue.edu. 2. Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education, 135 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 4100, Chicago, IL 60603, United States. Electronic address: mkiersma@acpe-accredit.org. 3. Purdue University, College of Pharmacy, 575 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907, United States. Electronic address: kplake@purdue.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In previous research, investigators have expressed concern about the ethical ambivalence of pharmacists in decision-making. The objectives of this study were to examine student pharmacists': 1) attitudes and responses regarding specific common ethical situations and 2) perceived level of difficulty in making ethical decisions. METHODS: A self-administered 38-item survey was given to second and third year student pharmacists at Purdue University. The survey comprised five sections, including: 1) attitudes towards common ethical situations, 2) responses to specific ethical scenarios, 3) emergency lending, 4) perceived level of difficulty in resolving ethical dilemmas, and 5) demographics. RESULTS: Over 90% of students agreed or strongly agreed that pharmacists have the right to refuse to dispense a medication for clinical reasons, while 45.3% agreed or strongly agreed that pharmacists had the right to refuse to dispense for moral or religious reasons. Greater than 20% of students were undecided about dispensing syringes without a prescription, pseudoephedrine tablets to a frequent purchaser, and lethal doses of narcotics. In eight out of nine cases involving ethical decision-making, over 70% of students perceived the decision to be somewhat problematic. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Exploration of student pharmacists' perceptions of specific ethical situations assists in identifying areas of uncertainty in decision-making and informing educational interventions that may foster ethical development of future pharmacy professionals.
INTRODUCTION: In previous research, investigators have expressed concern about the ethical ambivalence of pharmacists in decision-making. The objectives of this study were to examine student pharmacists': 1) attitudes and responses regarding specific common ethical situations and 2) perceived level of difficulty in making ethical decisions. METHODS: A self-administered 38-item survey was given to second and third year student pharmacists at Purdue University. The survey comprised five sections, including: 1) attitudes towards common ethical situations, 2) responses to specific ethical scenarios, 3) emergency lending, 4) perceived level of difficulty in resolving ethical dilemmas, and 5) demographics. RESULTS: Over 90% of students agreed or strongly agreed that pharmacists have the right to refuse to dispense a medication for clinical reasons, while 45.3% agreed or strongly agreed that pharmacists had the right to refuse to dispense for moral or religious reasons. Greater than 20% of students were undecided about dispensing syringes without a prescription, pseudoephedrine tablets to a frequent purchaser, and lethal doses of narcotics. In eight out of nine cases involving ethical decision-making, over 70% of students perceived the decision to be somewhat problematic. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Exploration of student pharmacists' perceptions of specific ethical situations assists in identifying areas of uncertainty in decision-making and informing educational interventions that may foster ethical development of future pharmacy professionals.