In Profession

Follow this topic

Bookmark

Record learning outcomes

The Royal Pharmaceutical Society in Scotland has come out against an assisted dying bill that has had “vital protections” for conscientious objectors stripped out.

With Members of the Scottish Parliament preparing to vote tonight (March 17) on a bill that would legislate for assisted dying for terminally ill adults, RPS Scotland has come out in opposition.

It said two provisions that directly concern pharmacists have been removed, including Section 18 which set out protections for healthcare professionals who wish to conscientiously object.  

Section 18 has been “removed from the bill entirely” said RPS Scotland, adding that plans to add it back through secondary legislation once the bill is passed are “inadequate and inappropriate”.

And Section 15 (1A), which would have guaranteed that a registered pharmacist supplied the substance used in the process, was “removed from the bill at stage 3”.

“This removes an extremely important safeguard on the supply of the substance, and the bill is now silent on this critical process,” said RPS Scotland, adding that there are now questions as to whether pharmacists “would be able to conscientiously object to supplying the substance, given the fact that this process is not described anywhere in the legislation”. 

Other amendments were voted down that would have clarified a pharmacist’s role when accompanying a doctor or nurse during an assisted death, the professional body said as it warned this creates confusion for patients, carers, pharmacists and other health workers. 

RPS Scotland described itself as “neutral on the principle of assisted dying, but not on the process”.  

It said it has met with bill sponsor Liam McArthur MSP “on multiple occasions” and suggested amendments “at every possible stage of the process”.

The final bill “will not contain vital protections for pharmacists, and other healthcare professionals, who may wish to conscientiously object to taking part in the assisted dying process” the organisation warned.   

It added: “This is despite the RPS tabling robust amendments at both stage 2 and stage 3 of the process which, had MSPs voted for them, would have provided these vital protections.”