Chamber of Pharmacists warns professionals against incorrect dispensing of Morning After Pill

Malta Independent

Rebekah Cilia

The Chamber of Pharmacists (Kamra tal-Ispizjara) has sent an email to its members stating that there is a standard question protocol that pharmacists must follow when dispensing the Morning After Pill without a prescription.

These guidelines, the email said, are professional tools and should be kept confidential.

The Chamber also noted that pharmacists should avoid engaging in public discussions on social media. “The Chamber reprimands pharmacists who do not uphold such standards bringing the profession to disrepute.” [Full text]

Anti-abortion doctors told not to apply for maternity hospital posts

Holles Street says new posts available only to consultants willing to carry out terminations

The Irish Times

Ronan McGreevy

The National Maternity Hospital (NMH) in Holles Street has confirmed that two recently advertised consultant posts will be available only to doctors willing to carry out abortions.

The NMH has advertised the posts for a consultant anaesthetist and a consultant in obstetrics and gynaecology. . . [Full text]

Consent not a defence, court tells body modification artist

BioEdge

Michael Cook

Dr. Evil, a British body modification artist, has been found guilty of three counts of grievous bodily harm for tongue-splitting and nipple removal despite the fact that his clients consented to the procedures.

The argument put forward in court by Dr Evil, aka Brendan McCarthy, was strongly supported in the community. A petition with 13,400 signatures argued “for the right to express ourselves in whatever modified manner we wish in a safe environment”.

Judge Amjad Nawaz ruled that the kind of radical procedures in which Dr Evil specialised were not analogous to tattoos and piercings. . .[Full text]

Controversy dogs ‘assisted dying’ poll of UK doctors

BioEdge

Michael Cook

A controversial poll by the Royal College of Physicians, in the UK, is expected to result in a change in its position on “assisted dying”. Polling ends on March 1 and the result will be announced later in the month.

If the email poll fails to reach a supermajority of 60% who oppose a change from the status quo of opposition, the official position of the College will change to neutrality.

On the face of it, the procedure for the poll is bizarre. If 59% of the RCP’s 35,000 members support opposition to “assisted dying”, which in any democratic election would be an overwhelming victory with a margin of 18 percent, they still lose.

In fact, a former chair of the RCP’s ethics committee has threatened legal action. Dr John Saunders described the vote as a “sham poll with a rigged outcome”. In a letter to The Guardian he contended that the RCP would change its position to neutral even if the result were the same as a 2014 poll, when 57.5% of the doctors who voted did not “support a change in the law to permit assisted suicide by the terminally ill”.

Another group of doctors wrote a letter to The Times in which they accused a cabal of hijacking the RCP. “We are worried that this move represents a deliberate attempt by a minority on the RCP council to drop the college’s opposition to assisted suicide even if the majority of the membership vote to maintain it.”

The RCP President, Dr Andrew Goddard, insists that the poll is both fair and necessary. “It is important that the RCP represents fairly the views of its full membership. We will go ahead with the survey as planned.”

He is quite aware of the impact that a change would have upon public opinion. “The RCP is frequently asked for its stance on this high profile issue, which may be cited in legal cases and parliamentary debate, so it is essential that we base this on an up-to-date understanding of our members’ and fellows’ views.”

Although some reports assumed that “assisted dying” means “assisted suicide”, the RCP’s definition seems to encompass euthanasia as well: “The supply by a doctor of a lethal dose of drugs to a patient who is terminally ill, meets certain criteria that will be defined by law, and requests those drugs in order that they might be used by the person concerned to end their life.” In Oregon, where only assisted suicide is legal, “a physician prescribes a lethal dose of medication to a patient, but the patient – not the doctor – administers the medication.”


Controversy dogs ‘assisted dying’ poll of UK doctors

This article is published by Michael Cook and BioEdge under a Creative Commons licence. You may republish it or translate it free of charge with attribution for non-commercial purposes following these guidelines. If you teach at a university we ask that your department make a donation to BioEdge. Commercial media must contact BioEdge for permission and fees. Some articles on this site are published under different terms.

Queenslanders asked if voluntary euthanasia should be allowed for under-18s

Brisbane Times

Felicity Caldwell

Queenslanders will be asked whether voluntary euthanasia should be available to people aged under 18.

The Health, Communities, Disability Services and Domestic and Family Violence Committee released an issues paper as part of its 12-month inquiry into aged and palliative care, end-of-life and voluntary assisted dying on Thursday.

People will be asked whether they think voluntary euthanasia should be allowed in Queensland, whether it should be limited to people aged 18 and over, and if doctors should be allowed to conscientiously object. . .[Full text]