Premium
Comments on the dilemma in the May issue: Refusing to take part in euthanasia
Author(s) -
Unsworth Rose A.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
in practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.211
H-Index - 25
eISSN - 2042-7689
pISSN - 0263-841X
DOI - 10.1136/inp.i3024
Subject(s) - dilemma , animal welfare , duty , ethical dilemma , nursing , animal rights , medicine , welfare , psychology , law , veterinary medicine , political science , ecology , philosophy , epistemology , biology
In the dilemma discussed in the May issue of In Practice , a nurse from your veterinary team had asked to speak with you in private. She told you that, as an animal rights activist, she was reluctant to take part in animal euthanasia in the future. Can a veterinary nurse refuse to take part in euthanasia due to their personal beliefs? ( IP , May 2016, vol 38, pp 253‐254). Manuel Magalhães‐Sant'Ana suggested that a response to the question required more information: in what circumstances did the nurse refuse to assist in euthanasia, was the refusal unconditional or contextual, and how would others be affected? Reasonable measures should be taken to protect the nurse from future work in which contextual euthanasia was a possible outcome. Doing this would mean that the nurse could meet the demands of the job, be prevented from emotional stress, and avoid conflicts with colleagues. It should also prevent animal welfare being compromised in the future. The nurse also had a duty to suggest alternatives to euthanasia, seeking support from the veterinary team and the regulatory body.