Prohibited substance regulation and compliance testing: A principalism approach

J. Laurens, P. Carstens
{"title":"Prohibited substance regulation and compliance testing: A principalism approach","authors":"J. Laurens, P. Carstens","doi":"10.7196/SAJBL.2020.V13I2.00711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Background : Prohibited substance regulation and compliance testing programmes are required to minimise risks to health and safety in the workplace due to inappropriate use of legal (alcohol, cannabis) and illegal substances. A compliance drug test is in principle an invasive biomedical intervention which infringes on the autonomy and other rights of the individual giving rise to ethical dilemmas.  Objectives: The principalism approach by Beauchamp and Childress was employed to reason and motivate for the minimum ethical requirements for this type of biomedical intervention. Methods: The ethical aspects relevant to the mandatory guidelines of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration of the United States of America (SAMHSA) protocols and procedures were extracted and interpreted with reference to the principalism approach. Results : The principalism approach was found to be highly applicable to the ethical requirements of a prohibited substance regulation and testing programme. Conclusion: Ethical dilemmas could be explained and motivated by using the four principles of respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice as a starting point.","PeriodicalId":43498,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Bioethics and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7196/SAJBL.2020.V13I2.00711","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Background : Prohibited substance regulation and compliance testing programmes are required to minimise risks to health and safety in the workplace due to inappropriate use of legal (alcohol, cannabis) and illegal substances. A compliance drug test is in principle an invasive biomedical intervention which infringes on the autonomy and other rights of the individual giving rise to ethical dilemmas.  Objectives: The principalism approach by Beauchamp and Childress was employed to reason and motivate for the minimum ethical requirements for this type of biomedical intervention. Methods: The ethical aspects relevant to the mandatory guidelines of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration of the United States of America (SAMHSA) protocols and procedures were extracted and interpreted with reference to the principalism approach. Results : The principalism approach was found to be highly applicable to the ethical requirements of a prohibited substance regulation and testing programme. Conclusion: Ethical dilemmas could be explained and motivated by using the four principles of respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice as a starting point.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
禁用物质法规和合规测试:一个原则的方法
摘要:背景:为了最大限度地减少因不适当使用合法(酒精、大麻)和非法物质而对工作场所健康和安全造成的风险,需要禁用物质法规和合规测试方案。依从性药物测试原则上是一种侵入性生物医学干预,侵犯了个人的自主权和其他权利,造成道德困境。目的:采用Beauchamp和Childress的原则方法来推理和激励这类生物医学干预的最低伦理要求。方法:对美国药物滥用和精神卫生服务管理局(SAMHSA)协议和程序的强制性指导原则中涉及的伦理问题进行提取,并参照原则主义方法进行解释。结果:发现原则方法高度适用于禁用物质监管和测试计划的伦理要求。结论:以尊重自主、仁慈、无害和正义四项原则为出发点,可以解释和激发伦理困境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
18
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Pragmatic ethical approaches to evangelising in the medical encounter The situation in Gaza – will cruelty and hatred triumph? Gaza and international law: The global obligation to protect life and health Is there a legal and ethical duty on doctors to inform patients of the likely co-payment costs should they be treated by practitioners who have contracted out of medical scheme rates? Three to one – an ethicolegal outline of mitochondrial donation in the South African context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1