Advertisement literally means engagement in an activity that draws attention to a product to get people by the product. Doing commercials on prescription drugs raises significant ethical issues. Notably, most of the time, the marketing of drugs is disguised as providing public education to potential consumers. Their study indicates that direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) raises some concerns for patient safety and authenticity of medical practice. For instance, the advertisement does not give information on the causes and at-risk population but shows being out of control without the medication (Sullivan et al., 2020). The implication is that the viewers may get the wrong prescription or order a drug without fully understanding their diagnosis. Although the DTCA claim to provide information, the advertisement of prescription drugs goes against the principles of justice, autonomy, non-maleficence, and beneficence.
As a nurse, I have noticed that many patients come to seek medical care but already have specific medications in mind. For instance, a client may ask for a prescription for a specific drug. When asked how they are sure the medicine they demand will alleviate their pain, the response is often related to the commercials they have seen. Some patients can even go to quack medics to receive a drug prescription and avoid consulting a physician first. Thus, the advertisement of prescription drugs is causing more people to self-diagnose and plan for treatment.
Medical and pharmaceutical workers have a binding obligation to ensure non-maleficence in all their activities. In essence, it is demanded that they do not harm the patient by causing them to experience unnecessary pain, injury, or death (Phillips et al., 2019). Yet, the DTCA causes consumers to recklessly purchase drugs they do not need leading to its abuse. Consequently, the patient may suffer from the side effects of the drugs and remain sick because they misdiagnosed their symptoms and bought a drug that was advertised.
Moreover, while treating or advocating for patients, it is important to preserve the autonomy of the patient. However, the liberty of patients’ needs to be considered only when they have all the required information to make an independent decision. Conversely, the advertisement overemphasizes the uncontrollable status of the victim while failing to show the causes of such symptoms (Sullivan et al., 2020). Resultantly, it may instill overconfidence in patients, making them think that the drug is good for them, yet their symptoms indicate a different issue.
The principle of justice demands that pharmacists conduct their services in a way that is truthful and fair to all patients. Notably, the commercials increased patient requests for the prescription when they go to the chemist or hospital (DeFrank et al., 2019). The implication is that DTCA is unfair and fails to make the patient listen to the different perspectives of the medic. They go to the hospital with a decision to only get the prescribed drugs.
It is expected that all healthcare workers observe beneficence which means that they should always think of the uttermost good of the patient. Yet the objective of the DTCA is to increase its sales and make a profit. The actions of the pharmaceutical companies who market their prescription drugs are business-oriented and not humanitarian. As the biggest beneficiaries of the DTCA are the companies and not the patients.
Conclusively, the advertisement of commercial drugs hurt all four ethical principles, including justice, autonomy, non-maleficence, and beneficence. The adverts focus more on the symptoms without giving the background to developing such a condition. Furthermore, the patient is misled to think that the medicine would solve all their challenges. The result is that despite the decision’s independence, the patient can still get harm. The actions of large pharmaceutical companies that fund such commercials are selfish because they care more about the profit that they can get when more people purchase their products. If such DTCA continues, people will eventually lose confidence in the medical professionals and prefer ordering a prescription without doing tests to verify whether the person has a specific disease.
References
DeFrank, J. T., Berkman, N. D., Kahwati, L., Cullen, K., Aikin, K. J., & Sullivan, H. W. (2019). Direct-to-Consumer advertising of prescription drugs and the patient–prescriber encounter: A systematic review. Health Communication, 35(6), 739-746.
Phillips, A. M., Campos, T. C., & Herring, J. (2019). Philosophical foundations of medical law. Oxford University Press, USA.
Sullivan, H. W., Aikin, K. J., Berktold, J., Stein, K. L., & Hoverman, V. J. (2020). Direct-to-Consumer prescription drug advertising and patient-provider interactions. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 33(2), 279-283.