An Interdisciplinary Mock Trial Involving Pharmacy, Law, and Ethics
Abstract
Objective To describe an innovative, interdisciplinary approach to illustrate the relationship between healthcare ethics and law. Methods A mock trial was created for students enrolled in the Samford University McWhorter School of Pharmacy and Department of Paralegal Education. The trial served as the starting point to discuss confidentiality in health care in general and pharmacy in particular. Students from both programs served on the jury and rendered a verdict after the case had been presented. The Alabama statute concerning exceptions to confidentiality is reviewed. The students' assignment and lessons learned are also described. Summary Students thoroughly enjoyed this method of teaching and learning. The mock trial provided an interesting way to exemplify the often complex relationship between healthcare ethics and law.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Based on the authors' investigations and experiences, the mock trial project has been and is adaptable to different contexts and modalities, such as integration within a course, as a co-curricular or extracurricular activity, and implementation in a virtual environment.
“Based on the authors' investigations and experiences, the mock trial project has been and is adaptable to different contexts and modalities, such as integration of a mock trial within a course, as a co-curricular or extracurricular activity, and implementation in a virtual environment (Broeseker & Jones, 1999).”
From Students’ performance and perceptions of mock trials as a teaching and assessment activity over three years at two institutions (2024) · cites this paper as Broeseker & Jones, 1999
Before this project, historically, mock trials were scarcely employed in pharmacy education, found only in isolated instances, and without repeated and deliberate assessment for competencies and outcomes; only one study previously reported having students as active participants in a mock trial albeit with roles that were scripted for the students by faculty or actual court cases.
“Before this project, historically, mock trials were scarcely employed in pharmacy education, found only in isolated instances, and without repeated and deliberate assessment for competencies and outcomes; only one study previously reported having students as active participants in a mock trial albeit with roles that were scripted for the students by faculty or actual court cases (van Dusen, 1998;”
From Students’ performance and perceptions of mock trials as a teaching and assessment activity over three years at two institutions (2024) · cites this paper as Broeseker & Jones, 1999
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rosenberg, E., Hsu, S.-Y., Truong, H.-A., & Taheri, R. (2024) · Pharmacy Education · doi:10.46542/pe.2024.241.2939
- Authors
- Broeseker, A. E., & Jones, M. M.
- Affiliations
- Samford University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Broeseker, Amy E
- Venue
- Annals of Pharmacotherapy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-07
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 7-8
- Pages
- 850-858
- ISSN
- 0012-6578 (ISSN-L)
- 1060-0280
- 1542-6270
- OpenAlex
- W2096992440
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 2.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annals of Pharmacotherapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methodologies in Social Sciences
- Social Sciences › Law › Legal Education and Practice Innovations
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
- Keywords
- mock trial, pharmacy education, health law, health care ethics, confidentiality, pharmacy students, paralegal studies, interdisciplinary teaching, jury verdicts
- MeSH terms
- Confidentiality, Education, Pharmacy, Ethics, Pharmacy, HIV Seropositivity, Legislation, Pharmacy, Teaching, Duty to Warn, Interdisciplinary Communication
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
