The rise of non-medical prescribing and medical dominance

This article contributes to the continuing debate on professional dominance of medicine given rising number professions allied that now have legal authority prescribe and could potentially threaten this dominance. The key questions addressed are whether non-medical prescribers represent a threat if they do not, what has mediated doctors' response these newer such able retain dominance? Drawing Abbott's work jurisdictional claims, paper explores how rise prescribing led competing claims over between doctors prescribers. particularly focuses pharmacist be settled. It discusses why profession is still dominant importance ideologies influencing outcome claims. ideology shifted from valuing indeterminacy involved in complex clinical decision making, illustrating medicine's ability adapt, maintain cultural knowledge. In contrast, prescribers' involves having specialist medicines expertise being safe Pharmacists draw upon argue their unique competence as prescriber: pharmacological knowledge attention detail which facilitates role checker or ‘safety net’ prescribing. However, decision-making enables, when there prescribing, for intellectual jurisdiction: control cognitive base making. Could eroded weaker form involving advisory jurisdiction? Should political developments further favour widespread acceptance core part pharmacist's role, an erosion jurisdiction may yet possible.