Reply #13: I believe if someone has an objection to filling prescriptions

[phylny]

or performing procedures, they need to make it known to the pharmacy or the hospital or office they're working at. They need to make it publicly known. Then said pharmacy or hospital has the right to fire them without impugnity for failure to perform their duties. They are free to find employment at, say, a Catholic hospital where they do not perform abortions, tubal ligations, vasectomies, nor dispense contraceptives.

Patients, too, should know up front that their pharmacist or doctor will refuse to perform certain duties, and can therefore make informed decisions. Those who are in favor of pick and choose medicine can populate the office. Those who are opposed can find another health care provider. Pharmacies had damned well better have TWO people on staff who can dispense medicine - and absorb the cost of two salaries versus one for that shift.

I think this is a very, very dangerous precedent. I'm a speech-language pathologist, and I don't pick and choose the people I help. "Oh, he has AIDS? Sorry, won't do it. What, she's got Hepatitis? Um um, no, won't do it."

Once you start this pick and choose sort of service delivery, it all goes down the tubes. If you object, go find a place to work where it won't impact your patients. Otherwise, do your job, or pick a different profession.