Can they really refuse to fill prescriptions?!

[Emily Jane]

The New Birth Control Ban

Pill Propelled into Abortion Debate

So, what do you think? Should these pharmacists have their licenses revoked?

[Egalitariat]

1. If they don't want to do something, they shouldn't be forced...

against their will by anyone.

It's important to get the word out so we can patronize other businesses, and so that the employers of these people know that they're losing out on revenue thanks to the actions of their employees.

But making someone do something they think is wrong doesn't sound very much like liberty to me.

[Emily Jane]

2. They probably think it's wrong to cheat...

...but I don't hear about anyone asking a man if the viagra is for his wife or mistress.

Many many many women take the pill for medical reasons.

[Greylyn58]

10. Kick

That is sooo right!!!

There are so many "get it up guys" pills on the market and I have yet to see one story about a Pharmacist refusing to fill that prescription.

:grr:

[Lars39]

3. They should find another career then.

If they aren't willing to fulfill the job requirements, then they chose the wrong profession.

[Blue Gardener]

4. It's their job

If they think they can pick and choose which prescriptions they want to fill, then perhaps they are in the wrong profession.

[sandnsea]

5. You must be a man

And just not realize the health implications to women or you wouldn't make that statement.

[AngryOldDem]

42. If I am willing to accept the risks

and if they have been explained to me, then that is my business. I don't need someone who is totally unfamiliar with my medical history or current situation passing judgment on why I need or don't need a certain medication. The pharmacist should assume that this has been discussed between my doctor and me and that I have made an informed decision to take the medication.

[Midlodemocrat]

6. I totally disagree with you

...but I respect your opinion. A pharmacist is there to dispense medications, not pass judgment on the person receiving the medication. Would they refuse to dispense Antabuse, the drug which alcholics take to try to quit drinking? What about Accutane or a myriad of other drugs which will harm the fetus? Sorry, they knew what they were getting into when they signed on.

[China_cat]

20. Yes, a couple of states...

Michigan and Wisconsin, I think, have passed laws that allow emergency workers, doctors and pharmacists to refuse services to anyone whose lifestyle 'conflicts with their moral values'. They say that emergency treatment would still be provided but if you can allow EMS, pharmacists, doctors and nurses to opt out for "moral, ethical or religious" reasons, it only stands to reason that the situation is going to come up where a homophobe is going to refuse to treat a gay person or a white supremacist to refuse to treat somebody of color. And the state will have to back them because of the way the law is worded.


http://www.unknownnews.net/040423refuse.html

Bill would let doctors refuse treatment to gays, Muslims, pregnant women ...
by Amy F. Bailey, Associated Press

April 22, 2004

LANSING, Mich. -- The state House has voted to protect health care workers and insurers from being fired or sued for refusing to perform a procedure, fill a prescription or cover treatment for something they object to for moral, ethical or religious reasons.

The law would apply to doctors or nurses who decline to perform or assist with abortions and to pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for morning-after pills.

The Republican-controlled House overwhelmingly approved the four-bill package as dozens of Catholics looked on from the balcony.

The Michigan Catholic Conference, which pushed for the bills, hosted a legislative day for Catholics on Wednesday at the state Capitol. The Catholic Church opposes abortion and birth control.

The bills now go the Senate, which also is controlled by Republicans.

The main bill in the package would create the Conscientious Objector Policy Act. It would allow health care providers to assert an objection within 24 hours of when they receive notice of a procedure with which they do not agree. However, it would prohibit emergency treatment to be refused.

The House voted 69-35 to approve the bill. It mostly was along party lines with Republicans voting for it and Democrats against it.

However, a handful of Democrats voted for it, including Steve Bieda of Warren, Rich Brown of Bessemer, John Gleason of Flushing, Bill O'Neil of Allen Park, Joe Rivet of Bay City, Michael Sak of Grand Rapids, Dale Sheltrown of West Branch, Doug Spade of Adrian and Lisa Wojno of Warren. Republican Rep. John Stewart of Plymouth joined Democrats in voting against the bill.

The other three bills, which were approved by similar margins, would exempt a health insurer or health facility from providing or covering a health care procedure that violated ethical, moral or religious principles reflected in their bylaws or mission statement.

The bill does not allow pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control.

Democratic Rep. Gretchen Whitmer of East Lansing failed to win enough support for an amendment to the main bill that would have prohibited health care professionals from refusing to provide emergency contraception. It failed on a 34-68 vote.

Rep. Jack Minore, D-Flint, said the bill would prevent patients' health care needs from being considered before anything else.

"I think it's a terrible slippery slope upon which we embark," he said before voting against the bill.

[snippy]

24. It is an important issue to the Reich Wing of the republican party.

The GOP has passed similar laws in some other states also. Democrats should make it more well known that these types of laws are such a priority for the GOP. Republicans have made this a political issue but democrats seem to ignore it.

[timtom]

27. I think I'm going to scream!

Ohhhh....it's gonna be a looong and extremely difficult 4 years! I only pray that I can keep my sense of humor.

[Midlodemocrat]

33. One of the sickest things I have ever heard

...where does it end? Do brown eyed people have to help green eyed people, or are green eyed people, because they are in the minority, on their own? What sick crap.

[blm]

7. Where will the line be drawn? No Valtrex for fornicators

who are being punished by God for their infractions against him?

[Egalitariat]

12. I'm just not comfortable with the gov't drawing any lines...

which is what the license revocation policy would amount to. I'd prefer to draw my own lines, and am willing to let everyone else do the same.

[Emily Jane]

13. Until...

...you try to fill your prescription and get refused. BCPs are not only used to prevent pregnancy.

[snippy]

15. Government drew the line which requires licensing in the first place.

Do you want every individual to have the right to decide whether he or she should have a license to practice pharmacy?

Your post certainly seems to suggest that this is what you want.

Government also drew the line which defines the requirements for a license to practice pharmacy. Do you want every individual to have the right to decide what the requirements for such invidual's license should be to practice pharmacy?

Your post certainly seems to suggest that this is what you want.

[blm]

16. But, the government is there to promote equal treatment of all citizens.

Those who use Viagra shouldn't be given access that those who need birth control pills are denied.

[Pepperbelly]

8. they should IF ...

they refuse to transfer the script to another pharmacy.

[Malva Zebrina]

11. Then there should be an alternative pharmacist available that does NOT

have the immorality to refuse birth control pills to women. Period.

In the same place as the one who does refuse to issue a prescription to a client. Period.

Women should NOT have to be stomped on by those,who operate in professional capacities, that refuse because of their religion, to issue a prescription given to them by an MD. Period

Women--rise up and demand there be another pharmacist available to you who WILL fill your prescription in order to preserve your autonomy over your own family planning.

Nevermind boycott--rise up and demand your right to your prescription as ordered by your doctor. These pharmacists have no right to refuse to fill a prescription ordered by a doctor--they are in effect, overriding the doctor and that is NOT professional, nor is is in accordance with the ethics of that profession.

NO pharmacist can over ride an MD's prescription because of HIS or HER own beliefs. If they think they can, then they need to have their license taken away. Demand it!

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

19. Nope. Don't buy that.

It's not like they woke up one day and decided "I'm going to be a pharmacist." They had to go to college for this. They studied. They planned on being pharmacists. And any pharmacist that didn't realize they might have to give out birth control pills and didn't want to do so because of "morality" should have never become pharmacists in the first goddamn place!

[Walt Starr]

21. IMO, any physician who refuses to prescribe, or a pharmacist who

refuses to fill a prescription should automatically forfeit their license and never be allowed to practice ever again in their lifetime.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

38. does this include ALL perscriptions or just

birth control, viagra and the like? I know the original post is about birth control, but what if a doctor refused to perscribe something or a pharmacist refused to fill something with cause...like the whole Vioxx (and many others) debacle? What if the doc/pharm had research showing something as dangerous in certain cases? Is it ok to refuse to prescribe something if you have cause?

Just playing devil's advocate here...

theProdigal

[seabeyond]

23. then they should be fired

it is not part of their job description to judge. they are not doctors adn are not being paid to advice or prescribe to patient. they are merely there to fill an order the doctor has prescribed to the patient

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MountainLaurel]

29. Then they shouldn't have become pharmacists.

n/t

[American Tragedy]

34. But it's their job, for God's sake.

What right do they have to judge whether someone should have a particular prescription? Should a clerk at a liquor store be able to refuse to let you buy a beer? What kind of precedent is this to set?

I take highly restricted drugs every day and will almost certainly have to take them for the rest of my life. They were prescribed to me by a licensed physician, and stopping my regimin even briefly is not an option. It is absolutely unacceptable that somebody behind the counter at CVS might decide that these medications just aren't right or whatever, and be legally permitted to refuse my prescription!

If I were one of those customers, I would be calling my lawyer and representatives of the company the next day. That pharmacist would be history.

[CAcyclist]

35. It's not their place to moralize

they are violating our rights as women if they refuse to give us medicine we need. Would you still support their "freedom to refuse service" if they didn't want to give medicine to black people?

[LiberalFighter]

36. What happens when pharmacists decide to fill prescriptions only...

for Christians? Or those that belong to their church? Because they consider anyone else as too sinful to receive any type of medical attention?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

45. Hey, any sort of medicine is "playing God" really.

We need to go back to the good old days where people died from the common cold.

[LiberalFighter]

46. How about bleeding for the repugs

They can use themselves as leeches

[noamnety]

9. we need the trifecta now to get birth control

Doctor, insurance company, pharmacist. Any of the three have the right to veto your choice.

[Mackenzie]

14. That's why I support selling birth control pills over the counter.

Women are intelligent enough to read and follow the directions, safety precautions, etc. The birth control pill should be sold over the counter.

[noamnety]

18. No! Don't say that!

Men are smart enough to use condoms, but we are females, we will never be smart enough to figure that stuff out on our own.

That's why things like diaphragms and caps need a prescription. We could never handle the doctor telling us what size we need, and then leaving it up to us to buy the right size. These must be dispensed by a pharmacist who can read the size for us, and grab it off the shelf for us! What if the doctor told me I needed one size, and I couldn't figure out if I should get that one or a different one once I got in the store? I am incapable!

[AngryOldDem]

44. I don't know about that

Each woman's system is different -- I don't think you could really manufacture a "one-size-fits-all" drug to control hormones, ovulation, etc. Just my opinion. I know I for one would not feel comfortable buying BC like I do Sinex.

[Padraig18]

17. They should not have their licenses revoked.

Unless there is a state law that makes dispensing birth-control pills a condition of having a license, then they are within their rights to refuse.

[China_cat]

22. By refusing to fill a prescription

the pharmacist is taking on the position of doctor. I don't know about your state, but here practicing medicine without a physician's license is a felony.

[Padraig18]

31. No, prescribing it would be practicing medicine.

There's no affirmative duty to fill a prescription, insofar as I'm aware.

[China_cat]

32. By denying it

you are saying that the person doesn't need it. Isn't that the doctor's job?

And it isn't just bcp's in Michigan...it's anything the pharmacist doesn't think you should be taking because of HIS/HER worldview. It could be morphine for intractable pain and the pharmacist doesn't believe anybody should be taking narcotics. It could be antabuse (as someone else asked about) because drinking is a 'moral' issue and shouldn't be controlled with drugs. Hell, it could be a kid's insulin because the pharmacist feels that diabetes is caused by a 'gluttonous' lifestyle. (I know that in most states you don't need a script for insulin but you do still have to ask the pharmacist for it.)

The pharmacist is there to carry out the doctor's orders, not place his/her judgement above that of the physician. Pharmacy school teaches them this...that the only time they have the right to interfere is if they see that there are medications that are contraindicated and then they are REQUIRED to notify the doctor first before doing anything else.

(I've got a pharmacist and a nurse with a pharmacology certificate in the family.)

[Padraig18]

37. No, that's not what denying it 'says'.

If the pharmacist refused to stock Geritol, it doesn't 'say' that the phamacist believes in anemia, e.g. .

[timtom]

25. My answer:

"Can they really refuse to fill prescriptions?!"

Legally and morally -- not only "No!" but "F*** No!"

"Should these pharmacists have their licenses revoked?"

Without a doubt! Some jail time, too, just to review their priorities.

[flvegan]

26. I think (not that anyone asked)

That they should be allowed to deny to fill a prescription based on their personal beliefs. People should be able to live their morals/ethics at their jobs, regardless of how idiotic I think that ethic to be.

HOWEVER, if you live your morals/ethics at your job, you do so with consequence should that cross someone else. Everything has a cost.

So, if a pharmacist denies filling a script, I'd ask for another pharmacist. If there were no other, I'd ask for a manager. I'd be sure to let said manager know that I'd be contacting corporate hq and letting them know that they just lost all my business to another pharm. I'd cc the CEO or Pres. As I'm a vindictive bastard, I'd mail my future receipts with copies of my first letter to them every six months, too. Not just script receipts. Nay verily. Receipts for everything from greeting cards to magazines to deoderant to shampoo. "This is money you could have had." Were I a woman, I'd make it one of my top 5 priorities.

[captain disgruntled]

30. I'm not sure precisely where I stand on this *morally*....

...but I do think picking and choosing what specific professional duties you find fit to perform does at least make you a poor employee.
I mean, what if you're a staunch Muslim or Jew and go to work at a grocery store meat department and refuse to handle pork?? Or a vegan? Or you're a committed environmentalist who works for a surveyor, and you refuse to do any surveys contracted by developers. It just seems to me that it's a poor job fit if you're not willing to subvert your particular moral stance to professional requirements--maybe you should go work at the student pharmacy at Bob Jones University or something, where goodness knows none of the students ever have irregular periods or other hormonal anomalies.

[Nobody]

39. Indeed I agree

And when I saw a monster.com job openeing that needed one IT professional of the type I am, while looking for work, I did NOT send my resume to a company whose sole reason for existing was to provide campaign workers (phone callers, mailers, door knockers) to Republican campaigns.

Conflict of interest. I was volunteering my time for free to Paul Wellstone.

[MADem]

40. This sort of thing actually HAPPENED

in Israel, but not on the part of the shopworkers, instead on the part of the neighborhood. The small Armenian community (best place to getcher canadian bacon and Xmas trees...and in Muslim countries where they live, the best home made wine) in one town were under pressure to close down their shops because they sold pork. They were offered the choice, almost at gunpoint, of removing the offending items or getting out of town. The religious right wanted them OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD because observant Jews were shopping in a store that sold the dreaded bacon, thus making the entire place somehow "unclean." They wanted to "ghetto-ize" the armenians, and require that everything they sold had the Kosher label.

The problem was, they had a lot of defenders, among them those Jews who liked the odd ham sandwich and didn't follow the dietary law. This was ongoing as of maybe six months ago...I didn't continue to follow the issue so I don't know how it turned out. At the time, I remember being struck by the intolerance of it all.

As someone who relied upon Armenians for the odd sausage patty, Xmas tree, and jug o' wine back in the day, I found their services invaluable. Awfully nice folks, too--incredibly adaptable, but then again, the poor bastards had to be.

[AngryOldDem]

41. This question AGAIN???

When I walk into a pharmacy with a legal prescription for a legal drug written by a licensed physician, I expect it to be filled. It is a business transaction. They guy behind the counter is there to do a job -- fill my script. If he cannot do that, then he needs to find another line of work. It is not up to me to 1) explain to him why I need the drug; or 2) inconvenience myself by going to another pharmacy to get what is legally mine in the first place.

As I've said before, if these people think filling a birth control prescription will send their eternal souls to hell, they are more than free to quit their current jobs, set up a "pro-life" pharmacy, and cater to a specific clientele. In the meantime, I, as a customer, expect them to do what they are behind the counter to do.

This is really a very simple issue: Do your job. If you have a moral problem with it, quit.

EDIT -- Spelling goof

[SemiCharmedQuark]

43. You don't believe in B.C.-don't use it. Don't stop others from using it.

This all comes down to the abortion debate again. If you have some sort of moral problem with birth control, well fine. But don't you DARE try and tell me what I can or can't use on my own body. I don't wear leather or eat meat, but if I went to work and refused to sell those things to people I would get fired. My rights as an American end at me. I cannot tell other people what to do.