Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Pharmacists could reject prescriptions on moral grounds in Minnesota

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Places » Minnesota Donate to DU
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 07:50 PM
Original message
Pharmacists could reject prescriptions on moral grounds in Minnesota


http://www.startribune.com/587/story/300914.html

When can druggists refuse to sell the Pill?
Pharmacists could reject prescriptions on moral grounds under a Minnesota bill that reflects a nationwide debate.
Maura Lerner, Star Tribune

For the first time, the Minnesota Legislature is poised to give pharmacists the right to refuse to dispense birth-control pills on moral or religious grounds. And legislators may have found a way to take that step without the kind of battle that has flared across the country over the issue.

A House committee approved a bill last week that would allow pharmacists to decline to fill prescriptions, but only if patients are assured "timely access" to their medications. Some details of the bill are in flux, but sponsors say it's likely to pass.

The question of whether a pharmacist's moral views should ever limit a woman's reproductive rights is provoking national debate. That's partly because of the growing use of emergency contraception commonly called the "morning-after" pill.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, reflecting the consensus of the medical profession, does not consider the drug an abortion pill. Medical groups say the pill, which at times is confused with the abortion pill known as RU-486, cannot end a pregnancy.

Barrett (a pharmacist mentioned earlier in the article), who manages a hospital pharmacy, said he was under pressure to stock the morning-after pill, known as Plan B. "I didn't want to," he said, because he is morally opposed to it. "I believe there are other options. But this doesn't mean a woman shouldn't have access to Plan B. I just shouldn't have to provide it."

The compromise allows pharmacists to refuse service on "ethical, moral or religious grounds." But they must notify their employers in writing, and avoid causing "undue hardship." Otherwise, they could be disciplined by the state Board of Pharmacy.


The article didn't mention what hospital this Barrett jerk manages a pharmacy for. I just wonder how a hospital - which no doubt treats rape victims on occasion - cannot stock Plan B. Especially if said hospital is outstate, personally I think expecting a rape victim to run around finding someone to fill her prescription constitutes "undue hardship".

I'm on the endorsements committee for my senate district, only one candidate is currently in the legislature and she will be asked about this bill.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
electron_blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. Um, are they also going to protect the cashiers who refuse to ring it up
based on their moral objections?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KitchenWitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. This crap chaps my ass!
I did bring a resolution to my caucus essentially to block this sort of legislation. Hopefully this will become part of the party platform this time around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I hope this becomes part of the platform too KW. This is ridiculous.
:grr: So can these bastards withhold AIDS drugs too? :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minnesota Raindog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
4. This bill has three DFL authors
Rep. Tom Huntley (Duluth), Sen. Linda Berglin (Minneapolis) and Sen. Yvonne Solon (Duluth). Once again, these proud Democrats settle for half a loaf when nothing short of a full loaf should be accepted. When are Democrats like these three going to stop selling us down the river, letting the zealots chip, chip, chip away at our rights? They won't stop at morning-after pills. Next, as other posters have noted, will be birth control pills and condoms (heathens, sex is for procreation only!), AIDS drugs (doncha know AIDS victims asked for their disease by defying the Word of God), mood enhancers (you wouldn't need these if you just open your heart to Jesus).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dpbrown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
5. Let a clerk deny a gun to a fundie under "moral grounds" and see...
It's okay to discriminate against women, because the Talibornagain have as part of their basic beliefs the suppression of women and the enforcing of their artificial patriarchy.

There has to be a way to expose this Rapturista propaganda for what it is and wake people up, dammit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minnesota Raindog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
6. Lieberman says it's OK to deny emergency contraception to rape victims
Our Republican in Democrat's clothing US Senator and former VP candidate Joe Lieberman thinks it's just fine if hospitals refuse to dispense emergency contraception to rape victims:

http://www.lastchancedemocracycafe.com/?p=109

But there's hope--this asshole has a Democratic challenger and he sounds like a firebrand:

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=68530

I encourage donations to Ned Lamont so we can rid the Democratic Party of the cancer who goes by the name of Joe Lieberman. I have no time for US Senators who wish to make this kind of Neanderthal policy the law of the land:

http://www.nedlamont.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northernsoul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
7. Can bus drivers turn passengers away?
Great. Now bus drivers can turn away passengers if the drivers morally disapprove of the passenger's destination?
Get ready for "sorry, sir, I can't let you on this bus because you're going to the liquor store and I think drinking is a sin."
Logically, it's the same thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Places » Minnesota Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC