Pharmacists can’t say no to contraception

[dweller]

By Gene C. Gerard
Online Journal Contributing Writer
The retailer Target recently announced that it would allow pharmacists at its stores to refuse to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception
(EC), if dispensing it would violate their religious beliefs. When taken within 72 hours of sexual intercourse EC can prevent pregnancy. The
retailer will require pharmacists who refuse to fill the order to ask another pharmacist at their location to fill the prescription, or confirm for the
patient that it can be obtained elsewhere. Target joined Kmart and Costco in allowing pharmacists to refuse to fill a prescription for EC.

There has been an ongoing struggle this year between pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for EC and birth control pills, and various
municipal and state governments who either support or oppose these actions. In April, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich issued an
administrative order that allows pharmacies not to sell contraceptives of any kind. But if they do, they are required to fill prescriptions for EC
or risk loosing(sic) their license. Illinois is the first state to do so. At least 10 pharmacists have sued the state on the grounds that the order forces
them to violate their religious beliefs. And the state has moved to revoke the licenses of two Walgreens pharmacies and an Osco pharmacy
for refusing to fill the prescriptions.

In Austin, Texas, the city council passed a measure in August requiring Walgreens, the pharmaceutical vendor for the city’s medical
assistance program, to fill any prescription “without discrimination or delay.” The measure was specifically aimed at pharmacies that have
refused to fill prescriptions for EC. The measure requires the pharmacies to fill prescriptions in the store where patients furnish their
prescriptions, regardless of a pharmacist’s religious beliefs. Austin is the first city in the nation to require pharmacies to fill all orders they
receive.

The Arizona legislature has chosen to side with pharmacists who have religious objections to EC. The Arizona House and Senate have
introduced legislation that would permit pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for any contraception if they are morally opposed to it. And
pharmacists would not be required to assist the patient in filling the prescription elsewhere. Michigan’s legislature is considering a similar bill.
The California Assembly has taken a much wider approach. It is considering legislation that would allow a pharmacist to refuse to fill any
prescription for religious reasons. The pharmacist would only have to inform their employer in writing in advance.

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_287.shtml

dp

[tsuki]

1. This is such a weird argument that I have to think something else

is at work. I keep getting these "shop cheaper" and "we pay more of the cost" bulletins from my health insurance. They want me to go mail order for my drugs.

All this baloney from the local pharmacies have made me seriously consider this alternative.

Now, I am wondering if some Scanlon-like manipulator has been stirring up the "religious whackos" to make shopping by mail-order more attractive to consumers.

If they win this arguement, what is next? Refusing to dispense medications to HIV patients because they are homophobes and might be helping a gay person?

[dweller]

2. read the whole article for it is

speculated for other ... situations.

dp

[prole_for_peace]

3. i would lose my mind if someone told me they wouldn't

fill my scrip 'cause of religious reasons. and i don't even think what i would do if it was one of those faux pharmacists that refuses to return the scrip so it can get filled somewhere else. i would imagine the encounter would probably end in the police being called and me in a jail cell.