Pharmacist wouldn't dispense anti-bleeding drug because it might be used post-abortion

[charlie]

Nevermind the misapplication of Idaho's "conscience clause", this tool seems to think that bleeding to death is a just consequence of having an abortion.

...The prescription was for a Planned Parenthood patient for Methergine, a medicine used to prevent or control bleeding of the uterus following childbirth or an abortion.

“Methergine is not an abortifacient and it serves multiple purposes in postpartum care,” the practitioner wrote in her complaint. “I believe the pharmacist wrongly applied the conscience protections.
...

Planned Parenthood officials said in the complaint that the pharmacist inquired if the patient needed the drug for post-abortion care. The nurse refused to answer the question based on confidentiality of health information.

According to Planned Parenthood, the pharmacist then stated that if the nurse practitioner did not disclose that information, she would not fill the prescription. The nurse alleged that the pharmacist hung up when asked for a referral to another pharmacy that would fill the prescription...

http://www.idahopress.com/news/article_d6a73c14-1eea-11e0-9f44-001cc4c03286.html

[BlueIris]

1. Misogynists are disgusting. nt

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. And scary!

[Confusious]

61. she

According to Planned Parenthood, the pharmacist then stated that if the nurse practitioner did not disclose that information, she would not fill the prescription.

[Maru Kitteh]

90. So what? You think women cannot be misogynists? Is that your point? Because if it is,

you're very wrong.

[kestrel91316]

3. That pharmacist needs to lose his/her license. Yesterday.

[Omaha Steve]

25. I agree

K&R!

[blondeatlast]

28. +1. nt

[Pacifist Patriot]

48. +1000

[Raster]

59. Let me guess... a christian pharmacist?

[GrannyK]

83. Most likely a LDS (Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) also known

as Mormons. Idaho has many, many LDS

[Raster]

96. Know them well... I was raised mormon in Arizona.

And yes, they're always willing more than willing to insert their beliefs into your life... whether you want them to or not.

[Cerridwen]

4. Wow. Who knew allowing them to get away with selective

dispensing of pharmaceuticals might mean it would impact other medications?

Oh yeah. We did.

[sakabatou]

5. *facepalm*

[AC_Mem]

6. I would sue the pharmacist

And then the pharmacy and find out if there is enough evidence of this behavior to file a class action lawsuit. Who gave this person the right to play God with this woman's life?

Enough is enough. We are going to continue to have to deal with this garbage until we stand up and say ENOUGH.

And this is yet another reason why I wish we had government paid healthcare for all.

[csziggy]

10. The pharmacy has already taken action

“Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest public affairs staff has since contacted Walgreens’ corporate office, and corrective action was taken with the Nampa pharmacist,” Kristen Glundberg-Prossor, Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest’s director of public affairs, said.

From the link in the OP.

I wonder if the pharmacist has a job today?

[Posteritatis]

32. He was probably given a brief talking to and back to the status quo

These sorts of things usually result in "suspended with pay and take a two hour seminar on sensitivity training" or the like.

[Confusious]

65. She. The pharma was a she.

[crim son]

56. If the pharmacist is still employed, I would be inspired

never to set foot in another Walgreen's again. Or any pharmacy that permits this kind of reckless irresponsibility in its employees.

[boppers]

7. Time to start revoking licenses.

That's just insane.

[Ilsa]

22. Let them choose their "conscience" over their pocketbooks. nt

[knitter4democracy]

8. This disgusts me.

Denial of care like this should be grounds for losing a license. When asked for a referral, isn't the pharmacist required to give one? Disgusting.

[charlie]

11. As far as I know, yes.

She's required to foward it to someone who'll fill it.

Even a self-righteous knob knows bleeding sometimes requires prompt treatment, that dithering can be dangerous. Hope she's pleased with herself.

[csziggy]

9. Go to the link and vote in the poll on the left side

Do you think a Nampa pharmacist was right to refuse a prescription for a medication sometimes used after an abortion?
Yes - 57 - 7%
No - 705 - 90%
I can see both sides - 15 - 2%
Don't know enough about it - 5 - 1%

[11 Bravo]

26. Up to 91% "NO"

[lolly]

99. Doncha love the way that is phrased?

Following the logic of the poll question--I'm sure some doctor, somewhere has told a patient to take an aspirin or ibuprofin if she experienced cramping after an abortion. So, by that pharmacist's logic, all women who buy aspirin should have to fill out an affidavit that they aren't using it to relieve cramping.

On second though, perhaps I shouldn't be giving those people any ideas.

[TorchTheWitch]

105. aspirin and ibuprofin are blood thinners and would encourage bleeding

but I definitely get the point you were making. They could do this with virtually any drug. Need a prescription for narcotics? Some pharmacist may refuse to fill it because they're afraid you don't really need it and are using it recreationally. Need hormone pills (bc control) to regulate your period because of chronic pain or other malfunction? Some pharmacist may not fill it because they're afraid it would be stopping a pregnancy (never mind whether or not you're even having sex). Pharmacists aren't care givers, they're chemists and clerks. They have NO business inserting themselves in care giving decisions and should only be refusing to fill certain prescriptions because of error, possible drug contradictions or suspected fraud.

No care givers should be inserting their personal beliefs into what sort of care their patients can/should receive either. Don't want to perform an abortion? Then don't go into OB/GYN. Don't want to give vaccinations? Then don't go to medical school to begin with. Don't want to do heart transplants? Then don't go into transplant surgery, etc., etc., etc.

This goes for ANY profession. If there's something within the profession you don't want to do because of your personal beliefs then don't go into that profession or go into only a part of that profession where your personal beliefs aren't ever going to be an issue, and if for some odd reason something comes up that does conflict with your personal beliefs then SUCK IT UP AND DO YOUR FUCKING JOB.

[Odin2005]

12. I hate these fuckers!

If you're conscience forbids you from fulfilling your job then find another job.

[blueamy66]

20. Exactly.

And this is why I use CVS and not Walgreen's....among many other reasons.

If you don't want to do your job, then you lose your damn job!!!!!

[demtenjeep]

42. I switched pharmacies this last couple of months because they were messing with my pain med

They would tell me they were still waiting on my Doc to authorize the refil so I called my doc and learned that it was authorized the day before.

When I called the pharm back they stammered and stuttered and finally sort of apologized and said they would fill it.

I went to pick it up and it was 5 short. I called my Doc from the store and it was fixed and that was the last time I used that store.

I have now a great pharm right next to my doc and they email me when my scripts are ready! Much better service!!!

[ProfessorGAC]

95. Ummmm, That Makes No Sense

When this same situation occurred on the east coast, it was a CVS pharmacy involved. When it happened in Texas, it was an independent. When it happened in the suburbs of Chicago, it was an Osco's.

So, this situation is completely unrelated to the chain pharmacy.

And your statement shows that you think it is, even though this happens with every chain, somewhere in this country.

[blueamy66]

97. Okay, how about this.

Walgreen's pharmacies are too damn slow, the CVS pharmacists are much nicer and CVS charges me much less for my generics than Walgreen's does.

Why does Walgreen's charge me $10 for the same script that CVS charges me $2.40 for?

[LiberalFighter]

13. Could the refusal of the prescription result in death or seriously impair the patient?

If so, a demand needs to be made of prosecutors to prosecute for attempted murder or other charge.

Did the pharmacist also violate HIPAA law? If so, go federal on him.

[kestrel91316]

35. I consider it attempted murder, especially because there is evidence of malice.

[perdita9]

73. It's like putting a Jehovah's Witness in charge of a blood bank

Your job is to dispense medicine perscribed by a physician. Not pass values judgments on patients.

I so hope this guy (or woman) gets sued.

[Warren DeMontague]

14. Great. Another Jesus-drunk pharmacist. He needs to find another line of work.

The job of a pharmacist is to fill legally valid prescriptions. If you can't do your job, find another one.

[liberalhistorian]

41. Jesus would not have approved of this so-called "pharmacists"

actions, not at all. Quite the opposite.

[Warren DeMontague]

46. You mean the Jesus that was, quite likely, a historical fiction?

http://www.jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/home.htm

Sorry, these people are -in this country- invariably acting in the name of Jesus, as they interpret "him". They are, to a fault, Christian Extremists. Trying to pretend that they're not "real" Christians is an example of a No True Scotsman Fallacy.

[KittyWampus]

49. "no true scotsman fallacy". PLEASE. Unless you operate under the assumption that any word can mean

anything you wish it to mean and that there is no objective truth... you can let that sad attempt at logic die a well-deserved rest.

[Warren DeMontague]

50. What? If the Pharmacist believes he is acting on behalf of "Jesus"

whether or not "Jesus" had an actual, historical existence or (more likely) did not- it is legitimate to call the Pharmacist "Jesus drunk".

But either way- please, put aside your indignation at the unfair persecution of the Christian Majority in this country for a moment to consider what the topic is actually about, i.e. pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions.

[Warren DeMontague]

53. Also, there is no objective truth to the idea that a "real Christian" is anything but

someone who calls themselves a "real Christian".

Maybe you have a subjective definition, but objectively? None. It's not like a "real volcano" or a "real diamond". A Christian is someone who says they're a Christian. Period.

[crim son]

57. I agree with you.

I don't know any self-professed Christian who doesn't think s/he is "real." Who gets to decide? Even the Westboro Baptist wingnuts quote Jesus when they defend their actions. "I come not to bring peace to the earth, but to bring a sword."

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Confusious]

62. she. the pharmacist is a she.

[Warren DeMontague]

75. Fair enough.

She needs to find another line of work.

[Confusious]

82. yep.

On Edit: Find work in something other then a medical field.

[Sirveri]

15. I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.
I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.
I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.
I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.
I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given to me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.
I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.
I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.
I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.
If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

- The Hippocratic Oath

[Violet_Crumble]

16. Those lunatics and the chemist they work at need to be named and shamed...

And people should boycott the pharmacy until the anti-choice zealot either starts treating women with respect and dispensing their prescriptions, or the pharmacy gets rid of them....

[CLANG]

40. And definitely give them a drug test!

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ohio Joe]

18. Granted, it says Walgreens took some unknown type of action but...

I felt the need to ;et them know I disapproved of this clowns actions and would not be a customer if this was going to be even possible. They even have a complaint form just for pharmacy related issues... sheesh, I let them know that did not bode well either. It's just a click away, let them know.

http://www.walgreens.com/marketing/contactus/forms.jsp?h1=Customer service &h2=Store service&h3=Pharmacy staff&h4=consumer

[RedArmy300]

19. Isn't this the kind of stuff doctors lose their licenses over?

I mean seriously when you deny someone medication that should be ground for immediate termination of that staff member UNLESS the person has a history of drug addiction. It's obvious the person trying to get these medications was not an addict so the women has every right to sue her OR she should be fired immediately, at least, I know this is the land of freedom and all but I really feel people should cram their religion when it comes to other people's lives.

[11 Bravo]

27. Welcome to DU!

[kestrel91316]

36. The drug involved isn't a controlled substance - no psychoactive

effects, no addictive potential - so that is irrelevant. Someone with a history of drug addiction has the same right to use it if prescribed for bleeding as anyone else. Sort of like antibiotics for an infection.

[renate]

52. welcome to DU!

:hi:

[SoCalDem]

21. This sort of thing can (and should) be handled with a post-op packet

given to the patient after the procedure. The packet could include any meds that "might" be necessary, along with emergency phone numbers of a nurse practitioner/doctor.

That would eliminate the need for the post-op patient to schlep down to the neighborhood pharmacy to buy meds that might be refused by some religious zealot.

[mopinko]

29. it was given to me with my home births.

little envelope with a couple pills and instruction on how to tell you needed to take them.

[SoCalDem]

31. When our dog gave birth, the vet gave me a syringe with a pre-measured

dose, in case she had an emergency.. Of course we were supposed to bring her in for a check up after she had the puppies (which we did), but he wanted me to be prepared in case she had a problem.

This is not rocket science.. I suspect that somewhere along the line, planned parenthood may be looking for a lawsuit that they can engage in, regarding pharmaceutical refusals..

[liberation]

71. There is a reason why pharmacists (and other medical professionals) are board certified

the board for her state should get a complain and review this pharmacists license accordingly.

[May Hamm]

80. I don't think that is realistic.

Most women who've had a baby, a miscarriage or an abortion do not require this. And most who are under stress like this really should have their condition monitored by a professional so they do not panic and take something that is not needed. It's real easy to believe that they wouldn't have been given it if it weren't most likely they would need to take it.

[ck4829]

23. Isn't the pharmacist required to refer to someone who would fill the prescription too?

So many things are wrong with what this person did it's astounding.

[Zephie]

24. I lived in Nampa!

It is backwards as all get out, and unless you drive into Boise the only interesting thing to do is tip cows. I'm not surprised at all by the refusal, more surprised that they put in a planned parenthood in Nampa finally.

[sarcasmo]

30. That pharmacist should be fired.

[Little Star]

33. There is a war on women in this country! Bastids! n/t k&r

[JBoy]

34. Sounds like a one-man death panel to me.

[Confusious]

63. One woman

The pharmacist is a she.

[sweetapogee]

37. Best thread ever!!!

Wow, I just realized this, I had two pharmacies this week refuse to fill my prescription for a post op blood thinner. One was a mom and pop outfit, the other a big chain store!!!
I actually didn't think much of it until reading this thread and then the LIGHT BULB went "CLICK"!!!
Thank you DU! Best thread ever!

take care everyone :)

[Lucian]

38. I think it's time to get ride of those stupid fucking conscience protections.

If a pharmacist doesn't want to do any part of his/her job, then he/she shouldn't be a fucking pharmacist. When I go to the pharmacy with a legitimate prescription, I expect to get what I need. If the pharmacist doesn't want to supply what I need because of their stupid goddamn conscience, then they should get another job. If they want a job where they can sleep at night, be a fucking custodian. Keep your goddamn religion out of my medication.

[Confusious]

64. I always wonder if someday a pharmacist

won't give me my anti-depression medication because god meant for me to be like that.

[Lucian]

68. Exactly.

Where do they get to draw the line?

[emmadoggy]

88. Totally agree! nt

[XanaDUer]

39. I think the pharma is a woman

too. Scary!

[CLANG]

43. Planned Parenthood Complaint to Idaho Board of Pharmacy

http://tinyurl.com/4n6arfb

[renegade000]

44. Someone should make a website

That keeps track of all these idiot pharmacists that hassle people. People should know ahead of time where not to take their business.

[BrklynLiberal]

45. I hope he gets his ass sued off. Wonder if he has compunctions about Viagra?

piece of shit.

[tammywammy]

51. Her. The pharmacist is a woman. n/t

[BrklynLiberal]

76. She. Her. A misogynistic woman. How pathetic.

[femrap]

47. women hating

other women....how lovely. Can't kick her husband/boyfriend around so she'll pick on other women. Fucking fascist. Where do these people get their educations? ORU?

[proud2BlibKansan]

54. Then get a different job

Or fire his ass. For the rest of us working stiffs, if we refuse to do our job, we lose our job. Why are pharmacists any different?

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

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

[Solly Mack]

58. K&R

fuckers

[felix_numinous]

60. Separation of church and everything else.

Religious power has to be isolated from all other seats of power, political, education, military and corporate.

[Confusious]

67. These people should find other work

If helping people get better violates their "conscience"

[MadMaddie]

69. These are same people who claim they don't want big

government telling them what to do. Yet, they have no issue telling women what to do with their lives and bodies.

Anyone want to bet that the pharmacist has absolutely no problem dispensing Viagra? This is how these twisted people roll.

[liberation]

70. Report her ass to the State's Pharma Board.

Nothing can put a pharmacist in a pickle more than having his or her license reviewed. In this case the review is granted, since the pharmacist is obviously rationing care following his own beliefs and not what it is established as procedure by the pharmacy board.

I never understood why these religious freaks decide to go into these lines of work.

[lolly]

102. I'm guessing this is a feature, not a bug

IOW--I would not be surprised to find out that fundy colleges are setting up pharm schools and recruiting people to do just this.

If you think this is a little tin-foil-hattish, think about the fundy law schools that have been cranking out people to work in the courts to overturn church/state separation laws.

[LittleGirl]

72. Practing medicine without a license?

Isn't it?

[Paka]

74. My brother is a pharmacist.

You don't fill the obviously fake prescriptions. You call the doctor if you see a glaring problem such as drug interaction when the doctor doesn't carefully read his own patient records. All other prescriptions require no comment. You simply start counting.

[RainDog]

77. these pharmacists who think they may impose their beliefs on others should be fired

they have no place in our society - they are violating the relationship between doctor and patient.

I'm glad to know there are (and I know there are many) pharmacists out there who are not idiotic ideologues.

those that are - I hope they find their licenses stripped.

[May Hamm]

78. Thank God for Christians with a conscience!

Better a new mother with complications bleed to death than risking a whore who had an abortion get away with it.

I am so sick of religion! And gods.

[Warren DeMontague]

79. I look at it sort of like Las Vegas.

What happens inside your head- your imaginary sky-friends and their endless lists of rules about things like birth control- STAYS inside your head.

[May Hamm]

81. I just don't get it

How can anyone use their god as an excuse for letting a woman bleed to death?

I know - these are the same people who believe the ill and injured with no insurance should be dragged out of the emergency room to die in the street rather than risk anyone getting "free" health care.

[Warren DeMontague]

84. I'd imagine the mind snaps right shut when they see "Planned Parenthood" on the scrip.

These 'conscience clause' laws are a terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE idea.

Edit: BTW, in case no one's said so yet, Welcome to DU! :hi:

[lolly]

104. Echoes of Schiavo here too

If you read the article at the link, they offer a summary of the "conscience clause" law.

One of the situations listed is end-of-life care.

The only thing I can think of that would make a pharmacist look worse than refusing to fill this woman's prescription would be refusing to fill a script for pain relief for an end-stage cancer victim. But apparently, they can do that too!

[Chakaconcarne]

85. This pharmacist WAS within her right to refuse filling this RX

So the replies to my first post weren't terribly civil, but I'll attempt once more to get my point across. In today's climate I can understand the paranoia toward first time posters and trolls, but I can assure you I most certainly am on the side of everyone here.

Pharmacists serve as care providers and they’re the last check in patient care thru delivery of medications. They get incorrect prescriptions, incorrect doses for indications, they get prescriptions written by old school providers for meds that have been found through recent trials to have risk, etc. Providers have terrible hand writing. They scribble and often it’s easy to confuse one medication for another. (though that's changing with E-prescriptions, but there can still be errors.) Docs aren't always the one's who write the Rx's, often a MA or PA will write and the doctor will sign off. Whether that's legal is a different story, but it happens and you can see where errors can occur. If a pharmacist has a question about an RX, they will call the provider for clarification. The indication for the medication prescribed can be discussed between providers. That is within HIPAA. Look it up. Most often providers will share diagnostic information with other care providers without a second thought, specially if they think it will benefit the patient. As well, physicians can be so egotistical, they relish any challenge to their therapy judgement and to justify treatment plans, they have discuss indication. Expect to see patient care in the future handled by several providers as a team oriented approach as electronic records become more available, standardized and shared. As well, pharmacists are just now beginning to get patient lab values with Rx's. It simply gives the opportunity for another trained pair of eyes to catch any gaps in therapy.

I am just going by the article.. But since the provider refused to give ANY information to the pharmacist, then the pharmacist with any question they may have doesn’t have to fill it and they are within legal right to do so. They are just covering themselves. If they fill a prescription and there is an event, that pharmacist's license is on the line and can be sued. Of course all of you know that. The pharmacist can say they think the dose is incorrect, or if the patient has other indications, the pharmacist can say there is a conflict or drug interaction. Patients will go to multiple pharmacies for their Rx’s, not every pharmacist has a complete med list for a patient. IF the patient is taking other meds from another pharmacy, how are they to check for interactions? It’s often best to contact the patients provider to get this information. Methergine is rarely prescribed; in fact I have never seen it on a pharmacy shelf (just my experience). As far as referring, that is a grey area.. Many pharmacists will tell the patient they won’t fill for these reasons and tell them to take it somewhere else. ( I have seen this done many times, I'm a 4th year pharmacy student.) If that pharmacist made a poor decision, then the patient doesn’t have to give them their business. By the way, it's ridiculous to say (as some have said here) that the pharmacist is denying care to a woman that is bleeding to death.. That's pretty dramatic don't you think? This woman was stabilized or she would have still been in the hospital.

As a progressive, I am against and angered by pharmacists who don’t fill Rx’s for patients for plan B. The point I was trying to make, is that this pharmacist is within their legal right to refuse filling and they can defend themselves to the state board and their employer based on what I’ve mentioned. The provider blew it. Had she not been so withholding of information, the dose was correct, etc. and the pharmacist refused then there MAY have been an issue. Pharmacists can legally refuse to fill if they aren't comfortable and this IS NOT plan b so I don't believe conscience clause works here. The laws may be different for this state, but to the best of my knowledge and what I have seen practiced in Oregon, this is the case.

So, please a little respect here. I would like to hold DU members here to a higher regard than our counterpart right wing nut case. Don't attack or belittle me for having a differing perspective and for being a first time poster. If you want to have a discussion, let's have it.

[May Hamm]

86. I don't know...

I read over a dozen articles about this since I first came to this discussion. The articles were not 'cut and paste' but written by hand by different people who looked into this and reported what they learned.

Each article stated the pharmacist asked and was specifically interested in only one thing: if the drug had anything to do with an abortion. This is not a question to discover dosage or drug interactions. The pharmacist didn't even pretend she had any other reason for asking.

Uterine bleeding was the diagnosis and methergine was the prescribed medication. It is not a proper use of the conscious clause to deny in this case.

The Idaho Board of Pharmacy is expected to rule next week. We'll see then. It IS Idaho, after all.

My guess: There will be no discipline. There will be a suggestion, perhaps even an order, for refresher training. And the Idaho legislature will amend the conscious clause to include this in the future. Like I said - it is Idaho, after all.

[xchrom]

91. read more closely -- you're responding to something that isn't in the article.

she asked if the patient had an abortion or if the drug was for post abortion care.

[Cerridwen]

87. Using the 'letter of the law' to destroy the 'spirit of the law'. Nice.

Goodnight.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

101. There is no spirit of the law.

Law should be interpreted solely based on what it says. That may seem harsh, but what the "spirit of the law" is is purely a matter of personal interpretation, whereas the letter of the law is something I can look up in a book.

I can be confident I'm not breaking the letter of the law; I can't be sure to avoid breaking a "spirit" of it because I can't be sure what a judge will think that is.

If we go by the spirit of the law, I risk being jailed even though I haven't violated the letter of the law, or having someone who commits a crime against me go free, just because the judge decides that the spirit of it is something other than what it says.



Now, obviously, the above is a slight oversimplification - there is inevitably some room where interpretation is needed no matter how precisely-phrased the law is. But, in general, there should be as little ambiguity in law as possible, and talking about "the spirit of the law" leads to more.

[Mariana]

89. That is NOT what the article said.

It does not say that the nurse practitioner refused to give ANY information to the pharmacist. It says that the nurse refused to say whether the prescription was for post-abortion care. Nothing in the article indicates that there were any other questions that were not answered.

If you want to have a discussion, and be treated with respect, why don't you try being honest, rather than misrepresenting the contents of the post you're answering?

[lolly]

103. Also--refused to give a referral

I understand that the law requires "conscience clause" pharmacists to give the Rx to another pharmacist. This one refused.

It sounds as if the Rx was called in over the phone, not written out--if so, the issue of poor handwriting is moot.

[Le Taz Hot]

94. Oh, fer crissake!

Go. Read H.I.P.A.A. Educate yourself.

"I would like to hold DU members here to a higher regard than 'our'(?) counterpart . . . " And DU in turn would like to hold YOU to a higher regard . . . That respect thing? Goes both ways.

[Le Taz Hot]

92. And the pharmacist was a woman.

Great! A new generation of Phyllis Schlaflys. Just what we needed.

[Art_from_Ark]

93. If the doctor prescribes it, and the patient needs it

then fill the freakin' prescription!

End of story.

[Chakaconcarne]

98. i did read the article, but....

Generally that is how its done. 99% of the time the pharmacist will fill the rx after talking to the doc. But unfortunately in this case the pharmacist had an out and she knew it. It's sickening but unfortunately I doubt much will happen to her. Had the provider gave the patient info to the pharmacist AND the patient had an adverse event AND the pharmacist did not refer, then she would likely face some serious board scrutiny and disciplinary action.

[haele]

106. What is the difference between uterine bleeding from an abortion or a birth?

The article indicated that the only issue stopping the pharmacist was her interest in if it were for a possible post-abortion issue. My understanding, with my limited medical training (a couple Corpsman courses and Red Cross basic EMT training) and experience helping birth a baby in an emergency situation is that internal bleeding is internal bleeding, be it from surgery, childbirth, or complications from an injury or syndrome - like a miscarriage, cancer, or ulceration.
Likewise Uterine bleeding is treated the same no matter what the cause.

My understanding of HIPPA, the other issue here, is that there was no need for a pharmacist to pry further into the personal situation of the patient than medically required; especially in a potentially small community where a particularly sanctimonious person could be in a position to be spreading gossip about another. And again, uterine bleeding is treated the same, be it from childbirth, removal of uterine cysts, a hysterectomy, cancer, or an abortion.
The pharmacist had no right to ask the Nurse Practitioner who called that particular prescription "if this was for post-abortion treatment", especially with a patient's name on it. This wasn't a pain killer, or an anti-biotic, or a matter of adverse reaction in the patient's condition.

Haele

[Donald Ian Rankin]

100. Blame the state, not the pharmacist.

There is no moral obligation on private citizens to supply anti-bleeding drugs to people who need them.

The state, however, *does* have a moral obligation to supply medication to people who need it.

If America had a decent health-care system them people who wanted to run pharmacies that wouldn't treat people who've had abortions could do so to their heart's content, without harming anyone.

The reason there is a problem is that because the state is not fulfilling its obligations, people who need health care are dependent on private individuals to choose to supply it, and if they choose not to then they can't get it.