Revisiting the pharmacist/birth control script refusal debate (sort of)

[DisDuck]

Charade.. Again I agree with your comments. The problem is between employee/employer. However, I try to be a realist while still maintaining my libertarian beliefs. In most areas there are alternative pharmacists or pharmacys. However, what do you in the small towns across the US which is where this scenerio is really the issue. If I as the customer have no alternatives then what do I do? I don't want government sticking its nose in this issue at all but there is the 'but'. Maybe the answer is to allow doctors to order the prescription over the phone/internet and have the patient get it directly. Cut out the pharmacy. In the meantime, however, I think that the patient's rights to receive appropriate medication overrides the pharmacy as they are not making the judgement to take it. Think of the pharmacy as the messenger not the message. Do you shoot the messenger because you don't like the message.

 

[CJMickeyMouse]

Most of my job at the time entailed that grey world. Mom & Pop drugstores were closing. (They really don't exist anymore.)

Actually they do exist, and many of them are thriving. How? By not accepting the insurance cards that pay nothing but ingredient cost. Chains accept all insurance - and therefore charge cash paying customers more.

There is definitely a way to have your own store, and run it with your own moral/ethical/religious/businesslike way. The problem is that inventory is so pricy that startup costs are outrageous. The Mom and Pops that have survived are the ones who have been around for years.

I do not, however, know any that refuse to fill prescriptions for BC pills. Other meds, yes, but not that particular one.

 

[Charade]

This was put on a no debate thread for a reason. Start another thread if you want to debate abortion.

I'm not specifically debating abortion but only wanted to point out that you seem to believe that if someone is against BC they are somehow being hypocritical if they dispense Viagra to a single man and it's not solely controlling another human beings actions. That person clearly has other choices to get what they want.

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why it's ok for some doctors to refuse to perform abortions (or other elective procedures like cosmetic surgery) while pharmacists should just shut up and dispense all drugs.

 

[AllyandJack]

Yeah, what if the guy at the deli is Muslim and does not think you should be eating ham products. Are we infringing on his religious beliefs to make him serve a ham sandwich?

What if your waiter/waitress at a steakhouse is a vegan and refuses to serve your steak?

Should we leave and go somewhere else to eat because we don't want to infringe on his/her beliefs?

Where is the responsibility of the person to consider their choices before making the rest of us a part of their belief system?

 

[CJMickeyMouse]

In most areas there are alternative pharmacists or pharmacys. However, what do you in the small towns across the US which is where this scenerio is really the issue. If I as the customer have no alternatives then what do I do?

Even in small towns there are many alternatives. We live in a VERY rural area - and there are still 10 pharmacies within 40 miles or so. The customer can always turn to mail order if driving is an issue. Many pharmacies in our area will mail out for free.

 

[Charade]

Rather disingenuous of you to pull something from a no debate thread and throw it into another one just to start an abortion debate. Have you started a separate thread yet?

I don't think so.

And no, I haven't started an new thread because my point was not to debate abortion specifically.

 

[AllyandJack]

I'm not specifically debating abortion but only wanted to point out that you seem to believe that if someone is against BC they are somehow being hypocritical if they dispense Viagra to a single man and it's not solely controlling another human beings actions. That person clearly has other choices to get what they want.

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why it's ok for some doctors to refuse to perform abortions (or other elective procedures like cosmetic surgery) while pharmacists should just shut up and dispense all drugs.

My doctor is a devout Catholic and will not perform abortions except in the case of saving the mother's life. However, he has another doctor in his practice that performs them with no inconvenience to the patient. He is morally opposed to it and will not do it, but he doesn't judge your choice. He just has you set up an appointment with his partner. Same office, same everything.

If the pharmacist was one of many in the store and wouldn't fill it and had someone else do it...that's fine, too.

 

[Charade]

What if your waiter/waitress at a steakhouse is a vegan and refuses to serve your steak?

Should we leave and go somewhere else to eat because we don't want to infringe on his/her beliefs?

Where is the responsibility of the person to consider their choices before making the rest of us a part of their belief system?

Another extreme example.. No vegan would work in a steak house unless prehaps they were desperate for a job.


But you are asking them to compromise their beliefs while you are free to express yours somewhere else.

 

[GoodFairies]

I find this interesting...are you saying that someone should be able to refuse to do their job based on their ethical beliefs, so long as those ethical beliefs aren't grounded in religious faith?

Not at all. I was merely pointing out that ethical beliefs are somewhat harder to "control" than religious beliefs. I thought I clarified that in my next statement when I said that surely no ob/gyn ever thought they were going to be delivering babies and nothing else. But then I also said that it's not really right to compare doctors and pharmacists in this situation. The butcher or vegan are much better analogies.
It seems ridiculous to practice in a field where you have an moral (whether it be religious or not) issue with something that numerous women are practicing, and where do you draw the line?

 

[Crankyshank]

You can't compare a Dr refusing to do a procedure with a pharmacist refusing to fill a prescription. If a Dr refuses to do an abortion then they will refer them to someone else. They're not saying "sorry you can't have this done by anybody". The pharmacist in the OP held on to the prescription and refused to let the patient have it back so she could get it filled elsewhere!

 

[Maleficent13]

But you are asking them to compromise their beliefs while you are free to express yours somewhere else.

No; what we are asking is that a vegan who knows they will not serve steak products not take a job as a server in a steak house.

 

[AllyandJack]

But you are asking them to compromise their beliefs while you are free to express yours somewhere else.

I'm not asking them to compromise anything....I'm asking them to make a responsible decision about their lives. If you're opposed to eating meat, don't work in a steakhouse.

I show up at a steakhouse to eat a steak, I expect that I'll get steak. Why should I drive to ANOTHER steakhouse because someone took a job that conflicted with their personal beliefs? It's not my responsibility to assist them in their religion. If they can't make proper life decisions, it's not my problem.

 

[Crankyshank]

Another extreme example.. No vegan would work in a steak house unless prehaps they were desperate for a job.


But you are asking them to compromise their beliefs while you are free to express yours somewhere else.

And why would a pharmacist work in a place where he would be asked MANY times a day EVERY day to fill a prescription he is morally opposed to unless he was desperate for a job in his field?

 

[6_Time_Momma]

[
To be honest, I would have a problem (if I were a pharmacist) filling BCP and morning after pills due to the aborificant properties. However, it seems wrong to me to have someone refuse to fill and emphysema med or a Ritalin prescription. So, I guess in a sense I am judging my own moral values to be more important than another pharmacist who refuses to fill Ritalin, and that isn't really right of me.


Kristy, there are reasons for taking BCPs OTHER than to prevent pregnancy. Ok, so this pharmacist's moral objections are now creating privacy problems, which is now a legal problem. My reasons for being on BCPs are purely medical (unfortunately...) but that, legally, is only between my doctor and me. I should not, legally, ethically or morally, have to divulge my medical reasons (or my sex life or lack thereof) to a pharmacist in order to receive a prescription that is doing one thing -- preventing me from having major surgery. So, not only are you judging your own moral values to be higher than others, you're making incorrect assumptions about people who use various drugs, too. Not everyone that takes an anti-viral drug has the g-form of herpes. Not everyone that needs AIDS drugs contracted AIDS through outside-of-marriage-sex. And the reality is that pharmacists KNOW this.

Actually I am not making any assumptions as to what someone would be on BCP for. Regardless of what it is for, they still have abortificant properties whether for birth control or hormonal needs.

And, I am very well aware of what forms of herpes exist, how people contract AIDS, etc.

 

[Maleficent13]

And why would a pharmacist work in a place where he would be asked MANY times a day EVERY day to fill a prescription he is morally opposed to unless he was desperate for a job in his field?

Speaking from personal experience, I can say that there is no way a pharmacist would be desperate for a job in his field. Also speaking from personal experience, there are many jobs pharmacists can take that involve absolutely nothing to do with contraception...infusion pharmacy, nursing home pharmacy, etc. And I know these companies are desperate to hire pharmacists.

 

[chobie]

I'm not specifically debating abortion but only wanted to point out that you seem to believe that if someone is against BC they are somehow being hypocritical if they dispense Viagra to a single man and it's not solely controlling another human beings actions. That person clearly has other choices to get what they want.

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why it's ok for some doctors to refuse to perform abortions (or other elective procedures like cosmetic surgery) while pharmacists should just shut up and dispense all drugs.

Well then you should have just stated that opinion on the thread that statement was posted on.

 

[BuckNaked]

The pharmacist in the OP held on the the prescription and refused to let the patient have it back so she could get it filled elsewhere!

And I agree that this is totally unacceptable.

 

[Crankyshank]

Speaking from personal experience, I can say that there is no way a pharmacist would be desperate for a job in his field. Also speaking from personal experience, there are many jobs pharmacists can take that involve absolutely nothing to do with contraception...infusion pharmacy, nursing home pharmacy, etc. And I know these companies are desperate to hire pharmacists.

Exactly my point.

 

[DisDuck]

This is the question that has been lost in this debate so I am reposting it (from puffy2) and comments.

"I read a case about this where the pharmacist not only refused to fill the perscription for the woman HE KEPT HER PERSCRIPTION SO SHE COULDN'T GO ELSEWHERE. I'd sue him and the company he worked for for stealing."


What seems to be happening is that some pharmacists who for religious reasons will not fill b/c are also refusing to give back prescription. In this way preventing that person from doing what they believe is moral, ie. imposing one belief system on another thru 'withholding'.

 

[Teejay32]

Actually they do exist, and many of them are thriving. How? By not accepting the insurance cards that pay nothing but ingredient cost. Chains accept all insurance - and therefore charge cash paying customers more.

There is definitely a way to have your own store, and run it with your own moral/ethical/religious/businesslike way. The problem is that inventory is so pricy that startup costs are outrageous. The Mom and Pops that have survived are the ones who have been around for years.

I'll qualify that then. All of the sole proprietor pharmacies in the city I worked and lived in closed in the 80s and 90s, no matter how long they'd been there. All of them. There just aren't any. Some just retired, some of those people went to work for the big chains and I worked with a few. I know of one here in Lynn (pop. 90,000+) and one left in my hometown (pop. 55,000+). Reasons: high cost of inventory, low rate of reimbursement.

There's no shortage of pharmacies here either, but I know the difference in services provided and I consider it a loss.