• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Does a pharmacist have the right?

Motokid

Motokid

New Member
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4425603.stm

What would you do if a pharmacist started lecturing you about your morals and then refused to fill your prescription?

Besides taking your business some place else what can you do?

I'm having trouble understanding how a phamacist can make this kind of decision, and not get fired, unless he happens to own the business.

I would love to be standing near somebody like novella if ever a phamacist started in on her about her morals and lifestyle....man would that be an event. :eek:
 
I would say that if the pharmacist have a problem about filling out your prescription, then they work in the wrong area. I don't think someone who comes in with the prescription wants to have any sort of moral lecture.
How it can be legal to deny someone a drug that isn't against the law is beyond my understanding.
I think if someone did anything like that to me, they would find themselves being ridiculed by me. I hate when people try to force their beliefs down my throat and it's one of the few things that can make me angry.
 
This is not just happening in the USA, there have been incidents reported in England too. I think it is an absolute disgrace. I totally agree with hay - the pharmacist is there to dispense the drugs, that is his job, so that's what he should do. His beliefs should not come into it. It's like a vegetarian checkout operator refusing to put through meat! (though obviously the pharmacy thing could have much more serious consequences!)
 
It's an interesting case because it introduces the possibility that employers should potentially be allowed to interview prospective employees about their religious and politcial beliefs in order to screen for certain jobs. For instance, if the huge drugstore chains wanted to make certain that all prescriptions would be filled, they would have to interview pharmacists about this issue and that would affect their hiring decision. See how they feel when their rights are infringed.

Hmmm. I wonder why this hasn't come up before, in the context of narcotics abuse on prescription or birth control in general, both of which are disapproved of by the Church?

And, Moto, I'm not a loudmouth; I'm a writer. In person, I'm pretty softspoken and have an irrepressible impulse to please everyone, probably the opposite of my written personality.

But I believe in using the media to change the world. I have an opinion piece coming out in Thursday's paper, as a matter of fact.

If that happened to me, I would use the local press to make life very uncomfortable for that person, ask people to re-evaluate their decision to do business with such a person, and look for any other weaknesses in his situation that might come in handy.
 
Ahh yes. I've been hearing about this a lot lately since I am an Illinois resident.

What is insane is that pharmacists are refusing to fill them based on what the prescription *could* be used for, not necessarily its intended purpose. For example: one woman had a medication prescribed for post-miscarriage. The pharmacist (in Chicago) refused to fill it since it could be used to induce abortion.

Last I heard, the drugstore chains were letting their pharmacists say, "I do not feel comfortable filling this, come back at <time> when a different pharmacist will be here." To me, that's a real inconvenience.

I agree with Halo - it's their job to provide medication, not to determine if one should take it or not. Doctors and the individual should be responsible for making that decision.
 
Actually novella, I did not picture you causing a sceen that would possibly need to include the police. I had pictured you remaining in total control, but with all the skill and speed of any executioner, verbally castrating the guy (why do I assume most of these pharmacists are guys?) before he even knew what hit him. You walking out of the store taking your business elsewhere and the pharmacist finally figuring out after you've left the scene that his entire world had just been rocked with laser guided precision.

That's what I thought of.
 
this surprises and offends me for so many reasons. :mad: maybe i shouldn't be so surprised. my opinion is that they should shut up and do their damned jobs. if their religion affects their ability to perform their job then they need a new line of work. they have no right to override a doctor's or patient's decision. they have no idea of the patient's background and it's none of their business.

if these pharmacists insist on their rights then the stores/pharmacies they work at should have to display signage that indicates their pharmacist operates on a religious level and that women should not come in expecting their rights will be honoured.
 
Motokid said:
Actually novella, I did not picture you causing a sceen that would possibly need to include the police. I had pictured you remaining in total control, but with all the skill and speed of any executioner, verbally castrating the guy (why do I assume most of these pharmacists are guys?) before he even knew what hit him. You walking out of the store taking your business elsewhere and the pharmacist finally figuring out after you've left the scene that his entire world had just been rocked with laser guided precision.

That's what I thought of.
Click to expand...

I'll take that as a compliment! :)

In fact, not too far from the truth, except that I usually choose to do it in print.

I think the pharmacist in the news story was a guy. Funny enough, I was just in my car and I heard a related story that said the drug will probably prevent more than 700,000 actual abortions in the US every year.

It's kind of bewildering to me that the same conservative voters who complain about welfare rolls, federallly subsidized day care, and school taxes also object to providing this choice. :confused:
 
I wonder how far they would let this go, I mean if you came in to fill prescriptions for other things like aids or cancer meds, and the pharmacist jumps to the conclusion that you are immoral because you smoked and got cancer or you were promiscuous and got aids, could he then decide to refuse your prescription? It leaves to much personal interpretation up to the pharmacist, I believe if you want to go into medicine whether as a doctor, nurse or pharmacist you should be willing to treat everyone not just those who you feel are morally deserving.
 
How long before a catholic pharmacist refuses to supply contraceptives?

Its hard to believe that these people are using their profession to push their religious and moral views on the rest of the world.People should boycott them and use non judgemental pharmacists for their needs.See how long before they realise money pays the billls and not out dated values.
 
I think Jenem raised a valid point:

Jenem said:
if these pharmacists insist on their rights then the stores/pharmacies they work at should have to display signage that indicates their pharmacist operates on a religious level and that women should not come in expecting their rights will be honoured.
Click to expand...

however surely those who morally object to certain medications being prescribed should have questioned the importance of their beliefs before chosing that profession. The decision with whether or not particular medicines should be prescribed falls upon a doctor, they are made aware of the individuals circumstances and therefore a pharmacist should honour that especially as the morning after pill is not neccessarily merely a fall back for irresponsible people. (ie victims of abuse)
 
i think it is outrageous. as sar point out these prescriptions are given by a doctor who would know the history behind the prescription. if it happened to me i would probably go balistic, as i get furious when others impose their beliefs on me and tramp all over my rights.
 
This was news to me today when I saw it on Catherine Crier, but I was totally outraged. I've been on the pill for about 8 months now, and words cannot describe the feeling I would feel if I had a pharmacist deny me the right of my birth control. On Catherine Crier, there was a pro-life man on there who thought this was insane! I mean, if you don't sell birth control, the amount of abortions might go up, and then where does that get you?! Nowhere. I think that this is outrageous. They are selling it to other people, not themselves, probably not their family members. They should not be allowed to say "no, I won't sell that to you." And also on Catherine Crier they reported some places taking the prescription slip and refusing to return it to you. Things like this really makes me wonder what ever happened to the whole concept of freedom? I mean I thought that in the United States we had a certain amount of freedom, and our pharmacists refusing to sell us birth control is infringing on that right. And I hate to bring politics into this, and I don't want to offend anybody on here, but I'm terrified of what the Republicans in Congress and the White House will do when they get their hands on this.
 
Motokid said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4425603.stm

What would you do if a pharmacist started lecturing you about your morals and then refused to fill your prescription?

Besides taking your business some place else what can you do?
Click to expand...

I'm really not a litigious person, but this dude would be hearing from my lawyer. I don't even know if I'd have a legal foot to stand on, but making his life hell would certainly be worth it.
 
What about complaining to Trading Standards? Surely a chemist that refuses to fill prescriptions would be warned, and then fined and closed down if necessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top