My friends at Planned Parenthood emailed me today about the growing trend of pharmacists (this time, specifically at Target) refusing to fill prescriptions based on their moral beliefs. Now, we ALL know that “moral beliefs” translates to “religious beliefs”. I just wish PP would say it!What we have is a group of people who in reality provide a necessary public service refusing to do so under some circumstances. They want a say on your treatment. Your medication WAS a decision between you and your doctor, but now it’s a choice with the pharmacist too. And the pharmacists want VETO power. What if he also objects to certain sleeping pills, pain pills, etc? Certainly, someone somewhere can make a good argument why Jesus doesn’t want you to obtain other legal medicines as well!Yes, the pharmacist has rights, but these rights to not extend to other people. His religious rights do not trump yours, they end where yours begin! Pharmacists fill prescriptions — they don’t overrule doctors. I hope Target takes a stand as a pharmacy for ALL people, not just the Christians.
r4d
Hey! Runts are good! ’specially the banana ones.
tomwright:
Now, exactly what do you mean by “false or spurious claims?”
If I am a minority and I have no reason other than the mere refusal of the Pharmacist to fill a legal ’script, then the State Board and the DEA/FDA have their investigatory duties and I have my rights to report the FACTS. If I?m Black, female, over 40, a Muslim ? whatever ? I have the right to report those facts along with the actions of the Pharmacist. If her/she turns out to be a member of the KKK ? damn shame. Let the professional boards examine the motives.
When bias, religious or other, taints a person with a professional license – that license is properly subject to discipline.
Your point is made to chill reporting. My point is to give the broadest area of reportage possible so that any act may be fully investigated. It would be a shame if the Neo-NAZI Pharmacist was asked about his refusal to fill a ?script for Robert Reich on the basis of his (the Pharmacist?s) religious belief only to have that NAZI truthfully answer, ?No.? when a broader inquiry would reveal the real bias behind their actions.
By the way, the free market in the United States does not permit bias on the basis of race, gender national origin, religious belief or color as legal grounds to deny entry to a market.
You can’t redline property on the basis of the color or race of the prospective purchaser and you can’t apply impermissible religious bias to the profession of dispensing pharmaceuticals.
Your professional license is forfeit if you insist on breaking the law.
Do I make my point any clearer?
Oh, yes, I am FOR much more regulation of this industry. Obviously it needs it. I find that the more regulation that an industry has the safer we tend to become. Try reading a 99 year old work by Upton Sinclair, The Jungle. http://www.capitalcentury.com/1906.html
Whatsa matta? I had to edit this post and replace a certain professional term with “druggists” and “drug stores” because the proper term was forbidden.
OK try it now! Please let me know if anyone has any problems from now (Thursday at 9pm EST) on.
It’s just a few keywords. Now you will know what the words are.
I’ve read a lot of the posts in this thread and have a couple comments.
I do not believe pharmacists should be making moral decisions but that they should always have “veto power” on medical grounds.
It is perfectly acceptable, for example, for a pharmacist to disallow a patient to purchase drugs prescribed to them that have serious drug interactions when taken together. In fact, I believe it to be medically irresponsible for a pharmacist to do otherwise.
I also believe it to be medically irresponsible for a pharmacist to deny access to drugs for reasons of personal bias because it can put a patient at risk to their health and well-being.
I wonder, do pharmacists respect the hippocratic oath, as doctors do? If so, how can they honestly refuse someone birth control whom has been prescribed it to treat ovarian cysts or to help women regulate their menstrual cycle?
One of the good points raised in the Washington Post article (linked to above) was:
The oath of the pharmacist is called the Oath of Maimonides.. Check it out on Google.
OK, Let’s ALL be honest here. Religonist are people who think they are controlling they’re fate by making sure sure they go to “heaven”. The bad side of that is, that, they also think they should ALSO control wheather or not EVERYONE else also gets to they’re “heaven”. One they’ve crossed THAT line, they’re violating OTHER peoples rights!! It doesn’t matter what the situation is. No matter WHAT right they’re trying to exrocise from they’re perpective. YOUR rights end where MY rights begin! If you have a problem with MY rights, that’s YOUR problem, NOT mine. Unlike the religiofacsist, I’ll respect your right to to TELL me that you don’t agree with me. But don’t be pissed when I tell you that I don’t care what your religon is or what it says about me or my life. Because it is MY LIFE. Not yours or your gods.
Well here’s some good news, for once. Almost makes me want to respect Walmart. Hey, I said almost!
article
Sorry, that didn’t work for some reason. Not sure how to do that!
http://www.wxow.com/news/publish/articles/article_3079.shtml
Don’t respect Walmart too quickly.
They refuse to stock the Plan B pill for women. While they pretend that there is not enough demand to keep it in stock, I think we all know the real reason.
I have read that Eckerd Drugs has fired some of it’s pharmacists for refusing to fill prescriptions.
Alan
http://www.meetanatheist.com
dirty talk during sex
dirty talk during sex