Woman was denied morning-after pill because of pharmacists' beliefs: Lawsuit

No. Insulin. Cancer medication. Take your pick of life-saving prescriptions.

If you are okay with a pharmacist refusing service for religious reasons, that has to apply generally.

So you are ok with any pharmacist refusing to fill any prescription for any patient, on religious grounds?

 

The law should be changed.

 

Because his job is to fill MDs prescriptions and he's unwilling to do that. A pharmacist in a more remote community could impact treatment outcomes by refusing to provide certain drugs.

 

If they're prescribed by a physician.

If you're a restaurant...

 

It says doctors can refuse to perform abortions. A few states are debating whether or not to allow pharmacists to opt out of providing emergency contraceptives.

 

The woman may not have been using contraceptives because she wasn't planning to have sex.

 

We don't know, do we?

 

Amazon Prime Member and shop Walmart if the price is right.

You impeached your own case. The morning after pill should be taken within 72 hours and is more effective the sooner it's taken.

 

I see you don't know what you're talking about.

 

The pharmacist should be obliged to provide prescription drugs.

 

A "hippie" with a security clearance working for Northrop Corporation.

Yeah, you're a genius.

 

It doesnt have to apply generally. Problem solved. She should of ordered it off amazon from the privacy of her own home. There is a reason doctors cant refuse service pharmacists arent saving peoples lives.

 

You can practice your religion, but if you cannot practice your job, then you are not entitled to maintain your position at said job. It's that simple

He should be free to practice his religion without any legal consequences, however if he is failing to do his job, then there should be nothing to guarantee that he does not lose his job. It's kind of like if one were to apply for a job as a bartender and then refuse to sell drinks. It doesn't really matter what their religious beliefs are, if they can't perform at their job, then they have no entitlement to remain at said job. This is especially true for licensed practices

 

The pharmacist wasn't practicing nor has to practice any longer. That's what the school was before becoming a pharmacist. Also just by refusal of service doesnt mean the pharmacist wasn't doing the job properly. Maybe cvs would stand up for the right to refuse service. A pharmacist isnt required by law to give out plan b.

 

He did. We don't all practice for the meat grinder.

Sorry if that stings.

 

Actually, as a licensed pharmacist, there are legal requirements for a pharmacist to provide a proscription if all conditions are met by the patient and the pharmacy. If one cannot meet the standards of their licensed practice, they are subject to lose their license.

 

It's completely legal in 4 states legislation has been proposed in 9 states and in all states that I can find but 3 the worst that happens is a slap on the wrist. Also the pharmacist is an adult and should understand that actions have consequences. If they are okay with losing their job so be it. Take the pharmacist to court or go on amazon and get 1 day free shipping whatever floats your boat.

 

That's not how proscribed purchases work, prescriptions for a controlled substance may only be issued by individuals with the proper medical license, if one wishes to get their proscribed medication filled by the pharmacy, they need to contact their doctor and have them request to have the proscription filled by the pharmacy. That is why working as a pharmacist is also a licensed practice, there are medical requirements that need to be met in order for one to maintain their license as a pharmacist. Assuming the pharmacy had already accepted the doctor's order(which they most likely did considering the interaction in the article was with the patient and not the doctor. Also, the article states that the proscription had already been called in), they have a legal obligation to provide said medication when all standards are met by the patient and the pharmacy.

If it is the company's policy to deny said proscription, then they should have refused the order back when the proscription was called in. Otherwise, they are not meeting the legal medical standards of their licensed practice, and could potentially lose their license.

 

Not legal obligation except in 3 states. Minnesota not being one.

 

That may be true for certain professions, however controlled substances are in part regulated at the federal level through both the FDA and DEA, and as such, licensed professions related to said controlled substances are held to the same legal standards of these federal agencies. All pharmacies in the US must be registered with the DEA

 

Right, but if they are locked up out of the reach of the customer to grab one and slap it down at the counter, and she had to rely on the pharmacist to unlock the cabinet or grab it from behind the counter, then she couldn't purchase it there. Either way, the pharmacist took a job he simply was not able to perform. If you have religious objections to something you have to do in the course of a job, that job isn't for you. That person is expecting respect for their beliefs to trump the absolutely deserved expectation that a person working at a place that sells medicine will sell that medicine to the customers that are allowed to buy it. It's no different than if you worked as a doorman and you don't open the door for anybody. Or any other of the countless situations where a person takes a job and then refuses to do some or all of it.

 

I'm not talking about controlled substances I'm referencing EC as related to the thread.

 

He had the job before 1999 when the morning after pill became legal and it's in Minnesota law for him to be a conscience objector

 

Wow I am impressed, yet I know what your doing.

 

Maybe you should learn what a morning after pill is before commenting AND WHEN it is used........

There was no "child", no "fetus" .....the woman was NOT pregnant.


LOLOLOL, the attack of the "unknowing" ...and the "I don't want to know the facts" faction...







LOL..It's called the "morning AFTER " pill ...and I bet some here are scratching their heads wondering, "After what? "