Anyone else boycotting Walgreens?

[SouthernDem4ever]

Seems they hired a bunch of religious morons.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/retail/2022/07/21/walgreens-pharmacy-birth-control-condoms/10110827002/

I will just go to CVS until they figure out WTF they are doing. I'll bet those same morons are selling cigarettes.

[Salviati]

1. CVS may be even more problematic.

Walgreens may be because of rogue employees, but CVS is giving pretty questionable instructions handed down from corporate:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216954965

[SouthernDem4ever]

5. Walgreens Corporate gave their employees permission to act like idiots too

Anyone that has religious issues should not be facing the public unless it's a church.

[hlthe2b]

16. Yes. CVS' is official policy as opposed to the random religious nut employee making the decision.

[Kaleva]

35. It's Walgreens policy to allow employees not to sell certain products

if doing so violates their religious beliefs.

[onecaliberal]

2. I quit Walgreens about 6 years ago. They're awful.

[hlthe2b]

15. They are incredibly expensive. Seems everything I see is at least 20% more expensive there.

[usedtobedemgurl]

3. Write them an email saying I quit them...

They do not care.never responded

[Novara]

20. Send a tweet with their official handle

I have done this when corporate assholes don't respond any other way. Social media gets their attention. Every time I've done this, someone responded to me privately almost immediately. Something specific will probably get their attention, like saying you had a horrible experience at a certain store and you refuse to go back. Their twitter handle is @Walgreens.

If you just write a general gripe about them they probably won't respond. But it's possible they are inundated with complaints. Checking twitter shows me a LOT of people are complaining.

[usedtobedemgurl]

39. Thank you!!! nt

[SouthernDem4ever]

4. I guess I'll try going to Costco

[SergeStorms]

10. At least Costco pays it's employees well...

and they seem to have a social conscience. Other than long lines to check-out sometimes, I've never heard anyone bad-mouth them.

[multigraincracker]

13. Try to find a small Independent drug store.

Two in my area and both are outstanding. Great service, friendly and go the extra mile to help you. One of those is a Compounding Drug store and they can make drugs other stores can’t get, including drugs for your pets.
I have one drug that the big store stopped carrying it andfound they can still get it. I asked why it was hard to get and the druggist told me there was too little profit in it for the big stores and they carry it as a service for the customers.

[Sky Jewels]

6. Yes. Going to Rite Aid.

I’m sure I’ll hear something bad about that chain too though.

[ratchiweenie]

38. It was years ago but I seem to remember that they allowed their employees to

refuse to sell birth control based on religious beliefs. Was a big bruhaha and they may have changed their policy.

[SheltieLover]

7. Have been for years. CVS as well.

[regnaD kciN]

8. I've been boycotting them for a couple of years...

...since the days of the mask mandate in our state, when I went into the local one and found an entire family going around without masks, and completely disregarding the distancing requirements (one literally walked up and stood right next to me in line). When I told the cashier about it, she informed me that they had decided not to enforce the mandate, so that it wouldn't "make our customers uncomfortable."

Haven't been back since.

[Polybius]

33. Was she the manager?

If there was someone higher up than her there, I'd report her.

[Kaleva]

36. Many businesses didn't enforce the mandate

[Laffy Kat]

9. I am now, which is very inconvenient, but I don't care.

That's where my I get my dog's Addison's disease medicine and I'm going to have to switch it now. It's very close to me and I have spent a lot of money there. No more.

[NJCher]

12. yeah, inconvenient for me, too

I get all my prescriptions via mail through them. I'm going to dump them now, though, and send this article to their company president stating why. I don't care if they care or not, they're going to know why they are losing my business.

[Laffy Kat]

23. Good idea.

I'll email them.

[NJCher]

28. yep, just went on the "to do" list

[dewsgirl]

11. CVS hasn't sold cigarettes in about 10 years.(at least in Florida )

[SouthernDem4ever]

24. I was talking about the employees at walgreens who won't sell birth control

but probably have no problem selling cigarettes.

[dewsgirl]

52. I'm sorry, I didn't mean that to sound catty or anything.

I personally can't stand CVS as a pharmacy, I think individual stores and staff make a huge difference, just like anywhere.

[SouthernDem4ever]

53. no problem was just making sure I was being clear

[dewsgirl]

55. ....

[hlthe2b]

14. CVS is OFFICIALLY telling ALL its pharmacists not to fill these prescriptions--worse than Walgreens

[Sympthsical]

25. What is the source on this?

I read they're having pharmacists in some relevant states confirm certain prescriptions are not being used for abortion purposes, because they're worried about running afoul of the law.

I have not heard anything about ALL pharmacists not filling prescriptions.

That would be a pretty radical thing if it were true.

[hlthe2b]

26. I am at work. You may search the threads as it has been posted here multiple times.

[Sympthsical]

30. No, I don't want Twitter sourcing

I have done a fairly thorough search, and my partner is a pharmacist. I just went upstairs and asked him, and he doesn't know what I'm referencing.

So, I think maybe some misinformation or mischaracterization is being spread about.

I do know about the calling of doctors to confirm purpose of the prescription. If the purpose is abortion related, they won't fill it.

But all pharmacists not filling something? That would be a massive, massive story.

[hlthe2b]

40. It was NOT twitter reporting and it took all of 2 secs to search DU to find the New Republic article

https://newrepublic.com/article/167087/roe-cvs-methotrexate-abortion-pills

No paywall
https://archive.ph/GqntZ

In the weeks since the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which allows states to make abortion illegal, there has been a raft of stories about patients with chronic illnesses being denied their prescriptions for methotrexate, a common autoimmune medication seen as the “gold standard” treatment for arthritis, lupus, Crohn’s, and other conditions. Uncertainty around what can legally be dispensed given the new abortion restrictions, especially in states with so-called “trigger laws,” has put doctors, pharmacists, and patients in the crosshairs of potential legal repercussions.

This is not about rogue individual pharmacists acting unilaterally, though. It turns out that the largest pharmacy chain in the country sent explicit instructions to its pharmacists informing them that new checks would be implemented to confirm the reason a doctor prescribes a drug before filling routine medications for patients.

Rebecca, a pharmacist at a CVS in Alabama, who did not want her real name used, said that CVS headquarters sent a memo to pharmacies in “high-risk” states after the decision came down. The memo, which she shared with me, and which has not previously been reported, explicitly states that as a result of Dobbs, Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Montana, Oklahoma, and Texas “have implemented laws creating potential criminal liability for any individual who knowingly or recklessly dispenses an ‘abortion-inducing drug’ for purposes of inducing an abortion.”

The memo then reviews diagnosis codes that are deemed acceptable for dispensation, which include miscarriage. “When dispensing a prescription for Misoprostol or Methotrexate to women of child-bearing potential in states that prohibit dispensing medications for the purpose of inducing abortion, Pharmacists should validate that the intended indication is not to terminate a pregnancy.” That includes not filling the prescription if it doesn’t have a diagnosis code, until they confirm it with the prescribing doctor. If they find abortion is the intended use, they “must refuse to fill the prescription.”

*snip*

[Sympthsical]

43. That's the article I was referencing

It isn't all pharmacists. It's pharmacists in states where CVS thinks they might run afoul of their anti-abortion laws.

Maybe the way you wrote it gave me the wrong impression, because I read it as CVS was banning all of their pharmacists company-wide.

That is untrue.

Rebecca, a pharmacist at a CVS in Alabama, who did not want her real name used, said that CVS headquarters sent a memo to pharmacies in “high-risk” states after the decision came down. The memo, which she shared with me, and which has not previously been reported, explicitly states that as a result of Dobbs, Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Montana, Oklahoma, and Texas “have implemented laws creating potential criminal liability for any individual who knowingly or recklessly dispenses an ‘abortion-inducing drug’ for purposes of inducing an abortion.”

Emphasis mine.

We should be careful about what kind of information we spread. I think it's our duty to ensure in this chaotic, shitty time that women know of all the options available to them wherever they live. Creating an impression that care is not available in some places that it actually is would be no bueno. That's what I was pushing against in my reply.

[hlthe2b]

45. It is CVS policy in those states. I NEVER stated otherwise. I neither deserve not will tolerate

your snarkiness which started with your very first response. Go hassle someone else. I don't get it, but whatever is going on with you, I'm done.

[Sympthsical]

48. You did not mention states

Your post was hyperbolic and incorrect. I read your post again, and there’s only one possible interpretation of those words.

It’s ok to be wrong. I’m wrong sometimes.

It’s always better to have correct information, particularly on sensitive matters like women’s health.

[hlthe2b]

49. No. And take your combativeness elsewhere. We have had good interactions in the past

but apparently no longer. And guess what, most of us are concerned about the welfare of this nation's women in the regressive states, whether or not your husband's job suffers and thus you feel so strongly you need to defend CVS as a result. Big picture.

[Sympthsical]

51. Oi

I wasn't even being snarky in my replies. I genuinely started googling after I read your initial response, thinking I had potentially missed a broader CVS policy being implemented. Frankly, a lot of people don't know how pharmacies work, and I've already read past tons of factually incorrect posts about them here. So, to be careful, I either research before I reply or ask my partner about things so I'm clear on what I'm articulating before I start typing.

There's certainly combativeness happening, but it isn't on my end. I don't know how else to read "CVS is OFFICIALLY telling ALL its pharmacists not to fill these prescriptions--worse than Walgreens" other than all of CVS pharmacists. That would be a massively radical shift in policy for them.

Frankly, I can't believe this exchange has blown up in this way. A simple, "I meant this," would've sufficed. Particularly after I clarified how I was reading your words.

But nah. We're doing this.

I'm done. Simple clarifications and corrections generating this level of defensive heat is weird. Not participating anymore.

[Ritabert]

17. I'm boycotting Walgreens and CVS

Their prescription prices are too expensive. The clerks not selling legitimate prescriptions is another reason.

[ecstatic]

18. I remember many years ago it was freaking freezing

I was not really presentable and my toddler was in the backseat. The asshole pharmacist refused to let me purchase Plan b through the drive-thru. I didn't boycott them but I probably should have after that. I rarely go there except for on holidays when everywhere else is closed.

[TheBeam19]

19. It should be a crime for a pharmacy

to refuse to fill a prescription from a doctor. Pharmacy clerks shouldn’t be deciding what kind of meds you get and insurance companies shouldn’t be able to deny anything a doctor orders. These two entities should be nothing more than facilitators of doctors’ orders. Don’t like it? Get out of the business.

Our system sucks.

[Novara]

21. Agreed

Most of us can't refuse to do our jobs and continue with employment.

If you have some sort of moral issue that prevents you from doing your job, find another one.

I refuse to step foot in Walgreens.

[Act_of_Reparation]

31. Ah, no.

Pharmacists are not lesser than doctors. They both have terminal degrees. Pharmacists are the ones checking to see if there any contraindications between a medication you have been prescribed and any other medications you may currently be on. If you don't like dying from a drug-drug interaction, allowing the Pharmacist leeway to alter a doctor's order is a good thing.

A pharmacist should not, however, be able to deny treatment on personal moral/ethical grounds.

[TheBeam19]

37. I figured it was kind of implied that

I wasn’t advocating for a pharmacist to knowingly let someone die, and that the context of the discussion was indeed about pharmacists deciding on a whim who gets what medication. Guess not!

[dlk]

22. Second guessing doctors

This would seem to violate HIPAA.

[ProfessorGAC]

47. I Don't Think So

While I'm certainly against the notion that a pharmacist or clerk can decide which legally obtainable goods can be refused on a whim, HIPPA blocks dissemination of medical information without your consent.
Your doctor sends a scrip to a pharmacy of your choice, so the consent is implied.
It's a highly objectionable practice, but I don't think HIPPA applies.

[dlk]

57. You're probably right

Yes, it is an extremely objectionable and dehumanizing practice. I’m thinking there could possibly be an issue of using your personal information, without your consent, to circumvent a legal prescription.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

27. Walgreens

is the pharmacy for secondary health insurance/prescription (Tricare), so I'm still with them to avoid prescription co-pays.

[Montauk6]

29. And I just put in a prescription refill with them :(

[Polybius]

32. Personally, I don't do boycotts unless the case is extraordinary (MyPillow)

Walgreens is too convenient for me to not go any more.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

34. My problem is less

with an individual pharmacist refusing to fill a prescription than it is with how they're doing it.

Get a prescription called, faxed, or electronically submitted? Let the person on duty who doesn't have an issue with filling it fill it. As a patient, I couldn't care less which pharmacist on duty fills it so long as it's filled.

Have a patient walk in and hand over a prescription? Take it, say thank you, tell them how long it will take, and then hand it over to the pharmacist on duty who has no problem filling it. Again, I couldn't care less which pharmacist on duty fills it so long as it's filled.

But the sanctimonious "I'm not filling this so that you can murder your baby" or "I don't believe in contraception, so I won't fill this" bullshit is simply a bullying tactic that shouldn't be permitted in any way, shape, or form.

If there is only one person on duty who can fill the prescription, then all bets are off and it should be filled without comment, but I've never been in a pharmacy where there is only one person working. That may be common and I'm just not aware of it

[gldstwmn]

41. I've been avoiding them for a while now. In light of this, I'll just keep on doing that.

[brooklynite]

42. Of course not...

Do you have evidence that this is a corporate policy rather than a local manager’s decision?

[SYFROYH]

44. Sounds like a local store issue, not a corp issuel

So no, I won't be boycotting Walgreens.

[sakabatou]

46. CVS is where I get my meds, but they're not for contraception

Being on the meds are still a pain.

[Demsrule86]

50. I feel like boycotting them all...CVS tried to charge me $128.00 for cough medicine in

pill form...it was listed on the website for under $40.00 with no insurance. When I pointed it out the pharmacists told me to pay it or not...but that was the price. I complained to the manager and he had the tech dig into it...I got it for $23.00 when all was said and done. No one could explain to me why I was charged $128.00 in the first place. I did call corporate and complained. I also called the state. I live in Bedford which is a great place to live. There are older folks here on fixed incomes and I saw an older gentleman buy half of his medicine as he could not afford all of it...and I have to take his med so I know there is a coupon that would help tremendously...I waited until he went outside and talked to him and then sent him the information to his phone and to his grandkid's phone...CVS is cheating these customers and it is sickening.

Now I need Eliquist (blood thinner)...the lowest price I can find around $500 per month. At first, I regretted using an advantage plan...but then I found out original medicare doesn't cover it at all...in fact, you can't even get a coupon from the manufacturer for either plan because Medicare doesn't cover it...It is way better than Wayfarin (coumadin) and it is a disgrace that Medicare doesn't cover it. Advantage will cover it...I have to get my doctor to write a letter and get pre-authorization. It is a jungle out there and I hear that CVS is not dispensing certain birth control pills, the morning after pill and abortion pills. I don't know this for sure.

[Hotler]

54. Boycotts don't work.

So I have been told by many here.

[SouthernDem4ever]

56. They work for me