Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Judge: State can't make druggists sell Plan B contraceptive [View all]
Washington state may not force pharmacies to sell Plan B or other emergency contraceptives, a federal judge ruled Wednesday, saying the state's true goal is to suppress religious objections by druggists not to promote timely access to the medicines for people who need them.
U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton heard closing arguments earlier this month in a lawsuit that claimed state rules violate the constitutional rights of pharmacists by requiring them to dispense such medicine. The state requires pharmacies to dispense any medication for which there is a community need and to stock a representative assortment of drugs needed by their patients.
Elaine Rose, CEO of Planned Parenthood Votes Northwest, said the issue was never about Plan B specifically but about the rights of patients.
"Really, this is a blow to access for all patients," she said.
"The real issue is when a person walks into a pharmacy with a prescription for a legitimate, legal medication, whether they are going to have that filled by the person behind the counter," Rose said. Under this ruling, it appears that any pharmacist or pharmacy can say they have an objection to dispensing a particular drug, she added. "Where is this going to stop?"
In his ruling, Leighton noted that the intervenors in the case included two HIV-positive individuals "concerned that the success of Plaintiffs' claims could result in the denial of lawfully prescribed and medically necessary drugs to combat their condition...."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017568248_planb23m.html
U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton heard closing arguments earlier this month in a lawsuit that claimed state rules violate the constitutional rights of pharmacists by requiring them to dispense such medicine. The state requires pharmacies to dispense any medication for which there is a community need and to stock a representative assortment of drugs needed by their patients.
Elaine Rose, CEO of Planned Parenthood Votes Northwest, said the issue was never about Plan B specifically but about the rights of patients.
"Really, this is a blow to access for all patients," she said.
"The real issue is when a person walks into a pharmacy with a prescription for a legitimate, legal medication, whether they are going to have that filled by the person behind the counter," Rose said. Under this ruling, it appears that any pharmacist or pharmacy can say they have an objection to dispensing a particular drug, she added. "Where is this going to stop?"
In his ruling, Leighton noted that the intervenors in the case included two HIV-positive individuals "concerned that the success of Plaintiffs' claims could result in the denial of lawfully prescribed and medically necessary drugs to combat their condition...."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017568248_planb23m.html
When is this nonsense going to stop?
21 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This is soooo screwed up in so many ways - soooo backward. US = United Stupidity. n/t
RKP5637
Feb 2012
#1
You know, I tried to watch Idiocracy all the way through and never made it ... it struck
RKP5637
Feb 2012
#11
dear pharmacists, if you have objections to providing legal drugs, GET ANOTHER JOB
niyad
Feb 2012
#6
funny how the religious crowd reads a job description, takes the job anyway, THEN
msongs
Feb 2012
#10
So, a pharmacists rights to withhold prescrition medicine trumps a person's rights to get them?
Old and In the Way
Feb 2012
#9
No, the ruling was that the state can not command a business to carry certain merchandise
ProgressiveProfessor
Feb 2012
#20
Most of the responses so far have missed a key point...it was pharmacies not pharmacists
ProgressiveProfessor
Feb 2012
#19