Religion In The Pharmacy? (CBS Poll)

[struggle4progress]

<snip> He said, even if a woman who was the victim of incestuous rape walked in his door after having been prescribed the pill, he wouldn't change his policy.

"I would tell her that I can't prescribe this," Duplantis said. <snip>

Four out of five Americans disagree with Duplantis. In a CBS poll, 80 percent of respondents said even if pharmacists have religious hang ups about contraceptives, they should not let it interfere with their job.

Just 16 percent think pharmacists should refuse to dispense birth control pills on religious grounds if they choose. <snip>

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/23/eveningnews/main657435.shtml

[donheld]

1. this man is in the wrong business

if you can't do the job find another one.

[SWPAdem]

2. Wonder if he'll fill Viagra 'scripts?

"Condoms, foams, etc. are tantamount to abortion"???????????? We have truly entered the freaking dark ages.

[VolcanoJen]

16. Now, *that's* a good question.

Why didn't the reporter ask it?

[Az_lefty]

3. Let's see....

when confronted with RW bullshit only 16% support it. But when we vote 51% think it's great. I cannot understand these people....

[eleny]

4. I wonder how much the pharmaceuticals make on birth control?

They have to be making a bundle on birth control pills. Will they be willing to give up the profits? Look what it took to get Vioxx off the market.

Btw, are the holy rollers bitching about vasectomies yet?

[Glenda]

43. The Bush Fundies vs. the Bush Funders: Who will win?

If birth control is illegal, the fundies win. BUt then the pharma companies lose. Hmmmmm... Bush has a dilemna...

[Mandate My Ass]

44. The black market

BC pills will cost exponentially more and desperate women who have no other choice will pony up the difference because their only other option is to get up close and personal with a coat hanger.

[artr2]

47. no the money wins every time

nt

[Spinzonner]

5. Fine

but no reimbursement from governmental or gonvernemental-funded programs.

If they want to have private morals drive their business they have no right to public funds.

[Spangle]

8. Ahhh......

I like THAT IDEA!

[mondo joe]

6. He should have to pay child support for every kid conceived as a result

He should have to pay child support for every kid conceived as a result of this.

Or the abortion fee.

[MountainLaurel]

12. And how about lifetime death benefits

To survivors when a woman with endometriosis or PCOS bleeds to death because she can't get a prescription filled for the medication that keeps her from hemorraghing to death?

[Spangle]

7. For some, Racism is a religus issue

For the Muslum woman who wanted to wear her headcovering during a DL picture.. it was decided that there was a spot were religan can not step over.

We have said the same thing about Racism.

Now, If a pharmacy wants to be "christan values pharmacy" and ONLY dispense meds that are "ok" with their faith, then so be it. Let them open a wack spot. But if these guys get hired at a pharmacy whos policy it is to serve EVERY customer based upon DOCTORS SCRIPT, then it shouldn't be allowed.

[sandnsea]

15. That's how they win

First it's one guy and his private business rights, next thing you know it spreads across the country. NO, there are some professions where personal opinions don't trump the public welfare. Pharmacy is one of them.

[Pithlet]

18. Well put

That is exactly right. Anyone who would have a moral issue with dispensing a medication prescribed by a doctor has no place as a pharmacist. There are other careers available that won't compromise your morals, and you will do no damage to other people because of those "morals".

[snippy]

22. Exactly right. I can not believe that the democratic party does not see

this as an important and winning political issue.

[Greylyn58]

9. This Makes Me Sick

If any Pharmacist feels this way they should get out of the business. To decide for someone else what prescriptions they will or will not fill is just unbelievable.

So what's next: "Oh I'm sorry I can't fill your heart medication...you just need to pray harder to take care of your problem."

Geez!!!!

:grr: :grr:

[BattyDem]

10. The same nut-jobs who have "religious and moral issues" ...

with birth control have absolutely no problem filling Viagra prescriptions for single men. :eyes:


It is a pharmacist's job to fill prescriptions ... period. He has no business making medical or moral decisions for anyone else. People would NEVER tolerate this nonsense if they were refusing to dispense heart medication or chemotherapy drugs, so why are they putting up with this shit? :evilgrin:

What's next? Doctors who refuse to treat sexually transmitted diseases because the person was guilty of immoral behavior and "deserved" what he got? Better yet, doctors can refuse to treat all diseases, based on the grounds that it's "God's will".

[Left in IL]

11. Does he own the store?

If he's an employee, he should comply with store policy or be fired.

If he owns the store, he should be able to sell what he wants, and face the conquences from the consumers.

[sandnsea]

17. Again, NO

That's the brainwashing of 20 years of Reaganism. We used to have something called the public trust. And people who worked for the public knew they had to follow the laws the public passed. ALL the laws. This pharmacist does not have the right to pass moral judgment on anybody. If he can't do his job which is to serve the public's medical needs, he needs to do something else.

[Pithlet]

21. No

If he/she doesn't want to sell prescriptions that a doctor has prescribed for a patient, then he/she can't own a pharmacy. This isn't just selling any old product. Owning a pharmacy does not give one license to come between a doctor and their patient. Pharmacist do not have the right to second guess doctors and patients.

[yardwork]

45. The article says that his is the only pharmacy for thirty miles

There are all kinds of laws regulating who can and can't open a pharmacy. It's not like a competitor can just plop another pharmacy right down next to this one. So this issue is more complicated than "his store, his right to run it his way."

[schultzee]

13. Here comes the American Taliban religio-fundi-fascists

[SeattleDem]

14. Prescribe?

Very weird that the pharmacist's quote is that he can't prescribe the drug.

Pharmacists don't prescribe. Doctors prescribe.

Pharmacists fill prescriptions. It's not the same thing as "prescribing" something.

[snippy]

19. This is an important political issue for the republican party.

The Reich Wing fundamentalist and anti-abortion republicans are working on passing state laws giving a pharmacist the right to refuse to dispense birth control pills regardless of why the medication has been prescribed. The laws prohibit an employer from taking any action against an employee pharmacist who does this. They have been sucessful in several states and expect to be successful in many more in the next few years. I think the democratic party is missing a huge opportunity on this issue.

There are millions of decent Americans who vote republican who would not if they realized just how disgustingly evil and totalitarian the Reich Wing fundamentalists and anti-abortion republicans actually are. But the democratic party has to make these laws an issue with the public. Otherwise the republican party will just continue to pass these laws state by state and convince people that it is unimportant or nonproductive to oppose such things.

[GoBlue]

20. Yank his Pharmacist's license

"I would tell her that I can't prescribe this," Duplantis said.

Pharmacists do not prescribe drugs - they fill prescriptions. He has no authority to refuse.

[WillyT]

28. I'm With You !!! - Yank Their Fucking Licenses !!!

Either that, or give all doctors access, on premises, to whatever drugs they need. Fuck the pharamacists if they're gonna go down this path!!!

:argh:

[SillyGoose]

23. These pharmacists are seriously overstepping their boundaries here.

>"I would tell her that I can't prescribe this," Duplantis said.<

Since when do pharmacists "prescribe" medications? Thought that was the job of the doctor? Isn't his job to FILL the prescription?

The way I see it, prescriptions are a private issue between the doctor who prescribes it and the patient. A pharmacist has no right to countermand medical treatment prescribed by a licensed doctor. Period.

These smug, self-righteous jerks need to get smacked down once and for all.

[Ilsa]

25. That's right, as long as the medication

is reasonably safe. It is only when there is a medically conflicting situation should a professional, like a pharm or nurse, should attempt to refuse an order. OC is known to be safe and is statistically safer than pregnancy. He should lose his license.

Besides, OC doesn't cause abortion.

[SeattleDem]

24. good review of this exact issue in NEJM recently

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/extract/351/19/2008

this is a summary of the arguments for and against (although their example was "the morning after pill" not regular contraceptives)

Arguments in Favor of a Pharmacist's Right to Object

Pharmacists Can and Should Exercise Independent Judgment

Professionals Should Not Forsake Their Morals as a Condition of Employment

Conscientious Objection is Integral to Democracy

Arguments Against a Pharmacist's Right to Object

Pharmacists Choose to Enter a Profession Bound by Fiduciary Duties

Emergency Contraception is Not an Abortifacient

Pharmacists' Objections Significantly Affect Patients' Health

Refusal Has Great Potential for Abuse and Discrimination

Their conclusion is perfect:
"...although health professionals may have a right to object, they should not have a right to obstruct."

[iamjoy]

26. If Only It Were This Easy

No doctor should have to perform an abortion or any procedure he/she feels is immoral. No pharmacist should be forced to sell a drug he/she finds immoral. No patient should be denied service because of a provider's morality.

What's the answer?
:shrug:

[tandot]

27. I'll take a job as a stripper and then refuse to take my clothes off

or refuse to do any overtly sexy moves...for religious reasons. As long as they pay me for it, I'll have it made.

May God strike those ignorant hypocrites with eternal impotence. :mad:

[VegasWolf]

29. Tandot, do that and I'll show up to support you and

I'll bring a bunch of five's that we can donate to StayOutOfMyBedroom.com.

[Gloria]

30. This sort of problem is going to get much worse because of the

language in the Omnibus bill just passed. Now, insurers, states, any gov. entity can decide it doesn't feel like working within the law and will have legal grounds to do so.

It's very, very bad....

The test is this: Such refusals interfere with the practice of medicine, plain and simple, by doctors. So, what is the AMA going to do???

[SeattleDem]

31. Devil's advocate question for you all

I am a pharmacist so I have a particular interest in this issue.

Here is an ethical dilemma that I faced that I wonder how DU'ers would feel.

I used to work in another state for a well-known university hospital. I worked in the Drug Information Center, which handled difficult questions from within and outside the institution. This was before the internet, when quick access to info was limited to centers such as where I worked.

One day, I got a call from high-ups in the state government wanting information on how to prepare lethal injections. The state was approaching putting a particularly offensive child murderer to death and they did not want to use the electric chair. But they'd never done a lethal injection before and did not have a protocol. So they called us. ME.

I am personally opposed to the death penalty so this presented a dilemma. I felt sickened to think about searching for literature on how to "humanely" kill another human being. But, it was my job. Part of my pharmacy license in that state dealt not only with dispensing drugs, but with dispensing information. But I didn't know how I'd live with myself if I provided a "recommendation" to the state on how to kill a prisoner.

I'll save what happened for another post. But I'm wondering, does this change anyone's mind about a pharmacist's "right" to practice in context of their own morality?

[Gloria]

32. The question is: when a person goes to pharmacy school, the license

is for the practice of pharmacy science. If you have such strong beliefs that you can't practice, then maybe the decision should have been made before going to pharmacy school.

If you hold the license, you should be prepared to practice under all circumstances. Or limit your practice to places like Catholic agencies,etc. But if you are in a public institution that is supposed to serve everyone, then you have to be prepared to practice in full.

The problem with the bill is that now public entities like state gov'ts. will start to act like religious institutions. Which means people like me, who need a medication that someone might "disapprove of" might not be able to get it, even though I don't practice any religion.

[SeattleDem]

33. but you go to school when you are young

I entered pharmacy school when I was 20 years old. Over the course of a lifetime, can't I change my opinion on things?

I grew up in a Republican household but once I entered college, I finally formed my own progressive opinions. People change over time as life shapes them. So saying I have to practice based on my beliefs at age 20 doesn't work. I didn't know at age 20 that at age 25, I'd feel totally different about the death penalty, for example.

[funnymanpants]

37. Then change professions

You can change, but you have to accept the consequences of your change. Handing out contraceptives is part of your job.

[Mandate My Ass]

34. Sorry, I don't see a dilemma at all

The decision to deny a patient a doctor's prescription, for who knows what reason other than preventing pregnancy, and the random request for advice on how to best poison a living human being when other obtainable methods of carrying out their objective exists, doesn't seem remotely comparable to me. Espically since nobody came into your pharmacy and said "Give me the poison to kill this man."

[funnymanpants]

35. Interesting

There are some parallels. But I think there are some differences, as well. For one thing, your situation is unique. When you took the job, you had no way of knowing that you would have to perform a task so against your own ethics. But handing out contraceptives is an every-day occurrence. The pharmacist knew this going into the job.

Also, I think there is a distinction between the two cases. You can argue that your case and the case with the pharmacist are identical in that both present an ethical dilemma. But feeling queasy about sex and being asked to kill another human being are two different things.

For example, I can think of an extreme example of a soldier serving in Nazi Germany and a pacifist in the same country. The soldier refuses to eat with a Jew because it is against his morals; the pacifist refuses to fight in the war because it is against his. Are we to say that both people have an equal right to follow their conscience?

I know this example may be a bit too extreme to be relevant.

[SeattleDem]

36. interesting too

I agree certainly that my situation is different in that I could not have reasonably expected to have to "participate" in executions when I went to school, versus this guy should have known he'd be asked to dispense OCs during routine practice.

But I do think this guy actually believes that OCs are abortifacients - he is not just quesy about sex. Of course, he is wrong, but because he believes OCs can cause an abortion, perhaps by preventing implantation, I bet he would argue that his filling an OC prescription is murder just as sure as it is murder to administer a lethal injection.

Your example is not extreme - it is interesting, and I guess I would have to say that I'd "support" both, even if one is incredibly offensive to me.

[struggle4progress]

38. Had I been in your position, I would have told the caller ...

... "In Pharmacy School, we studied how to save lives and preventing illness by using medication correctly. We discussed how to counsel people against misuse or abuse, and we learned how to avoid some dangerous interactions. The School never offered classes on the best way to kill people, and I'm afraid I'm simply not competent to advise you about that."

I do hope you immediately called the media, reported the incident, and wondered why the Dept of Corrections was using the yellow pages for advice on how to conduct executions ...

[SeattleDem]

42. how we handled it

I couldn't use your script because I was competent to provide the information. True, we didn't learn it in school, but I had access to medical and "prison medicine" literature and could use my mental faculties to come to an "answer" for them. Just like I did for hundreds of callers every week in that job.

So, after discussing my moral qualms with my boss and determining the veracity of the request (ie, that it wasn't a prank call!), we decided to do the research and provide an "answer" to their question.

I reasoned that although I opposed the death penalty, withholding the information wasn't going to stop this man from being killed by the state. Indeed, my work could result in a more humane death for him than the electric chair. I figured I could work at a different level than the individual "patient" level to change death penalty laws in this country.

so to, this pharmacist needs to recognize that he isn't going to change America one woman at a time. Indeed, his refusal to fill OC could actually result in MORE medical abortions being performed! He can put his morals beliefs into practice elsewhere and try to educate women in other forums, but he must provide his patients with the legal drugs that they request.

That said, the nite I drove home past the protestors at the prison the nite before the criminal was killed was one of the most chilling nites of my life, and I will never forget it. I still to this day feel that I had a hand, however indirect, in this man's execution.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

39. No invitro fertilization for the evangelical radicals then...

As a medical professional can I make the judgement that rejecting science/medicine on religious grounds cuts both ways?

[truthisfreedom]

40. this guy better not be handing out pain killers to rush limpbutt-types.

addicts do not deserve drugs, do they, mr. self-righteous?

[patomime]

41. This one makes me soooo sick.....

It is my civil right to my medication. No doubt about. No one has the right, period -- to deny me my doctor prescribed medication. Sorry (no offense males in attendance here), but have you ever noticed each of these stories has the male making the decisions or talking about issues like pro-choice. Even our biology kills an egg each month if it's not fertilized.

If four of five people in this survey agree, then we need to hit these people where it hurts. Boycott, boycott, boycott. Also, where are these fine people that are going to adopt these unwanted children? Nowhere - they just want children to be orphans.

No one has rights over my private issues with my body and medications. Even the Bible tells us not to make moral judgements of other people. It is not their business, period.

Geeeeezzzzzzzzzzh!

[snippy]

46. Boycotts are the wrong approach. Politics is the right solution.

Boycotts are fine but whether a patient can obtain properly prescribed medication is a question of social policy and social policy is a political issue. Giving pharmacists the legal right to refuse to dispense properly prescribed birth conrol pills is an important political issue to the republican party. The democratic party needs to educate the public so that the public knows that

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE VOTE REPUBLICAN.

The democratic party should insist that any pharmacy which refuses to dispense birth control pills must post that information prominently in the store so that patients are not faced with the need to go from store to store in search of a pharmacy which is not operated by Reich wing fundamentalist totalitarian assholes.

[noshenanigans]

49. The *should* put up a sign

I saw the report on CBS News last night and it gave me the heebie-jeebies. I think the guy should put up a big sign on the door of the store and next to the pharmacy that explains that because of personal beliefs they are unable to sell condoms or fill prescriptions for birth control.

My fear, though, is that he specifically does *not* inform people of this policy simply in the hopes that when women come in and ask for their prescriptions he can "discuss with them" the "side effects" and "moral implications" of such items. They talked with a woman on the report where this exact thing happened, and now she doesn't use birth control because he "educated" her.

[SeattleDem]

50. right now, it's a state issue

every state makes its own laws about the practice of pharmacy, so if Louisiana says it's okay for this guy to not fill scripts for OCs, then the state legislature has to deal with it.

I worked in a state in the 1980's where a Catholic hospital had an outpatient pharmacy but refused to carry OCs. Women who worked at the hospital could get prescriptions filled there (but not OCs) so they sued to get access to OCs. The state law said that a pharmacy cannot discriminate and must offer every drug that is approved by the FDA for sale. The employees won and the Catholic hospital had to fill prescriptions for the pill for its employees.

If we want to get a handle on this issue, it's a long slog, one state at a time.

[snippy]

51. The GOP is working on getting these laws passed in every state.

Republicans see it just as you have described it "a long slog, one state at a time." That is their goal. They know that some states will be much more difficult and take many more years than others, but they intend to work hard and persistently until every state has a law protecting the jobs of pharmacists who refuse to dispense the pill. This does not seem to bother the democratic party. It does bother me.

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

48. They won't sell contraceptives...

but you can by KY Jelly by they fucking barrel. Go figure.