Pharmacist refuses to fill presecription because of belief (muscles, contact, break)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Walgreen's in question has a Facebook page and they are getting an earful from customers.
Here are just three of the comments.
"Misoprostol is the prescription I was given after losing my much wanted daughter. Hearing that you refused a fellow loss mom's prescription due to some employees "ethical beliefs" really grinds my gears. Your current company policy allowed an employee to make a poor loss mom's experience that much more difficult.
Women die from not being given proper medical care after a miscarriage. Women lose their ability to conceive in the future when not properly treated after a miscarriage. When my small town pharmacy could not supply my prescription for two days, my Dr had the hospital fill the prescription because it was important for me to receive proper medical care so that I did not die, and was able to conceive future much wanted children. How dare you impose your ethical views on such an event. I will boycott your store until you resolve this issue and publicly apologize to the mom impacted by your immoral behavior."
"The actions of the pharmacist denying life saving medication to a woman suffering a missed miscarriage (fetus dead, not yet passed) is disgusting. A rotting fetus if not expelled can cause sepsis and death in the mother. Not only is your pharmacist judgmental, his ignorance of medicine is dangerous. And condoning it? Makes me glad to be Canadian. Your country, fueled by its "deeply held beliefs" has become a sewer and is the laughing stock of the world."
"As a former Walgreen's CPhT, I find it embarrassing and absolutely appalling that a Pharm D took it upon himself to pass moral judgement a woman who had a still born child inside her. He knew what the drug was for (it was not an abortion pill!) and even after listening to her tell him the baby was no longer viable, humiliated her in front of other customers and her 7 yr, simply because he doesn't believe the medication, (that was prescribed by her doctor, she wasn't asking for the Plan B pill, mind you) and he has a "moral issue" with her and her doctor trying to safely (and there is no other way to say) remove the still born from her womb. Shame on you Dr Brian H. SHAME ON YOU. If you want to pass moral judgement on others, become a pastor, but get out of the Pharmacy."
I'm a libertarian and have a little different take on it:
I think the rights of the pharmacist are violated if he's forced by the govt to go against his religious beliefs. This only becomes a problem if there's not another pharmacist handy who will fill the prescription. What if a person in need wanted to confess his sins but the only church in town was a synagogue? Should the rabbi be forced to hear confession? [For the record, I'm an atheist. I have no ax to grind here.]
While many (if not most) of us consider abortion a medical procedure that has value in protecting a mother's health (either physical or mental), some people have religious beliefs saying it is murder. That's their right. If we force them to act against those beliefs in this instance, then the way is clear for the govt to force us to do anything the majority feels is acceptable. Maybe in the future, slavery will again reach a point of public favor-- will Big Brother force Walmart to sell slaves?
At least the anti-abortion position is endorsed by an institution that has traditional standing in the community (like 2000 yr's worth). What about the pharmacies that are now refusing to fill scripts for narcotics? Their position is not based on the philosophy of an accepted, traditional institution. Shouldn't they be prosecuted for practicing medicine without a license, making a medical decision without having taken the pt's history or done a physical exam or examined the lab data?
She was inducing an abortion because the child was already dead.
This is not about religious beliefs. Its about someone who did not do their job, and should plainly be fired. Not only did the pharmacist shove his beliefs down someone else's throat, which is what the anti-abortion crowd is ALWAYS claiming is happening to them, he was derelict in his job. I find it egregious that this happened to a woman who was already in grief. Equating this with some Orwellian biz is really quite off the mark.
According to NIH it is an off label use. I cant imagine a pharmacist calling a dr to ask for a dx. They will barely call if there is a problem with the drug itself, or if ins refuses to pay for it, or a question about dosage etc. not to ask if this is for a dead or living fetus.
Are you serious? Pharmacists call dr's offices, at least the one I worked in (pediatrics so we didn't deal with this) very frequently, to verify a dose, say the dose is incorrect, and for many other reasons.
The lady has added that the pharmacist had obviously already made up his mind. As she tried to explain the situation to him, she said he showed no compassion and just stood there staring at her.
BTW, elsewhere Walgreen's has put out a statement saying their policy is that a pharmacist who objects to filling a prescription because of beliefs, is supposed to get someone else in the same pharmacy to take over, and that he had that option, but did not do so.
So, he violated Walgreen's policy on how to handle things.
Yes it is EXACTLY "here or there" because she had gone to the doctor. That's who wrote the Rx the pharmacist refused to fill.
Oh, like I said in my first post on this thread my computer won't open links with pictures or lots of "script" so I couldn't read the entire article. Is that how they handle incomplete miscarriages these days, with a pill? I also said in my first post that if the baby had already died, I don't see how this idiot pharmacist felt he was going against his religious beliefs.
I personally feel that if a person thinks they can't prescribe birth control pills or the morning after pill or whatever causes them angst because of their religion, that they should find a different line of work. I used to work at my church and personally had to bite my tongue and just do my job on a regular basis when it came to dealing with some of the church members.
Oh, like I said in my first post on this thread my computer won't open links with pictures or lots of "script" so I couldn't read the entire article. Is that how they handle incomplete miscarriages these days, with a pill?
Yes, because it can prevent many women from needing a D&C.
Yes, because it can prevent many women from needing a D&C.
which seems to be another surgery now a days right ? im just asking because I have never had one but a friend of mine did but I felt no need to ask her about it because I felt it was a personal thing .
which seems to be another surgery now a days right ? im just asking because I have never had one but a friend of mine did but I felt no need to ask her about it because I felt it was a personal thing .
I don't understand what you mean by "another surgery." In the past, most women who had miscarriages and did not complete them spontaneously were treated by surgically removing the remaining tissue. That is what a D&C (dilatation and curretage) does.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
