Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« The Comet's New Neighbor | Enter to Win a Free Trip to Ho... »

Wednesday, May 3, 2006

Emergency Contraception Emergency!

Posted by on May 3 at 14:41 PM

Some bad news came out of yesterday’s Board of Pharmacy hearing.

Here’s the report from Planned Parenthood:

The language originally proposed at yesterday’s meeting by the Department of Health would have required that pharmacists fill all lawfully prescribed drugs and devices unless those drugs are unsafe for the client or fraudulent, or if there is another pharmacist available on-site who will fill the prescription.

But by the end of the meeting an alternative version emerged that permits a pharmacist to refuse to serve a patient and refer them elsewhere.

The meeting was largely dominated by Pharmacy Board member Donna Dockter, a Seattle pharmacist whose term expires next January. Dockter spent the majority of the meeting expressing her strong opposition to a pharmacists’ duty to fill lawful prescriptions and advocated for new language that would permit a pharmacist to refuse a patient and refer them somewhere else.

Dockter’s version reads that if a pharmacist “cannot fill a lawfully prescribed stocked drug or device,” that pharmacist may “transfer the prescription to another pharmacist,” regardless of whether the other pharmacy stocks the drug or not.

As I’ve reported: refusals are a problem in Seattle.

Governor Gregoire needs to make it clear to the board that protecting women’s health is more important than protecting a fundamentalist’s feelings.


CommentsRSS icon

What can I do about this? Are there any more meetings to attend or people to whom to write angry letters?

What can I do about this? Are there any more meetings to attend or people to whom to write angry letters?

Goddamn it, they're talking about refusing access to CONTRACEPTION! How can these kooks be gaining traction in Washington?

Donna Dockter, eh? Does anyone know what pharmacy this dumb fucking bitch works at? It would be nice if we could exercise some consumer McCarthyism and boycott pharmacies that employ Fundie pharmacists.

That's absolute bullshit.

Absolutely insane. What job on earth allows for an employee's personal beliefs to choose which aspect of the job he or she will perform? If they are not willing to do their job, they need to step aside and allow for someone else too. Many people in Washington will find these referral's impractical (timing might be everything in some cases), if not impossible ("pharmacy one town over may be able to helper you ma'am").

ummmmmm, why don't you just stop having sex?


duh

Another idea: contact your health care provider and let them know that you are concerned by this and that you hope they would consider stocking EC's as physician dispensed medications.
Ditto for school clinics, campus health offices, and other places from which prescriptions for EC are likely to originate.
This could be a good thing if it forced more clinics and such to stock and administer the EC. Now they have the perfect reason, that they need to do it for the safety of their patients given the irresponsible actions of those who oversee pharmacists.

This is totally unacceptable. If Donna Doktor and her ilk want a concession, I say let the individual pharmacists have the option to refuse dispensing prescribed medication, but require every PHARMACY to dispense prescribed medication during all open hours. If pharmacies are held responsible for the so-called conscientious objections of their employees, many of those pharmacists with conflicting morals will find themselves out of jobs and won't have to be troubled by sinful (but legal) prescriptions anymore.

Seriously, though. If pharmacists were having ethical issues dispensing Viagra or fertility pills, there would be an iron-clad national law passed in a hot minute requiring every pharmacist to fill every single damned prescription.

If pharmacies are held responsible for the so-called conscientious objections of their employees, many of those pharmacists with conflicting morals will find themselves out of jobs and won't have to be troubled by sinful (but legal) prescriptions anymore.

If you don't own the pharmacy, how can you justify demanding control over its stock? If a business owner doesn't want to sell a particular product, there's no justification for forcing them to. It's like passing a law requiring kosher delis to sell ham.

And Longball, it's not difficult to figure out where Donna Docktor works, but it might be a little hard for you to boycott it. You'll probably have better luck harassing and intimidating her at her home.

So Joel, let's say you're making a trip to the supermarket. You buy lunch meat, chicken breasts, some ribs along with your other groceries. The checker rings up the other items, then says, "Sorry--I can't sell you meat products. I'm a strict vegetarian, and my moral beliefs tell me that killing and eating animals is wrong." I take it you wouldn't have a problem with that?

No, Mad Dog, I wouldn't. I might not shop there in the future, carnivore that I am, but if the owner wants to employ somebody with a conscience issue about meat, it's his/her business, not mine.

We're not talking about discriminating, about selling the stuff to one person but not to another. We're talking about pharmacists who refuse to stock the drug at all. Groceries run by vegetarians aren't required to sell meat, why should pharmacies run by religious people be required to sell something that's a violation of their religion?

So Joel, let's say you're making a trip to the supermarket. You buy lunch meat, chicken breasts, some ribs along with your other groceries. The checker rings up the other items, then says, "Sorry--I can't sell you meat products. I'm a strict vegetarian, and my moral beliefs tell me that killing and eating animals is wrong." I take it you wouldn't have a problem with that?

I would talk to the manager of the store about it. If the manager doesn't have a problem with the behavior of his employee, I would find another supermarket to frequent.

Same applies to a pharmacy. If a particular pharmacist refuses to dispense a medication that the pharmacy carries, it becomes an internal matter between the owner of the pharmacy and the individual pharmacist.

If the owner of the pharmacy chooses not to stop particular medication be it abortifificients, viagra, asprin or anything else. That's his choice. You know... like "pro choice".

Your recourse is to find somewhere else to get the medications you want.

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).