Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Dems on Bush Visit: "Bring It ... | Christian Jihad: Video Game Ed... »

Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Get Down to Olympia…

Posted by on May 31 at 12:53 PM

…or Tumwater, WA, actually…which is just south of Olympia on I-5.

1nce again, The Washington State Pharmacy Board is taking up the “conscience” clause debate (I prefer to call them refusal clauses).

It’s a debate between protecting someone’s feelings or protecting someone’s health. That should be a no-brainer, but the Pharmacy Board is considering language that would allow pharmacists to bounce customers to other pharmacies if they felt the prescription was “objectionable.”

Steven Saxe, the executive director of the pharmacy board (so not a board member), described the pending languge to me this way: “it provides for more options or opportunities for a pharmacist not to fill a prescription for reasons other than medical objections.” (The original proposal did not give pharmacists the room to turn customers away.)

So, people understand the implication of this, right? Not only does this jeopardize emergency contraception, but—if a pharmacist objects to sex w/out procreation—he or she could refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control. A self righteous pharmacist could also refuse to fill prescriptions for HIV medication.

The hearing is at 9:30am. Here’s Planned Parenthood’s volunteer contact info if you want to see what you can do: 206-328-7713

I’ve linked Planned Parenthood’s press release below.

  MEDIA ADVISORY


Board of Pharmacy to Consider Proposed Refusal Policy

Seattle, WA — The Washington State Board of Pharmacy will again take up the issue of whether or not pharmacists should be allowed to refuse to fill valid prescriptions for personal reasons.  In May the board released two proposed rules, one that protects patient access to prescriptions, and a second that does not. NARAL Pro-Choice Washington and our allies are very concerned about the impact such a policy could have on women's access to emergency contraception.  We strongly oppose any policy that would permit pharmacists to refuse to fill a prescription a legal, valid prescription based on non-medical judgments.  If a pharmacist is personally opposed to filling a prescription, the pharmacist or the pharmacy must ensure that patients can get their prescription filled at the same pharmacy without hassle or delay.

WHO: Washington State Board of Pharmacy

WHAT: Washington State Board of Pharmacy Meeting

WHEN: Thursday, June 1, 2006, 9:30 a.m.

WHERE: Department of Health, Point Plaza East — Conference Room 152/153

310 Israel Road SE, Tumwater WA 98501


CommentsRSS icon

"1nce again"?

Yep. They've been debating this issue since the beginning of the year. They're supposed to decide this summer...maybe even tonight.

Sorry, it wasn't the words I was questioning, but the manner of writing them. "1nce" just seems weird to me (not to mention harder to type than "once").

I wish I could go to this meeting, though - why does important shit always go down during the workday?

you could also stop by the port while you're down there...

Obviously, it's an A Tribe Called Quest reference: http://www.atcq.com/beats.html

Josh, good for you for staying on top of this. In this case, I do not think it is out of line to call the Governor's office and express some serious concern over this.

The governor appoints the Pharmacy Board, and she needs to hear from us. If the board rules for these "conscience clauses," (pauses to spit) the focus would shift to the state Legislative elections. If we were to incease our majority, the next session would outlaw this loophole for the fetus fascists.

But by all means, let's stop them now!

Ah! I just thought it was a silly Net-ism. I feel so ignorant now. Thanks for the clarification, CW. Carry on . . .

This issue also affects transpeople, who need meds and treatments that many religious people think are wrong.

It can affect straight people who need "birth control" meds for perfectly legitimate non-birth-contol issues, as well.

This is a very ugly issue. Do your best, Washington!


Josh,

I can't be at the meeting. Who can I call tomorrow to express my dismay over this refusal clause?

It's done. Meeting is over. "Refuse and refer" is the new policy. AAARRRGH!!! Sue their asses!!!!

Sue their asses!!!!

Absolutely, CM. Then it'll go to the Supreme Court eventually, and it will obviously fall under the Free Exercise clasue. Let's get the precedent set once and for all that it's discriminatory to require people to change religions in order to keep their jobs.

Comments Closed

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