Should pharmacists be allowed to refuse to dispense birth control?
 

What do you think? It's happening already at major pharmacy chains. Discuss...

Obviously not.

Sorry I don't understand how anyone can discuss this issue. Pharmacists aren't hired for their moral beliefs, they're hired to fill our prescriptions, plain and simple. Anyone who refuses to prescribe a legal drug should be fired on the spot, first offense. I don't agree with giving kids fucking ritalin, but that doesn't mean pharmacists can decide not to give it to people as long as it's legal.

Yes they should.

The same way they should be able to refuse painkillers or any other substance if they think it may used wrongfully.

Regards,

Lee

Why the hell would they do that?

hell no. their personal politics should have no say in what is legally prescribed by a physician. I think that if they even express their opinion to customers they should be fired.

no their license should be pulled .

lol, how do you use birth control "wrongfully"?

If someone has a prescription for a painkiller, they have to fill. They're not fucking doctors.

How do you use birth control "wrongfully"?

Unless birth control becomes illegal, they should STFU and fill the scripts.

I don't know, but I think the hot blonde ones should work topless.

If it is a private company they can refuse to carry a product it's as simple as that no matter how shitty it may be...

i'm not sure about that, they're a public serving private company

Religious fundamentalists are crazy, they like taking away rights from other people, especially women. These are the same type of people who force women to cover their faces on the other side of the world. The only reason the USA and other western nations are so far advanced is because centuries ago the majority of us stopped listening to these nuts. If they had been in charge the whole time you wouldn't be able to show your ankle at the beach, forget about voting and having a job. Surprise, religious fundamentalists are back! You're only going to hear more and more of this shit over the next 4 years, trust me. The last 50 years or so have been so liberal in the western world, no one realizes that these crazies mean business, and there are more of them than you'd think.

USA Today article: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...sts-pill_x.htm

Mississippi blazing the trail, I'm shocked. They're so enlightened down there.

god, that's fucking sickening. . unbelievable

Pharmacists should do their fucking job and that is to supply legally prescribed drugs to people who need them.

If they don't they should be fired.

My friend went to her doctor and asked for birth control when she was 18, and he said, "Women really shouldn't enter sexual relations until they are ready to get married and accept the responsibility for their actions." So she went to the planned parenting clinic and got the same pills for 15$ cheaper. My doctor is female and never even blinked at me when I asked for a prescription.

Fuck no thats rediculous.

That's scary, he should lose his license.

I think it's bluediculous actually.

Well, he didn't say "no," he just lectured her for fifteen minutes. But it was enough to turn her off the whole idea and go get them from somewhere else.

No way!

no that is a very personal issue. What if you are haveing hormonal problems and need to take it or somehting will go wrong or what if you need it for something else. And i think preventing is not so bad if you are not planning to have a family at that time.

fuck no! are we crawling back to the dark ages or what. :mad:

oh well, i guess she got them in the end

can a girl under 18 buy the pill in this country?

If you were a homosexual man with aids, would you want your doctor lecturing you about it? He should tell her about the side affects but he has no right to tell her how people should live.

I think he was trying to be parental and have "the talk" with her, but it really wasn't the right time or place.

If people lived their own lives and left the other people live their's
what a great world this would be.

fuck no they shouldn't that is detrimental to everything our government is trying to do :1orglaugh

pharmacists can refuse to fill any prescription and part of their job is to apply scrutiny to situations

it is their call whether they fill a prescription or not as they share in the liability, they can not be repremanded for refusing to fill

I realize they may have that right in some states, how does not filling a birth control prescription for an adult have anything to do with liability? You're talking your way around the issue. This decision is based 100% on one individual's personal ideas of morality.

The job of a pharmacist is to fill a perscription nothing more. They should be fired if they withhold drugs because of their own personal beliefs.

It shouldn't even be discussed ....

The United States...is just that...a country of united states. The US has always been a country of community standards and from the City level...County level and State level...they are allowed to enact laws/ordinances that fit within their individual community standards...as long as those laws are not deemed to be...by a court...and ultimately the Sumpreme Court...unconstitutional. There is nothing new about this.

No need to thank me for educating you yet once again...Richy boy.

Actually Mississippi is not blazing any trails. Did you know that the list of enlightened countries would also include Canada?

Some pharmacists have moral objections to emergency contraception. Four stakeholders wanted to know if pharmacists have the right to refuse to dispense ECs and their liability for adverse events when they do dispense.

Response: Most provinces and territories have adopted a policy that allows pharmacists to have the right to refuse to dispense medication for moral reasons but they would be expected, as a standard of care, to refer the woman to another pharmacist, a physician, or health facility where the medication could be readily obtained. Questions regarding liability issues related to the dispensing of any drugs should be directed to provincial pharmacy regulatory bodies.
Canadian Food and Drug Regulations

Most privately owned businesses (specifically those that do not participate in government contracts and/or subsidies) can refuse service...unless that refusal of service is in violation of race based or other laws that fall within legal discrimination.

No need to thank me for educating you yet once again...Richy boy.

Are you against ones right to free speech and do you favor mind control...Richy boy?

Am I to assume that you are not aware that many Pharmacists own their own individual Drug Store/Pharmacy...thus you are saying that they should fire themselves.

They should lose their license which is issued by the state.

This would be similar to a doctor refusing to treat a pregnant woman because he finds out she's not married.

Nope:BangBang:

There are doctors that refuse service for various things...and it is legal for them to do so...ie abortions.

If that had been me, the conversation would have ended something like this:

"I don't care if you want to stand there and think I'm some slut but I'm really surprised you're pompous enough to publicly say it to a paying customer. My doctor perscribed these for a hormonal imbalance but thanks for showing me your unprofessionalism. It really concerns me what other second-guessing you might try to do over my doctor so I will go get these somewhere else, good day!"

:glugglug

That was her doctor that told her that, not the pharmacist. I have never met a pharmacist who looked at me strangely for any prescription.

There's a big difference in a doctor limiting his services to specific specialties and a pharmacist refusing or balking at filling a percription written by a doctor. To make your analogy closer to the situation would be to have one doctor diagnose a patient and send to another doctor for treatment then have the 2nd doctor object on moral grounds. For instance: Pregnant woman has broken arm. Doctor diagnoses it and sends her to hospital for treatment. Doctor at hospital objects becauses she is unmarried.

right to free speech.....

:1orglaugh

Ah! Now the doctor should have known better. The mark of a good doctor is his/her "bedside manner", that is being able to tell a patient good/bad without sounding condescending or alienating. He could have told her of all of the potential side effects of taking the pills then concluded by telling her that medically it is much safer to not take the pills and to have sex only when she is ready to have children. He should be telling her that anyway, not on moral grounds. Some doctors are quick to write a perscription to companies they have deals with.

My analogy is a good analogy...as many doctors refuse to perform abortions...for moral convictions...even though it is legal...just as many doctors refuse to perform assisted suicide/euthanasia...even though it is legal in some states.

Just recently the wife of a friend was denied service for diabeties by a doctor unless she agreed to quit smoking...when she refused...he would not accept her as a patient.

Now that's a bad doctor. If his specialty is diabetes he could still help her with symptoms despite the smoking, and strongly object to the smoking at each visit and show her every negative test result that could be attributed to the smoking. Like too many doctors, he's too busy for his patients.