So, potentially at least this woman may now fall pregnant because of the delay in getting the pill.
Does he also refuse to serve customers with Condoms and other forms of contraceptives? Should the pharmacist have that level of power over his customers? I understand that his religious convictions means he cannot condone contraception/abortion, but in my opinion he’s in the wrong line of work to uphold those convictions. Should someone be able to impose their values on you when you have entered their place of business? Is it just a case of his shop his rules? Who is in the right in this case, if the woman falls preganant would she be able to sue the pharmacist?
As long as he is following the directives of the store management, he can do his job however he sees fit. Apparently his management seems to think it’s perfectly OK for him to refuse to serve customers who are legally trying to purchase pharmaceuticals. This is where a letter writing campaign and boycott of Lloyds Pharmacy would allow management to know that their customers don’t appreciate being judged by the staff and refused service on their personal whims.
If I were the manager of the pharmacy, he’d be out on his ass. If this were my local pharmacy, I’d take my business elsewhere. However, trying to force a business to sell a particular product either by law or lawsuit is going a bit too far. A business owner has the right to stock and sell whatever products they want to whoever they want, within a set of fairly loose legal constraints. Let the market decide if their business plan (not selling contraceptives) is a viable one.
If they don’t stock the product, that’s one thing, he can’t sell what he doesn’t stock. However if he had the product but just refused to sell it that’s the rub. I understand he has the legal right to refuse service but I guess i’m just steamed at him imposing his values on others.
Would a religious doctor be able to refuse treatment to a leper on the grounds of him being ‘unclean’ and his disease being a punishment from God?
Is a doctor who refuses to perform abortions imposing his rights on someone else? Is it his right to refuse to participate in any way in what he sees as an immoral act? Is the pharmacist’s circumstance different in any substantial way?
i’d need to know more about medical practices to even begin to answer. Don’t surgeons specialize? So a surgeon who was anti abortion would obviously not go down that route. He wouldn’t be refusing to perform the abortion, as he would not be trained for them, rather he would be bypass surgery or whatever.
A Pharmacy is the first place most people would go to for contraception both emergency and preventative. As this is commonly known it would make sense for anyone who has problems with this to take their pharmaceutical career down a different path.
I don’t really have a problem with it, as long as he doesn’t try to prevent people from getting their prescriptions filled elsewhere (as in the cases that crop up every so often of someone refusing to return or forward the scrip).
and if there’s a pharmacy down the street that will fill the order - fair enough. But if it’s in the next town and you don’t have a car? I believe time is of the essence with the morning after pill, so in the case where you don’t have multiple sources available to you, what then?
I’ve got no problem with his actions if it’s a blanket policy. i.e. 'This, we will not sell."
Management has the right to sell or not sell any products they wish. And the inconvenience to customers isn’t their problem. Pharmacies aren’t part of the government and have no obligation to be full-service for all customers if they don’t wish to be.
Heck, if this action cheesed off enough people then the marketplace should take care of this issue via more people choosing not to go there. Bang, problem solved.
But I don’t think a pharmacist should be required to stock and dispense any particular product via government fiat.
That’s all well and good in the general scheme of things but don’t pharmacies in UK cities draw up rotas among themselves to determine which ones will stay open late/all night on which dates?
This would alter responsibilities slightly if Dr No Sale was the only one working on the night Ms Need It Right Now was shopping.
You’re absolutely right. All businesses should cater to the whims of the masses. That said, next time I go into an Orthodox Jewish deli, I’m going to ask for a ham sandwich with extra bacon. Or the next time I go to the local Indian restaurant I’ll ask for a one-pound cheeseburger done medium rare so that the blood just drips down my arms.
Get my point? If not, I’ll spell it out for you. Businesses do not exist for your benefit. They exist for the benefit of the owner. Why should he be forced to bail you out, especially if it’s against his personal moral beliefs? The condom split, the article says. Well, dems da breaks. When you play the game, sometimes you lose. You’d think after the first two kids they’d be more careful. But none of that is the pharmacist’s fault.
The abortion pill is not a right, and the pharmacist is well within his rights to deny the sale of the pill. At least they complied with the law and told her where she could get it. If they hadn’t then I would have had an objection. Otherwise, that’s just a bunch of TS for her.
Yes but in this case the business does stock the product, it’s just this particular guy who won’t sell it. Didn’t I say that I don’t have a problem if the business doesn’t stock the product? Hence the Orthodox Jewish Deli comparison is not valid
Addition to my last post. A closer comparison would be if you went to Walmart, and the cashier refused to ring up your bacon as she was Jewish and it was against her religion.
Dude, I get what you’re saying about businesses choosing to do business how they want, but nobody was asking the pharmacist to dispense mifepristone.
He was asked to dispense standard, regular birth control pills in a package slightly different than normal.
I wonder if the doctor could get around such things by prescribing a regular month pack of birth control pills and instructing the patient on how many to take exactly when.
When I had the ‘morning after pill’ after being raped, it was a dose of 8 regular birth control pills. Take four, and then 12 hours later, take four more.
I’m not disputing that he has the legal right to act in this way, what I am saying is should he have that right. Someone raised the point earlier about pharmacies having late night rotas. If you need emergency contraception on the night this guy is on you’re stuck. And given the time sensitivity of this particular contraception, the delay may mean the woman has to have a medical abortion rather than the morning after pill. That sort of decision being removed from the woman’s hands is what i find to be wrong.
Count me in the crowd that finds the fact that this guy hasn’t been fired yet incredible. If I refused to sell products that my company had put on the shelves, I would have no illusions about keeping my job. Notice that the advertising slogan “Loyds, where you can get your medication unless we don’t want to give it to you for personal reasons” isn’t really a customer service themed motto.
It’s in the public interest to make sure that needed medications are available to people who need them, and as such I would imagine that legislating against this kind of thing would be within the gov’ts mandate.
One doesn’t go into a Jewish Deli expecting a ham sandwich. One does go into a pharmacy expecting a birth-control medicine that they stock. If it was advertised as a Catholic pharmacy, then the analogy might hold. Also a ham sandwich is hardly an essential health need.
They don’t exist for the benefit of the manager either, but thats who refused to sell to her.
The morning after pill is different then the abortion pill, but either way, what would you say if she couldn’t get the pill from another source? What if it was another form of medicine? I think most people would agree that while there might not be a “right” to access to medication, the gov’t should legislate in such a way that no one is denied access to needed medications if possible. Especially in England where they provide universal health care.