A teenager in Arizona was denied a refill on her prescription for her rheumatoid arthritis. Might use it for an abortion, doncha know.
Eventually got it from another pharmacy.
I don’t subscribe to the Post.
An individual pharmacist refused to fill the prescription? Is that in Arizona law?
If the pharmacist was afraid he might be prosecuted under a draconian abortion law, i can understand it.
Ah, thanks.
The pharmacist is a moron.
Methotrexate is NOT routinely used in any kind of abortion.
It CAN be used to resolve an ectopic pregnancy. Which even the most draconian “you had sex, so now you gotta DIE” laws at least pay lip service to permitting.
I popped in thinking it might be about Arthrotec - which is a high-end NSAID (diclofenac) combined with misoprostol… which, as it happens, IS used as part of the “abortion pill” regimen.
It’s included in the Arthrotec to protect the stomach from the harsh NSAID effects. I used it for a while, about a dozen years ago. Worked beautifully though it gave me gas from hell. The package had some pretty stern warnings about fetal harm if taken during pregnancy.
I would disagree. When the government is enforcing a moronic law, avoiding being charged under that law is not moronic.
Option A: “I don’t fill the prescription and take the public flak.”
Option B: “I fill the prescription and an anti-abortion DA charges me with a criminal offence that carries a minimum sentence of two years.”
Which option is moronic?
Same story from another news outlet:
As a retired pharmacist, I absolutely loathe these stories, and I would have put this thread in the Pit if I had been the OP.
A LOT of medications out there pose the risk of fetal harm.
Do pharmacies require every female of childbearing age to provide documentation that a baby will not be harmed?
as I said, methotrexate is NOT routinely used for abortions.
Isn’t there one state that now bans all abortions, even ectopic?
Thalidomide, isotretinoin (formerly branded as Accutane) and several other drugs require that the patient, doctor, and pharmacy must be registered and a negative pregnancy test confirmed by the doctor before the drug can be dispensed. Men also have to register, because these drugs are hazardous for them in their own ways
There were some pharmacists that would not fill prescriptions for a certain drug related to Covid 19 issues. Not sure about laws in every state, but it seems they legally could/should have, within the law. But just because you are quite sure you are in the right legally, does not mean you are safe from what is sometimes called lawfare ( analogous to warfare ). Just defending your lawful action can be financially and reputation wise, ruinous.
Some of the reason for the pharmacist’s reluctance probably had to do with the dosage.
My son had juvenile idiopathic (rheumatoid) arthritis, diagnosed at age 3. His rheumatologist put him on methotrexate immediately after the diagnosis. Apparently, effective doses for juveniles are way higher than for adults - they metabolize it much faster, or something.
So the pharmacist, understandably nervous about breaking a 19th century law that had just recently been reinstated by the action of a single judge, and seeing a (comparatively) huge dose of methotrexate specified, may well have worried about the possibility of providing an abortifacient dose rather than a medicinal dose. This is going to keep happening for a while until the law on the subject becomes clearer.