Prescription drugs are only available at government regulated pharmacies. Non-prescription items are available in a much broader range of outlets. It could therefore be seen as reasonable to require a government regulated pharmacy to provide access to all prescription only products, while allowing them the choice of what non-prescription products they would carry.
As I think I have said on previous threads on this issue, I’d be a fan of a centrally organized mail order service for prescriptions to cover suituations where people have no access to such drugs. But clearly, in the current situation, prescription and non-prescription items are different, and it is possible to make an argument that their compelled availability should be treated differently. You might not agree with that argument, but it isn’t as clear cut as you make out.
I big cities this may not be a huge issue, you have a wide choice of pharmacies to choose from. In a small town, in a rural setting there may be only one pharmacy. When that one pharmacy decides who they will dispense to and what they dispense choices have been eliminated. While the glib answer may be “well then open up your competing pharmacy and let the free market decide” people forget that human lives do not operate at the speed of economy.
I wish it were so, but unfortunately it is not the case.
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/assembly/asm76/news/Press%20Articles%20and%20Speeches/Articles/2005/The%20Capital%20Times1.htm
http://religiondispatches.org/Gui/Content.aspx?Page=BL&Id=230
Mail order Plan B is not going to be effective.
Well, there are a few of us who are pro-life, female, don’t use barrier or hormonal contraception, and don’t want to have everyone having a million babies. Me, for instance. Um, at least four friends of mine, too.Which is admittedly an anecdote, but that broad brush you’re using is pretty silly, too. I guess I’m not a True Scotsman.
I don’t think I’d go to them, in spite of being Catholic and following the Church’s teaching on birth control. The Pill is useful medication for at least a few different medical conditions, inclusing bad acne and debilitating cramps. Of course, they’re allowed to sell or not sell whatever they like. Shrug.
And I don’t know if you’re interested, Der Trihs, but despair is actually not considered a good thing in Christianity.
To Brownie
That’s true, unless there was overnight delivery… But don’t get me wrong, I am the one who thinks a pharmacy can be required to provide drugs as a requirement of licensing. Pharmacies though aren’t and wouldn’t required, as far as I know, to stock every possible drug - there would need to be an ordering period, and I would imagine that would involve at least overnight delivery.
Why?
Seriously - defend this. You seem to think that there’s some special rule for pharmacists that they have to fill any prescription someone presents. Why shouldn’t a pharmacist have the freedom to refuse to fill prescriptions he doesn’t like? You assert that they don’t get to use moral judgment like you’re announcing some law of science. Where is this written?
I was waiting to see if you were going to get challenged for equating having children with suffering, or asked how many children a woman has to have before the suffering starts.
While I believe (and hope) you didn’t mean it that way, some of the things you’ve been saying could be interpreted to mean that you believe pregnancy and childbirth themselves to be inherently evil and oppressive of women. And that it may be attitudes like this that the pharmacists believe themselves to be bravely fighting against.
Because I don’t need a pharmacist to get condoms. I personally am a college student and thus have access to all the free condoms I could possible need. But even if I weren’t, I could go and get them a huge number of places: grocery stores, Walmart or Target, big-chain pharmacies, women’s clinics, a ton of different websites, sex shops, convenience stores, gas stations…hell, I can buy condoms from a vending machine in the women’s restroom at a shopping mall here. I don’t need a prescription for condoms, all I need is a couple bucks.
With hormonal contraception, be it the ring or the patch or the pill, I can’t just go out and buy them. Because of the way our healthcare system is set up, I need someone else to dispense that to me. And in my opinion, to put oneself in that position, where there’s a reasonable expectation that you will dispense legitimately prescribed drugs, and then to not do so, is not okay, because there’s no alternative. Yes, I know I could go to another pharmacy, but I think it’s unethical for someone to make a person resort to that.
I’m honestly curious about this, because I’ve never seen any indication that there’s much more to it than entering data into a computer and counting/labeling things. My statement wasn’t meant to offend, that’s just my honest perception from experience.
My justification would be the fact that they are voluntarily in a government licensed and regulated industry, and in exchange for their license to practice, they agree to give up certain freedoms for the benefit of the community.
If pharmacists were not granted a monopoly or quasi-monopoly or any form of protection from competition by the government, then I would believe they should be free to supply or not supply whatever they chose.
As far as I know, in most states there isn’t suc a rule. I would support one, just as I would also support their being an ethical responsibility within the profession on the part of pharmacists to fill all prescriptions (subject to fraud, criminal, drug interaction etc suspicions.)
Would you want a pharmacist to blindly fill prescriptions for painkillers, or do you want them to be eyeballing those customers looking for signs that they are abusing the prescription system or are dependent on the medication?
Do you want a pharmacist to but out of your life completely, or do you want them to check your prescriptions for possible drug interactions?
My uncle was director of pharmacy services for a major university health system - he had to keep up with new drugs in his dispensaries continually, focus on immunosuppressant drugs since they were a major part of the health system’s transplant surgery efforts, travel to Europe on a regular basis to set up a transplant-centered pharmacy in Palermo, and manage personnel and a budget.
Lots to do there besides labeling bottles.
extreme reply:
to a chef: “I would like a steak, medium rare.”
“I’m sorry, but we have no meat or meat products here. This is a vegan* diner.”
“But you’re a chef, therefore it is your responsibility to cook what I want regardless”
Let me know how that works out for you, because I’m pretty sure a customer cannot tell a business owner how to do their job if it is against what that business owner wants. Just like you cant tell a doctor what to do - Hey doc, I need xyz prescription for the pain in my hand. It’s your job to write me a prescription. Do your fucking job and shut up. ummmmm , yeahhhhhhh.
Now, if the pharmacy is THE only pharmacy in town, then there is a potential problem. On the other hand, this isnt the 1800’s where travel and communications were lengthy and limited. Most people own cars and many cities have bus transportation. There’s also the USPS and other delivery services so the problem may not really be a problem but rather an inconvienance.
Now - a lot of you are saying that the Catholics/Prolifers are against birth control and I’m shocked that the Catholics/Prolifers on this board havent piped in with a little more accurate information. IME, the Catholics are against ARTIFICIAL bc methods. They do, however, teach and promote NATURAL birthcontrol (hey! I saw that! dont :rolleyes: at me!). But because of the easier-more-convienant-methods available that allow people to have sex pretty much whenever they want, it is hard to find places to teach the method. Sometimes I find myself comparing sex to dieting. I have little to no will power. I know that I often find pleasure in eating sweets but I know that I can only have them in moderation or I will pay the consequence (maybe I will feel depressed afterwards for having too much, or sick to my tummy, or gaining weight). Just like sex - if I have it when I’m ovulating the chances of pregnancy increases and the question is, do I want that? Without artificial bc one has to work with the body so it’s not as convienant. Therefore, discipline must take place. Pan of brownies, or small piece? intercourse or oral? Take a pill, you wont get pregnant; take a pill, you wont get fat. Get the drift?
I really wish they would teach NBC to all young women in school along with the other sex ed stuff. Wait, let me clarify - I dont mean for them to teach “natural birth control” in school, but rather to go into more detail about what happens when they are ovulating, etc. I found the technique to be very interesting and I learned a lot about my body. I think the classes now are targeted for couples who want to have kids.
*the reason I used vegan as an example is because there are extremists in that field who believe that meat is unhealthy and eating animals is cruel. If a vegan wants to open their own diner based on their beliefs, you will not find me picketing their establishment or slamming them based on mine (in which I am a meatatarian).
I think in both of these cases, if the pharmacist has concerns about the prescription they should contact the patient’s doctor. If the doctor says “do it anyway”, then I think it should be out of the pharmacist’s hands.
On a side note, this entire discussion reminds me of that one episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm.
In general I agree. I was merely illustrating that there’s more to the job than filling bottles.
Oh ok. Well, on that I would agree with you.
I agree that, if a state choses to impose such a condition as a pre-requisite to granting licenses, it’s well within its legitimate power to do so.
If you contend that a state must impose such a condition; that no reasonable person could possibly support any view other than the one which mandates pharamacists to comply, then I disagree.
Many pharmacies in my area have stopped stocking Oxycontin because they’re tired of getting robbed at gunpoint for it. Is this also an unconscionable act in direct conflict with the pharmacist’s obligation to fill prescriptions? Or is it a decision they’ve made on a store-level that has nothing to do with you or your prescription filling “rights”?
Just wondering, because of the whole “slap a label on it and shut the fuck up” mentality.
Oh, I will. Because you are full of shit.
No, I would prefer that girls learn that it is possible to become pregnant at any time in their cycle. Because that’s reality.
Not dispensing birth control is one thing (I don’t really agree or approve, but as as long as the person with a prescription has other options to get it filled , I don’t see any legal problem.)
Telling dangerous lies to young people is just categorically shameful.