One of my siblings has been a pharmacist for a good numbers of years now. So i’m relating second hand info:
It has been mentioned a few times: doctors do make mistakes. Sometimes deadly ones. (Where i live there’s always shortage on doctors/nurses, they work way over what they should just to try and keep up) The doctors sometimes prescribe a medication for a patient that, in combination of a medication they already take, would kill them.
Sometimes it’s the dosage that is incorrect for whatever reason (weaning off it/ depending on levels of whatever in the blood/ should stop it but for some reason the doctor kept prescribing).
Pharmacist are there not only to provide the prescription, they’re also there to correct mistakes by calling said doctors. Not to mention to answer your health questions.
And shame on that establishment for spreading wrong information just to try and justify their beliefs.
[QUOTE=Lissla Lissar]
And I don’t know if you’re interested, Der Trihs, but despair is actually not considered a good thing in Christianity.
[/QUOTE]
It certainly is by some. For example, I recall reading various books on life extension research, and there’s always be a quote from a Catholic priest/bishop/whatever about how it was bad because it would create hope.
They are quite correct in terms of technique; despair and suffering in general ARE good ways to induce faith in people. Desperate people are more likely to do stupid things, after all. Even in the cases where they don’t admit it, the promotion of despair and suffering are a basic part of what passes for Christianity’s ethical system, because they are so effective at helping them do the only thing that really matters to them : spreading and preserving Christianity.
No. In fact I would be frightened if, say, my dermatologist was required to perform abortions. But I believe if you ask your OB/GYN and they refuse they are required to refer you to another doctor who does perform abortions.
Even still though, the abortion analogy is a bad one. A pharmacy that refuses to sell hormonal birth control, spermicide, condoms, or any other product that can prevent pregnancy is a lot more like an OB/GYN that refuses to perform abortions, pap smears, and mammograms. If a doctor had a moral problem giving pap smears because they interfere with god’s plan should they be able to deny that service to their patients?
[QUOTE=Capcha]
One of my siblings has been a pharmacist for a good numbers of years now. So i’m relating second hand info:
It has been mentioned a few times: doctors do make mistakes. Sometimes deadly ones. (Where i live there’s always shortage on doctors/nurses, they work way over what they should just to try and keep up) The doctors sometimes prescribe a medication for a patient that, in combination of a medication they already take, would kill them.
Sometimes it’s the dosage that is incorrect for whatever reason (weaning off it/ depending on levels of whatever in the blood/ should stop it but for some reason the doctor kept prescribing).
Pharmacist are there not only to provide the prescription, they’re also there to correct mistakes by calling said doctors. Not to mention to answer your health questions.
[/QUOTE]
But none of that is very useful if they can screw with your prescription for religious or ideological reasons; at that point, you’re just introducing a second source of error, not providing backup. Should they be allowed to deny someone painkillers because they are an atheist, Jew, or gay, and therefore deserve to suffer ? Should they be allowed to deny someone anti HIV drugs because AIDS is God’s Will ?
[QUOTE=pbbth]
No. In fact I would be frightened if, say, my dermatologist was required to perform abortions. But I believe if you ask your OB/GYN and they refuse they are required to refer you to another doctor who does perform abortions.
[/quote]
I’m sure that depends on the state. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if most OB/GYNs do not perform abortions (for various reasons).
No, the analogy is good. The issue is birth control and/or termination of pregnancy. None of those other things you mention are primarily related to either of those.
[QUOTE=Antinor01]
The Pill (in its many varieties) is a prescription medication that one would expect a pharmacist to provide. I believe that a pharmacist is dutybound to provide any prescription that is written by a doctor. Condoms are not a prescription medication. The difference between the two is not that difficult to understand.
[/QUOTE]
What I’m surprised about is the assumptions that are being made about women who take the Pill. Yes, many women take it for contraception, which is what the pharmacy in the OP objects to. However, there are many other reasons why the Pill might be prescribed, such as ovarian cysts, excessively heavy flow, etc. The pharmacist doesn’t particularly have the right to ask you WHY you are filling a prescription, if it’s a valid scrip from a real doctor. Thus, they are not only disciminating against women who are trying to control their own reproductive life, but also against women who legitimately need the medicine and who have as much right to have it as people do to have acne medication or Viagra (if not moreso if we’re placing completely irrelevant personal judgments on other people’s medical necessities here).
How is a pharmacist to know who has a “legitimate” need for a medication and who is using it for reasons they might not like, without asking invasive questions beyond their right to ask? It’s the meddling into my personal life that I’d object to, and their assumption that they have the right to do so. Really, that process is between my doctor and me.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
I’m sure that depends on the state. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if most OB/GYNs do not perform abortions (for various reasons).
No, the analogy is good. The issue is birth control and/or termination of pregnancy. None of those other things you mention are primarily related to either of those.
[/QUOTE]
Ok then lets use the abortion example. Some women use the pill for heath reasons. I know a few women who would not be able to function at all during their period without being on the pill.
A pregnancy can also cause harm and death to the woman carrying the baby in some instances.
Refusal to supply birth control to a woman who needs it for medical reasons would be like refusing to abort a fetus that could harm the mother.
I think it would be more accurate to call this a Catholic pharmacy than a pro-life one. I’m pro-life and also in favor of contraception. Not everyone thinks that using a condom is the moral equivalent of killing a fetus. It was disheartening to me when I rotated through ob/gyn and saw so many girls who were making bad choices about contraception, leading to multiple unplanned pregnancies and abortions. I’d like to see those girls using contraception instead.
But even though I would not want to open an anti-contraception pharmacy myself (if I were a pharmacist) or shop at one, I don’t really see the big deal about these guys choosing to do it. I guess I view anti-contraceptive Catholics similarly to the way I view the Amish. I don’t want to live that way myself, but it doesn’t hurt me if they choose to live in a way that rejects certain modern technologies/products/services (including artificial birth control) that they view as spiritually unwholesome.
If they can keep the pharmacy open with the business of like-minded Catholics, good for them. They’re not forcing me to come to their store. They’re not stopping a pro-contraception pharmacist from opening up shop across the street. If enough people in the area where this pharmacy is opening want access to contraception, someone else will find a way to take advantage of that demand. Yay capitalism!
The point I was making is that birth control, unlike abortions, makes up a huge portion of the business provided to pharmacies. That would be like a butcher that didn’t sell steak or a make-up counter that didn’t carry lipstick. Beyond that, if a doctor had a moral problem with providing a pap smear or a mammogram because they felt like cancer was god’s way of controlling the population would they have a right to deny their customers an important, routine service?
[QUOTE=pbbth]
The point I was making is that birth control, unlike abortions, makes up a huge portion of the business provided to pharmacies. That would be like a butcher that didn’t sell steak or a make-up counter that didn’t carry lipstick. Beyond that, if a doctor had a moral problem with providing a pap smear or a mammogram because they felt like cancer was god’s way of controlling the population would they have a right to deny their customers an important, routine service?
[/QUOTE]
But that’s an argument for why the business will fail, not an argument for not allowing the business to operate under its desired plan. And, frankly, I think a pharmacy that doesn’t provide birth control is a doomed enterprise, except perhaps in some remote, religious enclave. So, I won’t argue that point.
[QUOTE=nyctea scandiaca] Bricker said, “Why shouldn’t a pharmacist have the freedom to refuse to fill prescriptions he doesn’t like?”
Change that to “Why shouldn’t a physician have the freedom to refuse to treat people he doesn’t like?”
Pixilated said, “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.”
So I asked, can a business owner put up a sign saying that they will only allow white people or Christian people to shop there? Can a doctor say he will only treat white people or Christian people?
Does anyone know if a doctor is allowed to refuse to treat certain people because he doesn’t like their ethnicity or religion?
I admit they’re not the same exact things, but it’s food for thought.
[/QUOTE]
Refusing to assist a customer/patient based on their race, religion, etc etc etc is against the law. I do believe many establishments still reserve the right to service anyone for particular reasons (ex: no shoes, no socks, no service…). I really didnt feel a need to put a disclosure on my statement because I didnt think anyone would be grasping at straws - my mistake.
I also realize that using the term “natural birth control” is not accurate - It’s just the only name I remember it by. And, for clarification: it is not the same as the calendar method. There is a lot of detail in the study and it is not easy to master.
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
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?
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, but you have no idea of what my daily chronic pain load happens to be, and what to you might seem like an inordinate amount of vicodan for miss anybody can be like M&Ms to me. It is up to the doctor who prescribes the meds to make that decision. I have been in enough pain that the admitting corpsman at the ER thought I was in withdrawl and I looked like I belonged on the set of night of the living dead .. but it was just a serious bout of kidney infection but if left up to you Id be hauled away to rehab and not given the pain meds.
By all means, go ahead and run the collection of my meds through your computer looking for bad interactions, but even that nanny-ing can be circumvented by going to more than one doctor and using more than one pharmacy. But dont sugest that pharmacists should be allowed to decide WHAT I can have prescribed to me. You will have my norethindrone when you pry it from my cold dead hands, or I go through menopause.
[QUOTE=pbbth]
Beyond that, if a doctor had a moral problem with providing a pap smear or a mammogram because they felt like cancer was god’s way of controlling the population would they have a right to deny their customers an important, routine service?
[/QUOTE]
Some already do, citing religious reasons (well, apparently. At the very least it is the next logical step). When reports about docs and pharmacists refusing to prescribe or sell Plan B, I was livid but found some hemming and hawing among a few reasonable women. They didn’t believe me when I told them The Pill was next, even in New York and L.A…
Refusal to supply birth control to a woman who needs it for medical reasons would be like refusing to abort a fetus that could harm the mother.
[/QUOTE]
You know what’s scary? Some actually do just that.
Cat Fight, that article makes me want to vomit in terror. Some doctors think that checking women for cancer to prevent an untimely, painful death is immoral? That is bullshit. If you don’t want to perform pap smears don’t become an OB/GYN. If you don’t want to distribute birth control pills don’t become a pharmacist. If I went to work (I’m an insurance agent) and said that I didn’t want to write auto insurance because cars are damaging the environment and I am morally opposed I would be fired before I could turn around, but some asshat with a religious bug up his butt can force lifestyle changes onto their customers or deny them necessary medical care because they don’t like it? Fuck them!
[QUOTE=Giraffe]
As an aside, it’s a common misconception that the morning after pill disrupts implantation of a fertilized egg. In fact, the morning after pill works exactly the same as the regular birth control pill by preventing ovulation. Most people assume that impregnation happens immediately after sex and thus the morning after pill is wiping out a fertilized egg, but in fact it can take several days for the miracle of knocking someone up to occur. Taking Plan B is just setting up the same chemical roadblocks that the regular birth control pill does, only more hastily and thus less effectively.
[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately, there are quite a few people out there promoting the idea that birth control pills, the morning after pill, and Depo Provera all cause abortions, even though we have no way of knowing whether they do or not and, if they do, how often this happens. Don’t believe me? Just Google Birth Control Pill Abortion.
[QUOTE=Rubystreak]
What I’m surprised about is the assumptions that are being made about women who take the Pill. Yes, many women take it for contraception, which is what the pharmacy in the OP objects to. However, there are many other reasons why the Pill might be prescribed, such as ovarian cysts, excessively heavy flow, etc. The pharmacist doesn’t particularly have the right to ask you WHY you are filling a prescription, if it’s a valid scrip from a real doctor. Thus, they are not only disciminating against women who are trying to control their own reproductive life, but also against women who legitimately need the medicine and who have as much right to have it as people do to have acne medication or Viagra (if not moreso if we’re placing completely irrelevant personal judgments on other people’s medical necessities here).
[/QUOTE]
Just wanted to note that I was not equating the pill to condoms, I was answering someone who did. I am well aware of the variety of things that the pill is good for.
[QUOTE=Antinor01]
Just wanted to note that I was not equating the pill to condoms, I was answering someone who did. I am well aware of the variety of things that the pill is good for.
[/QUOTE]
I was just extrapolating on your point, not trying to single you out as someone who doesn’t understand the “valid” medical uses for the Pill.