[Vision2020] Pharmacies and the morning after pill

[Joan Opyr]

> On Friday, March 10, 2006, at 08:38 PM, g. crabtree wrote:
>
>> Greetings Joan Opyr,
>>
>> In general I would say that in the case of the sheriff, IF it all 
>> went down as the victims sister and mother claim, I would think that 
>> their suit will prevail in court. A sheriff is elected/appointed to 
>> serve all the folks in his jurisdiction. To use his official capacity 
>> to prevent potentially life saving treatment to anyone is wrong, 
>> period.
>>
>> As to the pharmacy, or any other merchant for that matter, I believe 
>> they have the right to sell whatever merchandise they see fit, for 
>> whatever reason or no reason at all. Not every hospital elects to 
>> have the ability to perform an MRI or have a board certified 
>> ololaryngologist on staff even though either one could be potentially 
>> lifesaving. I don't think that every person in the world is entitled 
>> to every thing in the world at every location in the world.
>>
>> Having spent my formative years attending a Catholic school, I happen 
>> to know for a fact that unfortunate eyewear is permitted  by the 
>> edicts of Vatican II, mainly because it has been found that they are 
>> totally ineffective in the presence of a sixteen year old horn dog.
>>
>> G. Crabtree

Here's the thing though, Gary -- pharmacists are licensed by the state 
and pharmacies are legally required to stock "all usual and necessary 
medicines."  They don't have the legal right to refuse a particular 
medication to any patient if that medication has been legally 
prescribed.  It's not that I don't support the individual's right to 
refuse to participate in a practice that he or she finds repugnant; 
there are physicians who will not/do not perform abortions and medical 
schools where students are not trained in the procedure.  But 
pharmacies are not governed by the same laws as Pacifist Pawn Shops.  
If WalMart (or WalMart pharmacists) feel strongly that they do not want 
to supply the morning after pill, then perhaps they shouldn't be in the 
pill-selling business.

No, not every hospital has the capacity to perform an MRI, but they 
should provide the best care available and make a reasonable effort to 
ensure that a patient who needs an MRI can get an MRI -- referral?  
Life flight?  Greyhound bus from Riggins to Moscow?  Pharmacies are not 
hospitals.  Again, it's that stocking "all usual and necessary 
medicines" requirement.  See what I mean?  The problem is that in this 
specific case, i.e., WalMart pharmacies, the morning after pill is a 
completely legal medication and pharmacies must/should stock it.  Would 
we put up with a white supremacist pharmacist who refused to fill 
prescriptions for sickle cell anemia?  Or Tay-Sachs?  (Yes, I know that 
these are extreme examples, but this is where I believe the logic you 
outline leads.  Individual pharmacists making individual judgments 
about individuals they have no legal right to deprive of legitimately 
prescribed medication.)

(BTW, yours was an excellent last line.  I have to admit that I was 
thinking of Catholic School boys in birth control glasses rather than 
girls.  There -- I've revealed my inherent sexism.  Whoops.)

Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
www.joanopyr.com