The slippery slope of “Pharmacists’ Rights”

[ahem]

I was reading a thread (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4318734) about a CVS pharmacist refusing to fill a prescription for the “morning-after” pill, and this part stuck in my head:

"Our policy is to fill prescriptions for all customers in a timely manner and to make sure their needs are met and that they are satisfied," Eileen Howard Dunn, vice president of corporate communications and community relations for CVS, said yesterday. "As an employer, however, we must also accommodate a sincerely held religious conviction that may prevent a pharmacist from dispensing a certain prescription."

I wonder how far this can go. What if a pharmacist had a “sincerely held religious conviction” that life-extending medications conflict with God’s plan for a natural end-of-life? What if a pharmacist had a “sincerely held religious conviction” that you shouldn’t be able to have your blood pressure medicine or insulin because you’d be cheating God’s plan for you?

At what point would CVS and other companies find a problem with the “sincerely held religious convictions” of their employees? How extreme would the impact on the customers’ medical needs have to be?

I’m going to write to Ms. Dunn of CVS ( [e-mail] ) to see what she has to say. If I get a response, I’ll share it.

(My thanks to DUer ac8916 for the info in the other thread.)

[Horse with no Name]

1. Now wait

I thought CVS said they would fill ALL prescriptions...this is a flip flop from their original position.

[ahem]

6. I think you're right. I need to find the original statements where

CVS said they would fill all prescriptions. I'd like to include that in my letter to Ms. Dunn.

[Warren DeMontague]

32. See post #30. Fax to Planned Parenthood from CVS. n/t

[ahem]

7. Well I searched the archives and found several articles detailing

incidents of CVS denying BC meds to customers going back through 2004. So maybe it isn't a flip-flop after all, just a bad policy that's been in effect for a while. I'll keep researching.

[DBoon]

2. How about patients' rights?

something like "our customers have to right to have all legal prescriptions filled promptly and courteously, without religious or moral lectures from the pharmacist"?

You should know that pharmacies are very very profitable departments. If CVS lost pharmacy business, it would hurt them financially.

[ahem]

27. That would be a great policy:

"our customers have a right to have all legal prescriptions filled promptly and courteously, without religious or moral lectures from the pharmacist"?

But I wonder if any of the chain pharmacies would be willing to commit to that.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

3. WHY is religion an "out" for doing your job??????

How about a vegetarian working at McDonalds...can they refuse to serve meat? That's a sincere belief for some that doesn't happen to fall under the heading of religion, but I believe those people are just as sincere.

If I am a sun worshiper, can I take all sunny days off?

[oldcoot]

4. I have wondered about that issue

I suspect that the reason so many have been willing to tolerate pharmacies allowing pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control pills and morning after pills, is the lingering sexual double standard. There are some who still believe that women are immoral if they enjoy sex. I am not so sure that so many would have been so forgiving if these pharmacists would have refused to fill another type of prescription.

[ahem]

5. You're right.

It is the sexual double standard, pure and simple.

[havocmom]

24. Some female pharmacists should develope a religious doctrine which

says erectile dysfucntion is God's will and should not be tampered with. Let's see how concerned they are with employees' religious standards when customers can't get Viarga scrips filled!

[Orangepeel]

8. some vegan pharmacist

needs to declare he/she won't fill prescriptions developed with animal testing. That'll put a stop to calls for "pharmacist rights"

[ahem]

10. Or he/she won't fill scripts for pills in capsules since gelatin is used

to make the capsules (gelatin being made from animal bits 'n all.)

[Orangepeel]

18. that'll work

that can even have religious reasons behind it, so it will be completely analogous.

[ComerPerro]

9. The pharmacist just dispenses the drug. He/she does not perscribe or deny

They are not qualified to make those decisions.

Their job is to fill orders. That's it.

[etherealtruth]

12. OK let me be clear ...

... the refusal of pharmacists to do their job pisses me off! If you have moral objections to a job ---- DO NOT TAKE THAT JOB. No one's forcing anyone to take jobs which they find morally repugnant.

But ....


"Their job is to fill orders. That's it." This is not even close to the truth. Pharmacists are highly educated health care professionals. They are my favorite health care resource.

[ComerPerro]

13. I seriously doubt the credentials and sincerity of anyone

who would refuse birth control.

And, its not a dig at pharmacists in general.

But, the fact remains, you don't go to a pharmacist to get a prescription. You go to a pharmacist to get the order filled.

The pharmacist is not the one who gets to choose whether you should be receiving the drugs. That's up to the physician who wrote your prescription.

The only thing a pharmacist can do is refuse the prescription if he has reason to suspect the person requesting it. But that can be cleared up by a call to the doctor.

These psychos are overreaching, and deserve to be fired because of their blatant disregard for their duty and for public health.

[etherealtruth]

15. I will NOT paint all pharmacists with the same broad stroke ...

I wonder if anyone has stats r/t to the # of pharmacists who actually use these (im)morals clauses.

"The pharmacist is not the one who gets to choose whether you should be receiving the drugs. That's up to the physician who wrote your prescription." Also not entirely true.

I have consistently opposed the pharmacists who attempt to meet THEIR needs vs. the needs of their patients.

I won't use this issue to diminish the role of the pharmacist ... as for the idiots refusing to fill scripts for patients ...they diminish themselves.

[ComerPerro]

16. Neither am I. But these assholes who are doing this need to shut up

and get over themselves, or resign immediately, because they are in the wrong line of work.

[etherealtruth]

17. Now we agree 100%

O8)

[ahem]

14. There are pharmacists with prescriber status...

While I have a huge problem with those that try to deny us the medication that our doctors have prescribed (and their employers who allow them to), please remember there are great pharmacists our there. In fact, in 2002 New Mexico granted prescriber status to their pharmacists for the "morning-after" pill. So there are some out there who not only wouldn't deny it, but would prescribe to you themselves.

The job is about more than filling orders.

[seabeyond]

11. female is suppose to suffer. our original sin. yes, how far do they

get to take it. do i get my little magical pill that cuts my pain once a month, or does some man say no, i must suffer. to remember the sinner i am

[Nobody]

23. That old line. They always forget Adam's curse

when they trot out that moldy oldie.

Remember what Adam was curse with: that he should labor by the sweat of his brow. Power tools and farm equipment aren't biblical!

Let's all get jobs at John Deere tractor co. and refuse to allow men to buy them. After all.....


:sarcasm:

[wli]

19. boycott cvs

[greendog]

20. Can a drug store cashier refuse to ring up your purchace...

...if it conflicts with his/her religious beliefs? If the pharmacist has that "right" so should every other employee in the company.

[ahem]

22. Interesting question! I think they sell a limited selection of wine at the

CVS closest to me. I wonder if they would give a cashier refusing to sell alcohol due to his/her religious convictions the same out. Hmm. Or what about a cashier refusing to sell over-the-counter meds for some reason, or condoms?

[greendog]

26. Or what about a magazine that contained an article...

...that disagreed with the cashiers beliefs.

You know, it wouldn't be too hard for someone to get a cashiers job at CVS and "test" this new "right" they've given their employees. A decent lawyer could have a lot of fun with this. And think of the publicity. :evilgrin:

[eridani]

21. Nothing wrong with CVS allowing this, PROVIDED--

--that they always have substitute pharmacists on hand.

[Nobody]

25. I frequent two Middle Eastern restaurants

Both are owned by Muslim families and the food at both places is excellent.

Not once have I ever been denied a bottle of wine to go with my meals. Muslims never drink alcohol, but that doesn't prevent them from getting a liquor license and serving it to others who may or may not share their religious beliefs.

If they make any comments at all, it's to recommend that we try a new brand. Since they don't drink it themselves, they rely on regulars like us to tell them how we like it.

[Warren DeMontague]

28. Looky there. Another reason to shop COSTCO.

I mean, if this isn't about what are supposedly Pharmacists' "sincerely held religious convictions" and how that pertains to lecturing women, holding their prescriptions hostage, and denying them their pills, it's not about anything. Therefore, this CVS "policy" is meaningless, and it amounts to a carte blanche free pass to pharmacists who pick and choose about how to do their JOB.

Fuck 'em. If that's true, I'd say it's time for Planned Parenthood to change CVS's rating on the PPFA scorecard, too!

http://www.saveroe.com/fillmypillsnow/scored.php

[ahem]

29. Thanks for the link to the scorecard!

I think I'll write PP about this.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. The fax they sent to PP addresses some of the issues.

Judging by that, they don't sound so bad (although I'd still use Costco, just on general principles)- see post #30.

[Warren DeMontague]

30. Looks like the CVS fax to Planned Parenthood Addresses some of this:

http://www.saveroe.com/media/104_cvsmay2005fax.pdf

Sounds like they respect the beliefs of individual pharmacists, but if that means they will have a problem filling particular prescriptions, they have to let the company know in advance, (no spur of the moment -sorry, I can't fill that-) and filling the prescription in a timely fashion for the customer is paramount, so presumably the customer would never notice. Plus, pharmacists are prohibited from discussing their personal views on birth control with customers.

Overall, judging by the fax, the policy seems like one I could live with.

[ahem]

33. I'm not happy with the policy in practice, though.

In 2004 there was this story:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-11-08-druggists-pill_x.htm

For a year, Julee Lacey stopped in a CVS pharmacy near her home in a Fort Worth suburb to get refills of her birth-control pills. Then one day last March, the pharmacist refused to fill Lacey's prescription because she did not believe in birth control.

"I was shocked," says Lacey, 33, who was not able to get her prescription until the next day and missed taking one of her pills. "Their job is not to regulate what people take or do. It's just to fill the prescription that was ordered by my physician."

Then from the story that prompted my interest today:

http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20050811_covcvs.183b5f69.html

Dunn, who declined to identify either the patron or the pharmacist, said that the customer pulled up to the store's drive-up window at about 10 p.m. The pharmacist on duty at the 24-hour store refused to fill the prescription because it conflicted with his or her personal beliefs, Dunn said.

Instead, Dunn said, the customer was given the option of either returning to the store the next morning or having CVS send the prescription to another 24-hour store, in Warwick, where it could be filled immediately.

[Warren DeMontague]

34. If women have had prescriptions not filled; that seems to me to be

in direct conflict with their stated policy, as I would understand it.

It's interesting that PPFA has a button about CVS that says "NEW!" where they give them the thumbs-up. I do recall a bit of controversy about CVS and the PPFA approval, maybe a month or so ago. Maybe this is why.

And if the Rhode Island Story is recent, we should make sure Planned Parenthood is aware of it.

Personally, I'd err on the side of Costco, myself.

[ahem]

35. Seems that PP is aware...

The RI story is from last week.

From the story:

"Why are we placing undue obstacles on a woman?" Kathy Kushnir, vice president of external affairs for Planned Parenthood, said. "If a woman presents a legal prescription, it must be filled at that time -- period, end of story.

"And even if this is just one case, it's a major case because we have a woman going from pharmacy to pharmacy trying to fill a valid prescription," Kushnir said. "That is criminal."

<snip>

"The sooner you take it, the more effective it is," Kushnir said, adding that a pharmacist who refuses to fill the prescription has no way of knowing what the customer's time constraints are unless they engage in an inappropriate conversation.

"They don't know when a woman might have unprotected sex or if she had sex against her will," Kushnir said. "A woman with a valid, legal prescription should not have to have that conversation with her pharmacist . . . and she should not be sitting there in the store doing the math."

Maybe they'll change the scorecard.

I completely agree with you about Costco. I hope we get a Costco in my town sometime soon! They really sound wonderful.

[Warren DeMontague]

37. Yep. Time to update the web page!

It's amazing to me, just how many of these nutjob pharmacists there are. Seems like they're all coming out of the woodwork, now. I'd wager it's another case of the far right theocrats feeling particularly emboldened by *'s "man-date".

Sigh.

[TWiley]

36. Of course. They are in business to RAM RELIGION down

everyones throat. Silly me. I thought they were in business to fill perscriptions.