The personal beliefs of pharmacists cannot outweigh their professional duty — or the law

Posted on July 4, 2016 by Pharmaciststeve

Supreme Court right to not interfere with Wash. state’s pharmacy contraceptive rules

http://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/editorials/supreme-court-right-to-not-interfere-with-wash-states-pharmacy-contraceptive-rules/

I wonder if Judge Susan Graber‘s opinion “Speed is particularly important considering the time-sensitive nature of emergency contraception and of

many other medications…

The personal beliefs of pharmacists cannot outweigh their professional duty — or the law.”

could apply to medications that are used for subjective diseases (pain, anxiety, depression, ADD/ADHD, mental health) that the pt should not be subjected cannot send the woman to another pharmacy miles away… which seems to describe the “Pharmacy crawl “

Does this open a “can of worms” for those Pharmacists who believe that they can reject filling a otherwise legal Rx … for any reason ?

The U.S. Supreme Court was right not to interfere with Washington’s rules regarding a woman’s access to emergency contraception at the pharmacy.

 It took nine years, but the abortion proxy war at the pharmacy counter is finally over.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week declined to consider Washington’s 2007 rules, essentially ensuring women’s access to emergency contraception.

 In taking a pass, the Supreme Court upheld the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling last year, which found that Washington’s rules struck just the right balance between a pharmacist’s professional duty to fill a lawful prescription and his or her religious-based objection to emergency contraception, such as Plan B, because it can stop conception or terminate a fertilized egg.
 The pharmacy board’s rules were thoughtful back in 2007, when they were acting on reports that some pharmacists were refusing to dispense prescriptions that followed a decision made by a woman and her doctor. And they are particularly good nearly a decade later, when access to a full range of reproductive medicine continues to be under attack.
[Pro/con: Should pharmacists have religious freedom in America?]

In recent weeks, a state judge correctly ruled that public hospital districts must follow state law and provide abortions themselves — and not outsource the duty to Planned Parenthood — if they provide maternity care. And the U.S. Supreme Court turned back Texas’ stealth attempt to shut down abortion clinics with undue medical regulations.

In the pharmacy case, the state rules say a pharmacist can simply hand an objectionable prescription to another non-objecting pharmacist on-site, if one is available, but cannot send the woman to another pharmacy miles away.

“Speed is particularly important considering the time-sensitive nature of emergency contraception and of many other medications,” federal appellate Judge Susan Graber wrote in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling last year. She also noted that the pass-the-prescription game subjected women to shame for seeking a lawful medicine.

The personal beliefs of pharmacists cannot outweigh their professional duty — or the law.

 
Editorial board members are editorial page editor Kate Riley, Frank A. Blethen, Ryan Blethen, Donna Gordon Blankinship, Brier Dudley, Mark Higgins, Jonathan Martin, William K. Blethen (emeritus) and Robert C. Blethen (emeritus).

Filed under: General Problems

« »

Leave a Reply

Discover more from PHARMACIST STEVE

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading