Politics, News & Issues >
Politics, News & Issues (Other)
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould pharmacists be forced to violate religious beliefs by selling the morning after pill?
Results so far:
| No | 41% | 408 votes | Total: 987 votes | |
| Yes | 59% | 579 votes |
No
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesNo, pharmacists should not be forced to violate their religious beliefs to sell anything, nor should anyone else. Freedom of practicing one's religion as one chooses is one of the basic freedoms we enjoy as Americans. No one should ever be forced to compromise their religion for any reason.
That being said, in the case of an independent pharmacy, religion doesn't have to come into play at all. They should be able to stock whatever they want by way of prescriptions and anything else they sell in their drugstore. If they don't like the Gatorade rep, they don't have to sell Gatorade. People who like Gatorade will have to go somewhere else to buy their drinks. If they don't want to sell Playboy magazine, they don't have to. It't their store; they can and should be able to sell whatever they want. And they shouldn't have to stand on religious grounds.
Now in the case of a large Pharmacy Chain, like Walgreens, for instance, a pharmacist should still be able to refuse to fill the prescription. But he or she should have to give it to another pharmacist to take the pill from one bottle and put it in another bottle for the customer. If he or she is opposed to this pill and Walgreens decides to distribute it, and it really bothers him or her that much, it's time to look for another job. At the drugstore that won't sell Gatorade.
But Walgreens should not be able to force the pharmacist to handle or distribute the pill if it violatews his or her religious stance.
If I was Muslim and my religion required me to pray facing Mecca a few times every day, and my employer forbade this, there would be a civil suit filed so fast by the ACLU that there'd would be skidmarks near the courthouse. And rightfully so; because my religion would dictate that I do this and I should have to compromise it for the sake of my job.
There is no difference between that analogy than that of a pharmacist whose religion forbids what they see, as abortion.
This is a no-brainer, folks. If someone wants the morning after pill and gives the prescription to Walgreens or CVS or whatever drugstore they choose, and the pharmacist on duty says they'll have to wait until someone else can fill it, or refuses to fill it on religious grounds, they can simply take the prescription somewhere else. Chances are they would have to wait a while if they took it to Walgreens anyway. But at least they'd be able to get some gatorade while they were waiting.
Learn more about this author, Michelle Williams.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Yes
Every person who becomes a pharmacist has to adhere to a code of ethics, which has been written and adopted by pharmacists.
The third part of that code, apparently, is as follows:
"A pharmacist respects the autonomy and dignity of each patient." (SOURCE: http://www.uspharmd. com/pharmacist/Pharm acist_Oath_and_Code_ of_Ethics.html)
What this means, in a nutshell, is that a pharmacist has promised, solemnly, to respect the beliefs and choices of each patient, respecting the patient's personal belief system and the course given to them by their doctor.
What it also means is this:
If a person who has very strong religious beliefs that would prevent them from distributing a prescribed drug to any individual, for whatever reason, that person should not become a pharmacist.
Period.
It seems to me there is little more to say on this matter, but I'll add this:
If we ignore the "morning after pill" part of this topic, and extend the topic to include any treatment a pharmacist might find immoral, the problem becomes more clear.
There are plenty of people in this country and world who have very strong beliefs about all sorts of drugs, and they're not all Scientologists. Having a chronic pain disorder, I have run into many people who believe it is simply wrong for people like me to take narcotic pain killers. They don't know or care how much such drugs improve my quality of life. They simply believe narcotics are evil.
I know people who would rather let a person with ADHD, bipolar disorder, or severe depression suffer through their various torments than take their respective treatments.
If these attitudes were allowed to sway a pharmacist from doing his or her job, many people would simply suffer. Furthermore, if word got out that a pharmacist denied someone such a drug when it was prescribed for them, there would be public outcry, and rightfully so.
People deserve fair, respectful, confidential treatment for their problems. We all have problems. Imagine if you had a problem and were denied the help you deserve because the person you relied on for help thought you were being immoral for seeking help in the first place. That, plainly said, would suck.
It is incredibly important that pharmacists be held to their oath and code of ethics, that they trust and work alongside doctors and patients, and do their job to the best of their ability.
Without this, each of us could find ourself in a mess of trouble.
Learn more about this author, Josh Hostetler.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Politics, News & Issues (Other)
- Should the US continue to provide foreign aid to the Palestinians?
- Is the worst of the recession behind us?
- Should women be forced to serve if a country imposes a military draft?
- Should the Iranian president be allowed to visit 9/11 Ground Zero?
- Should the federal government give assistance to American auto makers?
- Should public housing be run by the government?
