Illinois Pharmacists Balk at Contraception

[WanderAimlessly]

Time to boycott Walgreens

**Illinois Pharmacists Balk at Contraception **
By JIM SUHR,
AP Business Writer
1 hour, 43 minutes ago

ST. LOUIS - Walgreen Co. said it has put four Illinois pharmacists in the St. Louis area on unpaid leave for refusing to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception in violation of a state rule.

The four cited religious or moral objections to filling prescriptions for the morning-after pill and “have said they would like to maintain their right to refuse to dispense, and in Illinois that is not an option,” Walgreen spokeswoman Tiffani Bruce said

Full story

PF

 

[Karin]

WanderAimlessly:

Time to boycott Walgreens PF

Perhaps they (pharmacists) should look for employment in another state?!?!

 

[WanderAimlessly]

Karin:

Perhaps they (pharmacists) should look for employment in another state?!?!

Why should they be inconvenienced by having to move. The are following their moral conscious not to commit murder.

PF

 

[Karin]

Well if they are breaking the law…either move somewhere were the moral conscious can be exercised or perhaps look into another job field?

 

[Karin]

Walgreen policy says pharmacists can refuse to fill prescriptions to which they are morally opposed — except where state law prohibits — but they must take steps to have the prescription filled by another pharmacist or store, Bruce said

They will remain on unpaid leave “until they either decide to abide by Illinois law or relocate to another state” without such a rule or law. For example, she said, the company would be willing to help them get licensed in Missouri and they could work for Walgreen there.

So why did they not just get another pharmacist to fill the prescriptions? The company alllows this option

 

[WanderAimlessly]

Karin:

Well if they are breaking the law…either move somewhere were the moral conscious can be exercised or perhaps look into another job field?

No they are not. They are breaking an illegal and immoral executive order that blatently violates the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act.

PF

 

[Petergee]

Well if they are breaking the law…either move somewhere were the moral conscious can be exercised or perhaps look into another job field?

No doubt they became pharmacists long before this immoral law was introduced, and they chose that profession in order to cure people, not kill them. Why should they have to leave their profession or their home? How would you like it if the government passed a law saying that everybody who belongs to your occupation is COMPELLED to kill people?

So why did they not just get another pharmacist to fill the prescriptions?

Arranging for someone else to commit an immoral act is still immoral on your part. In fact it’s arguably even worse than doing the deed yourself, because you’re leading another person into sin.

 

[Karin]

Petergee:

No doubt they became pharmacists long before this immoral law was introduced, and they chose that profession in order to cure people, not kill them.** Perhaps I do not know. ANd did they have issues handing out with an RX birthcontrol pills? OR are they selectivaly not filling RX’s??**
Why should they have to leave their profession or their home? **Well if they can not work at Walgreens becuase it conflicts with their morals perhaps they should work at another pharmacy then in the area? ** How would you like it if the government passed a law saying that everybody who belongs to your occupation is COMPELLED to kill people?
I would have to laugh…but as a citizen are we not supposed to follow the laws of our goverment?
.

Petergee:

Arranging for someone else to commit an immoral act is still immoral on your part. In fact it’s arguably even worse than doing the deed yourself, because you’re leading another person into sin.

But if the other person does not have an issue with it, why the big fuss? Just as not everyone is against abortion not everyone (pharmacist) has an aversion to giving out ABC etc.

 

[Karin]

WanderAimlessly:

No they are not. They are breaking an illegal and immoral executive order that blatently violates the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act.

PF

People can argue that there are many immoral laws, as an example aboriton and the womans right to get one.
I for one have not problem with this law…if you do not want to fillt he RX and your co-worker will fill than pass it over to them!

 

[WanderAimlessly]

Karin:

I for one have not problem with this law…if you do not want to fillt he RX and your co-worker will fill than pass it over to them!

Unfortunately, they do not even have that “right” under this diktat. And, even if they did, as Petergee stated:

Petergee:

Arranging for someone else to commit an immoral act is still immoral on your part. In fact it’s arguably even worse than doing the deed yourself, because you’re leading another person into sin.

PF

 

[Karin]

WanderAimlessly:

Unfortunately, they do not even have that “right” under this diktat. And, even if they did, as Petergee stated:
PF

actually they do…as stated in your original article…

---

Walgreen policy says pharmacists can refuse to fill prescriptions to which they are morally opposed — except where state law prohibits — but they must take steps to have the prescription filled by another pharmacist or store, Bruce said

Now i could of read that wrong…but I read it to mean that another pharmacist can fill it or they can send them to another pharmacy to get it filled.

As to the other part what if I am the other pharmacist working with you,…I have no issue filling this RX so why not just give it to me ???

 

[WanderAimlessly]

I have been following this for quite awhile. Here is Blagojevich’s own words from a NY Times Article:

“Our regulation says that if a woman goes to a pharmacy with a prescription for birth control, the pharmacy or the pharmacist is not allowed to discriminate or to choose who he sells it to or who he doesn’t sell it to,” Mr. Blagojevich, a Democrat, said. “No delays. No hassles. No lectures.”

Sounds like the pharmacist has absolutely no right to even hand it off.

PF

 

[Karin]

WanderAimlessly:

I have been following this for quite awhile. Here is Blagojevich’s own words from a NY Times Article:Sounds like the pharmacist has absolutely no right to even hand it off.

PF

Then perhaps they should as Walgreens asks…either fill the RX, relocate with Walgreens help to another state that does not have these laws or perhaps get a job in another pharmacy that does NOT SELL these things!

 

[WanderAimlessly]

Then perhaps they should as Walgreens asks…either fill the RX, relocate with Walgreens help to another state that does not have these laws or perhaps get a job in another pharmacy that does NOT SELL these things!

In my opinion, that policy makes Walgreens complicit in enforcing Blagojevich’s dikat.

PF

 

[CatholicCid]

Just laws are meant to be followed. One should protest unjust ones, but they will face consequences for their action.
Can’t discriminate against the customer, but can discriminate against the staff. (4 Pharmacist, 188 Stores in IL, 3-5 Pharmacist per store… Those 4 are the minority… But they have moral convictions so discriminate right away)

 

[Petergee]

Karin:

People can argue that there are many immoral laws, as an example aboriton and the womans right to get one.

Laws, or the lack thereof, which PERMIT immoral acts are one thing. Laws like this one which purport to actually COMPEL people to perform immoral acts such as facilitating abortion, are a totally different type of “immoral law”. The only moral response to such a law is civil disobedience.

I for one have not problem with this law…if you do not want to fillt he RX and your co-worker will fill than pass it over to them!

If a pharmacist considered it was unethical to dispense a Valium or morphine prescription, it would be extremely UNethical just to pass the buck to a colleague. It’s the same principle for an unethical morning-after-pill prescription.

 

[Karin]

Petergee:

Laws, or the lack thereof, which PERMIT immoral acts are one thing. Laws like this one which purport to actually COMPEL people to perform immoral acts such as facilitating abortion, are a totally different type of “immoral law”.

I wonder if these 4 folks also refused to fill ABC prescriptions?
Or are they picking and choosing what to fill?

Petergee:

The only moral response to such a law is civil disobedience.

I guess one of the consequences then is that these people may perhaps loose their jobs because of their Disobedience.
Every action has a reaction !~

 

[Petergee]

I wonder if these 4 folks also refused to fill ABC prescriptions?
Or are they picking and choosing what to fill?

Of course they are. Picking and choosing what to fill is a very important part of every pharmacist’s job. Otherwise you may as well replace pharmacists with vending machines.

Possibly the point you are trying to make is that because oral contraceptives (especially the supposedly “gentler” progestogen-only “mini-pill”) can ALSO often cause an abortion, it would be logically inconsistent for a pharmacist who has no problem dispensing OCs (as you surmise is the case with these pharmacists) to refuse to dispense the MAP. I disagree. Abortion is far more likely to occur with the MAP than with OCs. In fact it is the major mechanism by which the MAP “works”. True, the difference is a matter of degree rather than an absolute difference, but I can understand a pharmacist differentiating between the ethics of the two types of product. While the OC usually worlks as a contraceptive and occasionally as an abortifacient, the MAP very rarely works as a contraceptive, despite its marketing as an “emergency contraceptive”. When the MAP “works” at all, it is nearly always by means of inducing an abortion.

I guess one of the consequences then is that these people may perhaps loose their jobs because of their Disobedience.
Every action has a reaction !~

And the point of this thread is that it is immoral for the company to sack people (or demand they move interstate) simply because of their refusal to be forcibly conscripted to facilitate abortion.

 

[Karin]

Petergee:

Of course they are. Picking and choosing what to fill is a very important part of every pharmacist’s job. Otherwise you may as well replace pharmacists with vending machines…

They should of never gone into the field then if they are not going to FILL all prescriptions that are presented to them.
IF this was a BIG issue for these folks then they should of applied to work at a pharamcy that does not sell these things! Do these pharmacists think that they know what is best for people, by picking and choosing what they want to fill?

Vending machines are sounding pretty good right about now…if my doctor gives me an RX for a medication that I need I want it filled.

 

[Karin]

Petergee:

And the point of this thread is that it is immoral for the company to sack people (or demand they move interstate) simply because of their refusal to be forcibly conscripted to facilitate abortion.

Well the law is written in such a way that the company has no option but to hold them accountable for filling these prescriptions…**if they do not want to do there job then they should not be empolyed! **