Illinois Pharmacists Balk at Contraception

[chicago]

Rosalinda:

This is the response I received from Walgreens.

What a bunch of hooey. What they are really saying is, “We want to take the easy way out and not spend any money on legal battles,” all around.

And the fact that they insist upon calling this stuff “contraceptives”? A major pharmacy doesn’t really know better than that? COME ON! Replies like what they offered are nothing more than insulting efforts which presume that we are all a bunch of idiots.

 

[koda]

There have been several threads discussing workers who were fired for not doing their jobs and support has generally leaned toward the employer by a wide margin. The basic philosophy was: this is required by your job - if you don’t like it you can quit & the boss makes the rules. Why is this different?

I also think that Walgreen’s is being about as fair as they can be under the circumstances. They are a pharmacy and must comply with the law to keep their license. They are not the moral police (nor are the pharmacists). What if we get a a scientolgist pharmacist who doesn’t approve of anti-depressants and refusts to fill prescriptions? Is that okay? People have a right to the medications prescribed by their doctors and they shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to get them. If you don’t want to dispense certain drugs then perhaps you should go into another field of work - what your customers do is simply none of your business.

 

[Bella3502]

I should not have to explain to a pharmacist why my doctor gave me a prescription of any kind. They do not know more than doctors and if one of them decided that they did and refused to fill my prescription, I would do my best to have them fired from that job before they do any more dumb damage.

 

[Pug]

koda:

There have been several threads discussing workers who were fired for not doing their jobs and support has generally leaned toward the employer by a wide margin. The basic philosophy was: this is required by your job - if you don’t like it you can quit & the boss makes the rules. Why is this different?

I also think that Walgreen’s is being about as fair as they can be under the circumstances. They are a pharmacy and must comply with the law to keep their license

I think it is a little different because they trained and took the job and have been working for years with one set of rules and now the rules have changed underneath them. They weren’t told when they took the job that they’d have to do this. I don’t think it is much different, however.

I’m not sure if Walgreen’s is being fair. Jewel is not laying off or firing it’s pharmacists, and they are in the same state (IL). Does anyone know why it is Walgreen’s and not the other chains that are laying the pharmacists off? Jewel has had pharmacists refuse, I’ve read about it on the net. The rules aren’t different, so what gives? Are the pharmacists at Walgreen’s doing something different than the other refusing pharmacists?

 

[Rosalinda]

lifesite.net/ldn/2005/dec/05122202.html

ACLJ to Defend Two Pharmacists Fired for Refusing to Provide Abortifacients

WASHINGTON, DC, United States, December 22, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) –
The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) announced today that legal action is underway in defense of two pharmacists who were fired for refusing to hand out abortifacient drugs.

“These Conscience Clause cases are significant and represent the cutting edge of the abortion debate in our country right now;” ACLJ said in a statement to the press. “Doctors, nurses and pharmacists should not be compelled to violate their conscience and participate in an abortion procedure. We have already had success in a number of cases around the country, and we are confident that we will succeed in Illinois as well.”