Sevens
Forum Dominatrix
Mods, I didn't think this really qualified as political, but if you want to move it there or anywhere else where you feel it would be more fitting, please do so.
This has caused quite the stir here in little old Idaho. Basically it boils down to a pharmacist at Walgreens (yes, I know the pharmacist involved) refusing to fill a prescription for a drug that is given to stop/slow bleeding after live births, miscarriages, and abortions. She refused to fill it because the patient refused to tell her if she'd had an abortion. Now under Idaho law, a pharmacist doesn't have to fill a precription that goes against their personal tenets. This was passed in part because of the morning after pill and a lot of pharmacists feeling it was wrong to dispense that particular drug. The law states basically that the pharmacist may refuse to fill the scrip, BUT he or she MUST do everything in their power to find a pharmacist who WILL fill the scrip. I was just curious what you think. Was the pharmacist in the right because of the law? Or was she in the wrong because its not her place to implement her beliefs on others? Personally I'm on the side of the patient and Planned Parenthood. I think it was wrong of this pharmacist to refuse to fill the medication and I feel she needs to be more severely punished (she was only required to "re-study" Walgreens policy on scrip filling). What if this patient had died because of her refusal to fill the scrip? *shakes head* So longer post, shorter I'm just curious what others think about this.
http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/113433439.html
http://www.ktvb.com/news/Planned-Parenthood-files-complaint-against-Nampa-pharmacist-113429849.html
http://www.kivitv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13841719
This has caused quite the stir here in little old Idaho. Basically it boils down to a pharmacist at Walgreens (yes, I know the pharmacist involved) refusing to fill a prescription for a drug that is given to stop/slow bleeding after live births, miscarriages, and abortions. She refused to fill it because the patient refused to tell her if she'd had an abortion. Now under Idaho law, a pharmacist doesn't have to fill a precription that goes against their personal tenets. This was passed in part because of the morning after pill and a lot of pharmacists feeling it was wrong to dispense that particular drug. The law states basically that the pharmacist may refuse to fill the scrip, BUT he or she MUST do everything in their power to find a pharmacist who WILL fill the scrip. I was just curious what you think. Was the pharmacist in the right because of the law? Or was she in the wrong because its not her place to implement her beliefs on others? Personally I'm on the side of the patient and Planned Parenthood. I think it was wrong of this pharmacist to refuse to fill the medication and I feel she needs to be more severely punished (she was only required to "re-study" Walgreens policy on scrip filling). What if this patient had died because of her refusal to fill the scrip? *shakes head* So longer post, shorter I'm just curious what others think about this.
http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/113433439.html
http://www.ktvb.com/news/Planned-Parenthood-files-complaint-against-Nampa-pharmacist-113429849.html
http://www.kivitv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13841719