Woman denied the Pill ‘because of religion'

[2millionways]

A pharmacist refused to hand over contraceptive pills prescribed by a doctor – because of her religious beliefs.

More at:
Woman denied the Pill ‘because of religion' | Metro.co.uk

I am not Pharmacist but will start studying pharmacy next year.

The above issue completely cannot fit in my head.

Since pharmacists have to act in the best interest of patients (code of conduct) why stories like this happen????

Since science, medicines and importance of public health brought you into this profession why this sudden refusal to do your duty and why you bring religion into the matter.

I wrote 'you' as I know about pharmacist who refused to sell the morning after pill (on Sunday shifts) because of the same reason. So it is not rare problem.

Lastly, does anyone know what is position of RPSGB into this matter. Since I read many articles of ‘bad behaved’ pharmacists in every PJ, why RPSGB does not make it clear and really stop this happening.

I asked many questions but would like to confront pharmacist who actually refuse to sell contraceptive pills or morning after pills, and could elaborate on it.

Thank you.

[LeftArm]

I know one pharmacist who does not provide EHC services for religious reasons but will dispense if prescribed by a doctor.
I think Lloyds may be in breach of their contract for not supplying in this case.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/8557816.stm

[roper]

The RPSGB position is that the "conscience clause" allows a pharmacist to refuse a supply in these circumstances as long as they "signpost" the patient to an alternative pharmacy where they can obtain it. As I understand it doctors have a similar issue in that some may refer patients elsewhere to obtain the necessary signatures for approval of an abortion - but should not delay the process unduly such that the patient is unable to obtain what the law of the land says is a permissable procedure. There is plenty of debate on the subject but the current code of ethics supports a pharmacist making a refusal on religious grounds. There was another Lloyds pharmacy, within walking distance, prepared to make the supply. I understand the woman's indignation as she may feel "judged" but she really went over the top going to the papers.

[dizzyb23]

I have come across many Pharmacists who refuse to do various things like not selling the EHC......it's been going on for a long time...

[Nik]

I understand the woman's indignation as she may feel "judged" but she really went over the top going to the papers.

This couldn't have been the first time the pharmacist refused to supply such a script so what happened to all the other women who were refused ? Probably were a bit angry at first, then annoyed because they had to go to another chemist. Interesting to note though that the woman in question said she was using the drug for endometriosis. So where does the argument of religion stand against the use of the drug for a different indication ?

[Pharmanaut]

My thoughts are that it is up to individual patient to make the decision.
It is not my place to make that for them, or judge anyone based on whatever religious beliefs I have.

[Fleegle]

This is a delicate issue. From my experience, problems like this arise through either ignorance or disrespect of the religious beliefs of another person. I have been practising in Ireland for 12 years now. Whilst hormonal contraception is now widely prescribed, EHC is still strictly prescription-only, and abortion is illegal. Condoms were kept under the counter in many pharmacies until relatively recently (if stocked at all). The mood is probably shifting gradually towards a 'more liberal' outlook, but it must not be forgotten that Ireland is, and will remain a Catholic country, and the religious views of the population, including health-care professionals must be respected.

My personal view is that a pharmacist is perfectly within his/her rights to refuse to supply contraception of any form if it makes them feel in any way uncomfortable with respect to their religious beliefs, which very often have been an integral part of their daily way of life since early childhood.

Fleegle.

[Sir_Dispensalot]

i know of another pharmacist involved in a similar case a couple of years ago - this was discussed in a previous thread. You aren't doing anything wrong providing you clearly signpost the patient to another place willing to supply. Yes, the patient felt embarrassed. They then ran to a newspaper to attempt to humiliate the person who 'wronged' them. I think it's a worse reflection upon the newspaper for falling for such lazy journalism.

[DavidS]

I put don't know.

I guess if no-one in the country agreed with the pill, then we wouldn't be having this debate? Does it mean because maybe only one person (*) in the country feels a certain way that this one person should be forced to act against their beliefs?

(* I know there are many more than that)

[roper]

I have not used the conscience clause myself but defend its existence. If we get to the situation where pills to cause abortion are given out in community pharmacy, (some people feel that EHC is close to this but I am meaning drugs such as misoprostolol or mifepristone for express purpose of aborting a known pregnancy at poss 7 or 8 weeks etc), then I would like the right to gently direct the patient to an alternative pharmacy. Nurses can also opt not to be involved in abortion procedures etc. Obviously, it is appropriate to give some thought to where you work as if you held such an objection and took a job in an abortion clinic that would be plain stupid, but community pharmacy is not so specialised. I have come across people unwilling to supply EHC but personally have not seen refusal of regular contraceptives aimed to act before conception. I see the inconvenience but as the code of ethics allows this course of action I want to support the individual involved in this case.