Protest follows denial of morning-after pill
 

Protest follows denial of morning-after pill
Tuesday, February 3, 2004 Posted: 2:41 PM EST (1941 GMT)

DENTON, Texas (AP) -- About 40 people gathered outside an Eckerd pharmacy Monday, protesting what they said was a decision to deny a rape victim a prescription for the morning-after pill.

...

Gay Dodson, executive director of the Texas State Board of Pharmacy, said state law allows pharmacists to decline filling prescriptions if the medication could harm the patient.

"The law does not say that the pharmacy can decline because of moral ground," she said.

Read the rest of the article here: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Southwest....ap/index.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is completely ridiculous. I hope this pharmacist got fired. :mad:

Re: Protest follows denial of morning-after pill
 

Wish granted.... I can't believe that these men tried to force their own morals on anyone, in violation of their state licenses and company policy. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Eckerd Fires 3 Pharmacy Workers

Pharmacists wouldn’t fill rape victim’s prescription for ‘morning-after’ pill

08:01 AM CST on Thursday, February 12, 2004

By Liz Austin / Associated Press Writer
http://www.dallasnews.com/s/dws/drc/....11e9b5f3.html

Eckerd Corp. has fired three pharmacists at the Denton store on University Drive who declined to fill an emergency contraception prescription for a woman who had been raped, one of the pharmacists said Wednesday.

Gene Herr, 33, of Denton said he and two co-workers were fired on Jan. 29, six days after refusing to fill the prescription.

Eckerd has declined to comment on their employment status. Joan Gallagher, the vice president of communications for Largo, Fla.-based Eckerd only would say the company had taken the appropriate disciplinary action.

Herr said he declined to fill the prescription for the so-called "morning-after pill" because he believes it could have killed the embryo if the woman already had conceived. Though he had declined five or six times in the past to fill such prescriptions, it was the first time he had been handed one for a rape victim, he said.

"I went in the back room and briefly prayed about it," said Herr, who had worked for Eckerd for five years. "I actually called my pastor at Denton Bible Church and asked him what he thought about it."

The two other pharmacists who were present at the time also declined to fill the prescription. Herr would not name them.

The rape victim had the prescription filled at the Walgreens across the street.

Gallagher said Eckerd’s employment manual says pharmacists are not allowed to opt out of filling a prescription for religious, moral or ethical reasons.

Herr said he did not know about that policy until his supervisors questioned him about it shortly before he was fired.

"In my mind if I agree to work for someone knowing that that’s their policy, then I should submit to that policy. But I didn’t even know about it," he said.

He declined to discuss his future plans.

Morning-after pills are higher doses of the hormones in regular birth control pills and have been sold under the brand names Plan B and Preven since 1998.

Taken within 72 hours of unprotected sexual intercourse, the pills are at least 75 percent effective at preventing pregnancy. They work by preventing ovulation or fertilization of an egg. If fertilization already has occurred, they prevent the egg from implanting into the uterus — the medical definition of pregnancy.

Herr said he’s disappointed but not angry or bitter.

"I’m a Christian. I feel like God gave me an opportunity to, I guess, make a stand for what is right," Herr said. "He’s gonna take care of me either way."

WHAT BULLSHIT! I'm so pissed about that story it's not even funny! Some people really need to shove that religion crap right where the sun don't shine! I'm sorry but that's just ridiculous! She was RAPED! ARGH! I'm so mad. That's just fuel for my fire as to why I don't practice religion. I'm sure that will help with Eckerd's current buy out situation. HA!

Re: Re: Protest follows denial of morning-after pill
 

Uninformed jacka$$. I hope they strip him of his license. :mad:

Thank goodness it wasn't in Florida this time! :relieved:

Sort of makes you wish that this pharmacist's mom had aborted him.

Amen and testify! He shoulda just filled the EFFING prescription, took his moral views elsewhere and mind his own damn business!

As far as being kicked to the curb: I hope he let the door hit him in the ass on the way out! :p

ZTAbchbum said:
Sister, I am with you on that one! I was raised Catholic but it is one reason why I left the religion and religion period. I didn't agree with some of the views

Its very irritating that they keep pointing out that the person denied the prescription was a rape victim. It doesn't matter why she needed the EC, its irrelavant to the point that the pharmacist was wrong. Her status as a rape victim doesn't make her any more entitled to EC than anyone else who may need it.

I can understand where the pharmacist is coming from in terms of his morality. If he feels so strongly about it, he should work for a religious institution so his job and his morality don't conflict with each other. Being a pharmacist at a drug store means you don't get to choose your patients and their medical needs. You fill the prescription as a doctor directs.

I'm a Christian, and I even I have a problem with this. It's not his decision to make, it's hers.

I'm pro-life, but I don't stand in front of abortion clinics and prevent women from going inside. I practice MY faith. I don't force it on others. :rolleyes:

What a jackass!!! He "went in the back room and prayed about it?!" WHAT?! It's called DO YOUR DAMN JOB!!!!

I wonder if he refused to fill birth control prescriptions and sell condoms, too.

I'm right there with you about the not practicing religion thing, ztabchbum.


:mad: :mad: :mad:

...and that's the way it should be. It's one thing to share your faith with those who ASK about it. It's another to force it down their throats and condemn them because they do not share your faith.

I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one on here that feels the way I do about religion. I really am happy that guy got fired and I think that American Airlines pilot should have been repremanded as well for preaching through that flight. Whoever said the statement as to it not mattering that she was a rape victim that no matter who she was she should have been given the pill is SO RIGHT! I myself went to a pharmacy to get the pill and was told be 3 different pharmacists that no such pill existed. THANKS A LOT! Things worked out for me, but that still doesn't make up for all the shit that happened.

How is this any different from a Doctor refusing to perform an Abortion? You cannot force him to supply a pill that will end up destroying what he feels is a life, that would be forcing your views on him. Devil's Advocate

supplying an abortion is not a requirement of every doctor's job, just like performing heart surgery is not every doctor's job. certain doctor's perform certain tasks.

however, a pharmacists job is to fill the subscriptions that a doctor has given a patient, regardless of what the drug is. therefore, this pharmacist did not perform a specified requirement of his job.

But this pill came out AFTER this guy was a pharmacist (I AM ASSUMING). If they all of a sudden started requiring pharmacists to kill every third person that walked up to the desk, would you feel he needed to do that? Now, I am playing devil's Advocate here, so please do not get angry. I am trying to point out, that this pharmacist obviously feels this is akin to what he would be doing by dispencing the pill. Why do you think your opinion is more important than his? Do you see my point?

New medications are constantly being introduced. Nice try.

No, his opinion and moral beliefs are valid, and no one asking him to give up his faith or compromise his beliefs. I also don't think anyone is thinking their opinion is more important than anyone elses. But this man violated corporate policy. And pleading ignorance is no excuse.

New drugs are being developed everyday, and I'm sure some people will find them objectionable. However, it is not up to the pharmacist to decided which drugs can and cannot be taken. A pharmacist is not a medical doctor. He is there to fill precriptions on behalf of the doctor, because the doctor feels that whatever medication is prescribed is the right course of treatment for the patient.
It doesn't matter that the pill came out ofter this man became a pharmacist because the company he worked for clearly had an established policy that he could not refuse to fill a prescription based on moral/ethical/religious reasons.

Well, if everyone followed what their company told them to do, this world would be a craphole, that is for sure. (i.e. Enron) As far as I am concerned, moral and ethical beliefs take priority over comapny policy, but maybe I am old fashioned... What I am saying, is that he DOES deserve to be fired, but do not insult the pharmacist, or say that he is wrong for doing what he believes is right.

And russellwarshay... I don't see what you are getting at, man.

Filling prescriptions of new medications is a constant process. It is not his job to evaluate the efficacy or legitimacy of these medications, as this is done by the FDA.

Of course, not everyone does exactly what their company tells them too, but it's certainly a cause to be fired, and he got what was coming to him. I don't know why you think we are sayign that his beliefs are wrong. No has said that. People disagree with his beliefs, and some feel that it was not his place to pace judgement/decide what course of treatment is correct for someone who is not his patient, etc, etc., but no one is saying his beliefs are wrong. Just that we disagreee with them.

His company is not trying to force him to engage in illegal activities. What they are doing is well within the boundaries of the law. If it is outside of his moral code it is his responsibility to leave that job, not expect corporate policy to change to suit his beliefs, and certainly not to refuse to perform his function.

"Some people really need to shove that religion crap right where the sun don't shine!"

"it kind of makes you wish the pharmacist's mother would have aborted him"

Um, these are a little more pointed than saying he should do what his job tells him to do. I think he SHOULD have been fired. He DESERVES to be fired. The point is that people WERE personallty attacking his decision. He made a MORAL decision to not supply someone with a drug that aborts what he feels is a life.

When he found out this pill was coming on the market, if he had such a strong feeling about it, he should have asked his supervisor (store manager, head pharmacist, whoever was above him) if he was going to be required to dispense it. If the answer didn't jibe with his moral code, he needed to quit his job THEN AND THERE. Not throw a wrench into the works when someone needed an emergency prescription.

From what I have read, he was the supervisor...

Why does it matter?

I guess what I mean is, he refused this drug to like 6 people and Eckard didn't seem to care... Maybe he had a deal w/ Eckards, and now they have finally fired him (which they should have done earlier) because it is media spotlight fodor.

Maybe the Corporate offices weren't aware he was refusing to fill thiese precriptions because no one bothered to complain about it.
I don't think it's media fodor. I think Eckard's was made aware of the issue and the took action.

Actually, now that I think of it, maybe he shouldn't have been fired. I believe this is Eckard's fault. You shouldn't have to agree to go against your moral beliefs to be a pharmacist. Eckards should have made sure someone at the pharmacy would agree toi disense the medication... Yes, he should have come forward with the release of the drug and said he would not agree to dispense it. Eckard should respect that, and staff someone at the location who WILL dispense the medication... How 'bout that?

Fact of the matter is, he didn't tell his superiors about his beliefs, he didn't ask another person to dispense the drug. So it's still his fault. Eckard were within their legal rights, and I think they did the right thing.

Agreed, he should have said something, and at that Point Eckard could have placed someone there in his stead. He could have been moved to a different pharmacy, or he could play a different role at the pharmacy or something.

Don't go blaming this on Eckard. Eckard is a business, and no business that wants to stay afloat is going to keep staff members who refuse to carry out their duties or who turn away customers to the competition (i.e., this woman who ended up going to the Walgreen's across the street).

This guy should have done his job. He was aware of the existance of this product, and should have known that he would one day encounter someone who wanted to purchase it. If he had a problem with that, he should have seriously considered a new career path. Chances are, he's going to have to do that now, anyway.

Exactly! Not to mention EC came out 10 years ago...it's only now become advertised to the point where almost everyone's familiar with it. Before then, doctors were telling women how to take regular BC in a mega-dose to basically do the same thing as EC.

Why do some "Christian" men feel like it's their business to prevent women from doing what they see fit with their reproductive lives?

Yeah, I should not have used the word fault... That isn't what I really meant. I guess what I mean is, Eckard has to respect the fact that some people might not want to dispence this drug. Maybe everyone will learn from this scenario. I agree that this fellow should have taken the hypotheetical into consideration before this tragedy happened though.

Why do you have to turn it into a religious/sexism thing?

Why should they "respect" someone who has managed to get their company's name dragged through the mud because of his actions? A lot of people are going to pick up on the Eckerd name before they remember this guy's name and before you know it, there will be an internet rumor that Eckerd doesn't give regular BC pills or something of the like.

Thank you for your opinion.:)

I can understand krazy's point. You shouldn't have to compromise your values to have a career. I am sure that their are other pharmacists who have a problem with this drug. What are they supposed to do?

I don't think that this situation has dragged Eckerd's name through the mud. It might spark an interesting debate on morality and religious values in the workforce. I do think that it is controversial that he was fired rather than placed in a position in which his religious beliefs weren't compromised. I actually think that Eckerd's reaction is going to be a big problem for them in the future.

Per the follow up article, there were actually THREE pharmacists on shift at this Eckerd that all refused to fill the prescription on personal moral grounds. All three were fired.

Until you own your own business & accept the risks, you don't have the right to make this kind of decision.

They can find or start a pharmacy that supports their beliefs. I'm sure many of the "Christian" hospitals with in-house pharmacy staff would accomodate their beliefs.

-Rudey

Wht kind of position do you think the pharmacists could be placed in so they wouldn't be in a position to possible compromise their moral/religious/ethical beliefs?