Pharmacist wont issue contraceptive pill to Janine Deeley on religious grounds

[Marv]

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

A woman has been refused the contraceptive pill because it was against the religious beliefs of a pharmacist.

The female employee at Lloyds pharmacy on Duke Street in Sheffield told Janine Deeley she could not give her the prescription on religious grounds.

Ms Deeley, 38, of Wybourn, was told she could pick up the pill the next day, when another staff member was on duty.

A Lloyds pharmacy spokeswoman said an investigation had begun.

She said: "Lloyds pharmacy is very sorry that Ms Deeley was refused supply of her prescribed contraceptive pill at our Duke Street pharmacy.

"We have launched an investigation into the incident and have been in contact with her to apologise for any distress and inconvenience caused."

The spokeswoman said she was not aware which religion the pharmacist followed.

[Pene784]

That pharmacist is a moron. You need to follow your own religion, not force others to follow it.

[TheMorningStar]

I bet he is happy to fill a prescription for Viagra.

[Dakota Valkyrie]

Wonder how far it is to the next pharmacy? I know I would have walked my business over.

[sorrow_discord]

hmm Can't say that this is only in the UK.

Had a local Pharmacist (I live is PA) insist that I needed a prescription for Plan B.

Ahh I am well over 17 years old and when I gave proof, they still insisted they need it.

[jus shaking my head]

My daughter-in-law was refused a prescription for birth control from a doctor because of the doctor's religion. She was told to cross her legs! Needless to say, traci went elsewhere.

Believe it or not, she was sent a bill! We haven't heard from her since traci called her and told her to uncross her legs to get the money.

[Athena]

I don't have a problem with this. I left my last doctor because her office wouldn't deal with Plan B. I didn't need it - I was just curious where they stood on the issue. I suspected they'd be that way about it, so once I found out, I found a new doctor.

Still, I think this is something that should be handled by the market. I don't think a pharmacist should be forced to hand out anything that contradicts their beliefs. However, I do think if it is against company policy to refuse, they should be fired.

[battery jackson]

here is the economic translation of how real people real with real things.

pharmacist: "sorry, your money is no good here if you want THAT."
customer: "oh ok, i'll just take my business elsewhere. have a nice life."

[Pete Bondurant]

WE NEED MORE WHITE BABIES!

[battery jackson]

WE NEED MORE WHITE BABIES!

except if they're from meth states

[Pete Bondurant]

except if they're from meth states

I do not believe there is a geographic restriction to meth-amphetamine use. I should say.....WE NEED MORE HEALTHY, WHITE BABIES!

[battery jackson]

I do not believe there is a geographic restriction to meth-amphetamine use. I should say.....WE NEED MORE HEALTHY, WHITE BABIES!

the problem with this is that the white people who tend to have the most babies are also our....hm how to put this....low class liabilities. hicks, rednecks, junkies, and other such useless ones. these are many of the people we read about every day on this site. wouldn't it make more sense to get rid of these people than to have more of them contributing to the population? i mean i don't care about race, i just hate all stupid fucks and patsies equally, but i feel like my idea makes more sense.

[malq]

except if they're from meth states

Every state is a meth state. We are a meth nation

[62julietandvoid]

My daughter-in-law was refused a prescription for birth control from a doctor because of the doctor's religion. She was told to cross her legs! Needless to say, traci went elsewhere.

Believe it or not, she was sent a bill! We haven't heard from her since traci called her and told her to uncross her legs to get the money.

Buahahahahaha!!!

[MC30]

hummm...don't most pharmacys sell condoms and other forms of otc birth control? i would assume that if she felt that strongly about the issue she would refuse to work there period. my awesome state has a law that any pharmacy can refuse a perscription based on beliefs without any problems regarding their employment. i think its bullshit. its all about hating on women. really. what if the pharmacist dosen't believe in blood transfusions and you had one so you need a clotting agent or WhatEver. is it okay for them to say well, its against my beliefs, sorry, maybe you'll make it 'till tomorrow, so come back then. and never mind the fact that some women are issued bc for reasons that have nothing to do with reproduction (cysts, hormones, ect.) its just another way for the religious right to try and throw their weight around.

[Gidget]

You know, sometimes birth control pills are prescribed when the patient is not at risk of being pregnant. For example, some women take birth control pills to regulate or lessen the severity of their menstrual cycles. And there are certain prescriptions that cause such severe birth defects that when they need to be prescribed, doctors will automatically prescribe birth control to females of childbearing age regardless of their sexual history.

The pharmacist should have kept her religious beliefs and her judgement of her patient to herself. Her behavior was unprofessional and she should be reprimanded accordingly.

[Aslan]

Companies have to cover their asses when it comes to employees. Keep that in mind.
While common sense would dictate "If you sell it, you have no say" that's not always the case.
For example, when I was a waitress I wouldn't serve alcohol to pregnant women. Just something I personally feel strongly about.
Now that didn't make them drinking illegal and our establishment couldn't turn them down, I would just find another server for the table who took care of them.
Sounds like this is what the guy did, told her to come back when someone else was working.

I'm really not sure why you would deny someone birth control, though.
Just looking at it from a different angle.

[runecire]

Not knowing the woman's background or situation, I will say this:

The moment one person's religious or political or social beliefs infringe on the rights and life of another, the first person is WRONG. His job is/was to dispense prescribed medication to PAYING customers, not to pass judgement on them by reason of his religion. Severe reprimand is in order, but I'm willing to bet this is not the first time. If it has happened before, my opinion is his employment should be terminated.

My guess is he's Catholic.

You don't have to be a six-footer.
You don't have to have a great brain.
You don't have to have any clothes on. You're
A Catholic the moment Dad came,

Because

Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate. ---Monty Python The Meaning of Life


***pssst...you're welcome for that earworm...bwahahahaha***

[MC30]

don't take this the wrong way y'all BUT..

The female employee at Lloyds pharmacy on Duke Street in Sheffield told Janine Deeley she could not give her the prescription on religious grounds.

[runecire]

don't take this the wrong way y'all BUT..

Whoops. Thanks, Momma. Momma...Momma...Momma

Okay, maybe SHE's Catholic.

insert Monty Python...again

[Tits McGee]

Companies have to cover their asses when it comes to employees. Keep that in mind.
While common sense would dictate "If you sell it, you have no say" that's not always the case.
For example, when I was a waitress I wouldn't serve alcohol to pregnant women. Just something I personally feel strongly about.
Now that didn't make them drinking illegal and our establishment couldn't turn them down, I would just find another server for the table who took care of them.
Sounds like this is what the guy did, told her to come back when someone else was working.

I'm really not sure why you would deny someone birth control, though.
Just looking at it from a different angle.

Wrong. The establishment has the right to refuse service to anyone. And if restaurant/bar DOES serve an obviously pregnant woman alcohol, and the baby is born with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome or some other disability, the mother can sue the establishment. I've turned down pregnant people when they wanted an alcoholic drink. If they don't like it, go home and drink. I'm not contributing to that.

[Athena]

Wrong. The establishment has the right to refuse service to anyone. And if restaurant/bar DOES serve an obviously pregnant woman alcohol, and the baby is born with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome or some other disability, the mother can sue the establishment. I've turned down pregnant people when they wanted an alcoholic drink. If they don't like it, go home and drink. I'm not contributing to that.

Actually, you're wrong, Tits. Please try to avoid spreading misinformation, especially the kind that could get people sued or fired.

Many an establishment has been sued and many a server fired for refusing to serve a pregnant woman. It is quite illegal to refuse to serve a pregnant woman because she's pregnant. However, I have never heard of a woman successfully suing an establishment that served her alcohol as the result of producing a child with fetal alcohol syndrome. In fact, a woman would only be able to sue if the bar did not inform her that drinking while pregnant could be harmful. Most bars avoid this liability by posting a sign informing women that drinking can be harmful.

The question, here, is what's protected and what isn't. An establishment cannot refuse service to quite anyone. They can't refuse a black man for being black. They can't refuse a handicapped person for being handicapped. They can't refuse a pregnant woman for being pregnant. How far should that extend? Should it extend to women seeking birth control? I don't know.

On a side note, "It's okay to drink [lightly] while pregnant, new study finds" and "As far as we know, drinking lightly during pregnancy does not have adverse consequences."

The fact is, there is nothing to suggest that, as some say, "even one glass of wine can harm a fetus". The government has adopted an abstinence-only policy because it's too difficult to explain to retarded Americans that heavy drinking is bad but light drinking is okay. As most people know, I'm currently expecting, and my OBGYN is a female that just recently had her own child. When going through the list of dos and don'ts during my first appointment, she specifically said, "No heavy drinking." I knew why, but asked anyway, and she broke it down - "I shouldn't say this, but you're obviously intelligent and you know the difference between light and heavy drinking. A lot of my patients aren't so sharp, so I just tell them 'No drinking'. It's easier than having to explain it."

If someone wants to go on thinking that any drinking at all will result in fetal alcohol syndrome, that's fine. It's not true, but it's not particularly harmful, either. I would just hope that this individual would keep their opinion to themselves and certainly not impose their views on another individual.

[Marv]

I don't think a pharmacist should be forced to hand out anything that contradicts their beliefs.

I do.

She knew that part of the job would involve handing out contraceptives. If she was not comfortable with that because of her 'religious beliefs', then she should have chosen a different career.

It's like a person with strong environmentalist beliefs taking a job in a petrol station, then refusing to serve customers who own 4x4's because they 'do the most environmental damage'.

I do agree that it would have been no biggie for the customer to take her business elsewhere, but why should she? Pharmacy's are meant to dispense the drugs that the doctors write 'scripts out for.

If the pharmacist doesn't belive in taking contraceptives then fine, no one can force her to take them. But she has no right to judge somenone else, based on her religious morals, and refuse them their medication.

Miss Deeley said she is prescribed the pill by her GP because she suffers from a condition which causes painful periods.

http://www.whatsonxiamen.com/news10834.html

[Pene784]

Since when is it okay for pharmacists to decide what medications or prescriptions a person should take? Last time I checked that was the doctors job. That pharmacist did not know that womans history and had absolutely no business making a medical decision about what medicines she would allow her to get. I myself have never taken "the pill" for birth control, only for periods that were so severe that I was hospitalized to receive blood transfusions. If I missed even one day of "the pill" I would bleed so bad I would have to stay in the bathroom as they have yet to make a product that could handle it!(I know TMI) With my insurance I can only pick up meds the day the last prescription runs out so waiting til someone else's shift can mean waiting an extra day and that extra day can be a problem, a HUGE problem. As for taking the prescription to another pharmacy, some insurance only allows you to use certain pharmacies, I know mine does! So my point is, I think this pharmacist was negligent and made an uninformed medical decision and she should be FIRED and her license should be suspended!

[Athena]

I do.

She knew that part of the job would involve handing out contraceptives. If she was not comfortable with that because of her 'religious beliefs', then she should have chosen a different career.

It's like a person with strong environmentalist beliefs taking a job in a petrol station, then refusing to serve customers who own 4x4's because they 'do the most environmental damage'.

I get that. I really do. To be perfectly honest, this is one of those rare issues that I struggle with internally as both a pro-choice female and a staunch free-marketer. It presents a natural conflict for me.

It's a right that I don't believe should be governmentally protected, certainly. If a pharmacy's policy is to administer contraceptives regardless of religious concerns, they should be allowed to fire that pharmacist without repercussion. But if a pharmacy's policy is that its employees are free to decide, I think it should be able to operate in that manner.

But, who knows. Talk to me next week and I may feel the other way about it. I can see both sides quite clearly.

[Tits McGee]

Actually, you're wrong, Tits. Please try to avoid spreading misinformation, especially the kind that could get people sued or fired.

Many an establishment has been sued and many a server fired for refusing to serve a pregnant woman. It is quite illegal to refuse to serve a pregnant woman because she's pregnant. However, I have never heard of a woman successfully suing an establishment that served her alcohol as the result of producing a child with fetal alcohol syndrome. In fact, a woman would only be able to sue if the bar did not inform her that drinking while pregnant could be harmful. Most bars avoid this liability by posting a sign informing women that drinking can be harmful.

The question, here, is what's protected and what isn't. An establishment cannot refuse service to quite anyone. They can't refuse a black man for being black. They can't refuse a handicapped person for being handicapped. They can't refuse a pregnant woman for being pregnant. How far should that extend? Should it extend to women seeking birth control? I don't know.

On a side note, "It's okay to drink [lightly] while pregnant, new study finds" and "As far as we know, drinking lightly during pregnancy does not have adverse consequences."

The fact is, there is nothing to suggest that, as some say, "even one glass of wine can harm a fetus". The government has adopted an abstinence-only policy because it's too difficult to explain to retarded Americans that heavy drinking is bad but light drinking is okay. As most people know, I'm currently expecting, and my OBGYN is a female that just recently had her own child. When going through the list of dos and don'ts during my first appointment, she specifically said, "No heavy drinking." I knew why, but asked anyway, and she broke it down - "I shouldn't say this, but you're obviously intelligent and you know the difference between light and heavy drinking. A lot of my patients aren't so sharp, so I just tell them 'No drinking'. It's easier than having to explain it."

If someone wants to go on thinking that any drinking at all will result in fetal alcohol syndrome, that's fine. It's not true, but it's not particularly harmful, either. I would just hope that this individual would keep their opinion to themselves and certainly not impose their views on another individual.

I stand corrected.

[Gidget]

She knew that part of the job would involve handing out contraceptives. If she was not comfortable with that because of her 'religious beliefs', then she should have chosen a different career.

It's like a person with strong environmentalist beliefs taking a job in a petrol station, then refusing to serve customers who own 4x4's because they 'do the most environmental damage'.

Agreed. I was thinking it was like someone becoming a hooker, then telling their customers that they don't believe in having sex before marriage. But I think your analogy (while not as fun) makes more sense.

[oedura]

Any pharmacist who refuses to issue a patient drugs on the grounds of his or her religious beliefs needs to be fired immediately.

It's their job to hand out drugs. If their religion is going to get in the way of that, then maybe they should have thought out their career choices a little better beforehand.

Seriously, it's like a vegetarian getting a job at a steakhouse and then refusing to serve the customers food.