home

Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill

By Jeralyn, Section Social Justice
Posted on Mon Oct 24, 2005 at 01:54:43 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Crooks and Liars has the details from this Arizona Star article of a rape victim who spent three days trying to get the morning after pill.

C & L says,

Looks like we have another Target on our hands. John has more on them. I thought these Circus Clowns believed abortion was fine if it involved rape?

< Bush Laying Ground For Miers' Withdrawal? | R.I.P. Rosa Parks >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill | 56 comments (56 topical)
    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (5.00 / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    Hey, thanks for posting this. I contacted a number of mainstream and blogs in hopes that this gets publicity because it is an outrage to the 'enth degree. I cannot tell you how much this enrages me. Keep up the good work and thanks for reading my e-mail.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    "While calling dozens of Tucson pharmacies trying to fill a prescription for emergency contraception, she found that most did not stock the drug. When she finally did find a pharmacy with it, she said she was told the pharmacist on duty would not dispense it because of religious and moral objections." How is that a mundane story? She found a place that stocked it, but when she got there, they refused to sell it to her because of "religious and moral objections." Also the story says that she could not afford the $70 cost of the pills at Planned Parenthood. So, yes, they do indeed stock it, but charge out the rear for it. I cannot believe a company would empower their employees to make judgment calls like that.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#3)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    I have trouble thinking Planned Parenthood would not give her the pill. I also have trouble that Target, if their management was aware, wouldn't get another pharmacist on duty. Are we sure this is real?? Sounds like an urban myth.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    Matt O., you have just be introduced to a couple of the local trolls. Even if they were on hand to witness exactly what had transpired they would still find some way to blame it on the liberal press. Or any other mythological beasty you can think of. PPJ, yeah this did happen. No urban legend here. Just another example of how the right wing Christian circus is playing God with other peoples lives. Exactly opposite of what true Christians would do.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    Come on out here to Tucson and find out. I'll take you to the actual Fry's in question myself. We can ask them. I am not sure how Planned Parenthood deals with the morning after pill and those who cannot afford it. In the article it says PP charges $70 for the pills but I think I remember reading that they offer some kind of payment plan? I suppose she just figured she could get it cheaper elsewhere. She is a college student, and I know first hand out here, most of us are broke like a joke. $70 to a college student out here, when they've raised tuition more than a dozen times can but a bit tough on the wallet.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#6)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    You have a right to an abortion and/or emergency contraception. You don't necessarily have a right to others' help in getting it.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    It is the pharmacists' job to fill perscriptions. They are not suppose to judge you in any regard. They put the pill in a bottle and tell you what not to take with it. End of story. Plus, in this story, they were suppose to refer her to a place that would fill it, and she and her friend claim they didn't. So yeah, company policy was that they were suppose to "help in getting it."

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    The pharmacists conduct was absolutely abominable. In a just world he would be fired immediately and his license yanked. He has no right to impose his views on a woman.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    Matt O, ohwilleke, you two are new here. Been a fair amount of discussion on this subject. See here and here. It's not so cut and dried as you might think.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#10)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    It's not so cut and dried as you might think. It is to me! Fill the prescription or get another job. I've worked in medicine ALL of my adult life and the first pharmacist that gave me sh*t would be the last. I have a freakin' problem doing an MRI on a drunk driver who kills. My JOB is to do the MRI regardless of who the patient may or may not be. And - it is absolutely no one's business why this patient is purchasing the morning after pill. The pharmacist'S "involvement" is to note any other medications the patient may be taking so as not to cause an adverse reaction and then FILL the prescription. Gotta a problem with it - fill it and then take up with your supervisor or management. You do not inconvenience the patient. The bottom line is ALWAYS - P-A-T-I-E-N-T C-A-R-E.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    roy writes:
    You have a right to an abortion and/or emergency contraception. You don't necessarily have a right to others' help in getting it.
    Roy, where is your compassion? When you are knocked down by a hit-and-run driver, will you be so sure that even though you have the right to an ambulance and an emergency operation, you don't necessarily have a right to others' help in getting it. Will that be your attitude when you see someone who is hurt and needs help? If you have ever heard of the parable of the Good Samaritan, you will see where I am going with this analogy. What kind of world do you want to live in? Most of us want a world in which people do not espouse the attitudes you have expressed here. Do YOU believe that those attitudes can ever be justified in a humane and caring society?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#12)
    by LorettaNall on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    Here is what pisses me off about the pro-lifers who wish to enforce their religious beliefs on the rest of us.
    It is the Christian right who squeals about all these perceived "rights of the unborn" but as soon as the "unborn" with all of those supposed rights enter into this world it is the same Christian right who begins to squawl that they have to feed these bastard children that the mother should not have had if she couldn't afford to take care of it.
    Try reconciling that one.
    Also...you never see the Chirstian right lining up to adopt these children that they fought so hard to have someone else bring into the world.
    I smell some serious hypocirscy...but hey...what's new about that?
    Neither abortion nor the morning after pill are compulsory behaviors. If they don't want to have an abortion or take a pill after being raped then they are free not to.
    Down with the right-wing, nut-ball, religious moralists. They have destroyed our once great country and I wish their goddamn rapture would hurry up so the rest of us could live in peace.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#13)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Cymro, You are making the common mistake of thinking that my support for the freedom to do X implies my support for doing X. I like for pharmacists to dispense drugs without giving guff. I like for paramedics to come to hit-and-run scenes. I like for people to be good samaritans. I don't like the government to force anybody to do all that good stuff.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#14)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    why don't they stock a nice pharmacy full of morning after pills to dispense to their heart's content instead of trying to force other people to violate their own moral beliefs?
    Gee, I dunno, because they're not a pharmacy?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#15)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Also, here's the elephant in the corner that the wingnuts love to overlook: I'm a pharmacist with a moral objection to antibiotics. If someone dies of a staph infection due to my "morals", is that good or bad?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    sarcastic unwanted one, yeah it is that cut and dry. Do your f@#$ing job, leave your f#%ing morals at home, or otherwise find another line of work. Nobody forced this or any other person to become a pharmacist, and nobody, even in the Bible, said it is ok for Christians to shove their sense of morality down our throats. Keep stepping on peoples rights in the name of a supposed God and eventually they will start pushing back. Come 2006 you and all of your supposed Christian friends will see just how tired the American people are of every single one of you hypocrites.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#17)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Short version of above: living in a free society means people are free to do things you don't like. Obligatory jibe: haven't Liberals been preaching that at Conservatives for decades?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#18)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Cops are given certain powers, but are only allowed to use them in a certain way. Pharmacists are allowed to sell drugs, but only if they do it a certain way. If they refuse, yank their license. And Roy, if the paramedics refuse to treat someone because they are of a different race, how long do you think that they will be a paramedic?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    charley, if those who want pharmacists to dispense pills are "trying to force other people to violate their own moral beliefs" then I expect to see you advocating that gun store owners should stop selling guns. After all, people who buy the guns may use them to kill people, and I'm sure killing people is against the moral beliefs of many of those store owners.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    LorettaNall raises some interesting ideas. I think she mistates the Conservative position however, when she says "as soon as the "unborn" with all of those supposed rights enter into this world it is the same Christian right who begins to squawl that they have to feed these bastard children that the mother should not have had if she couldn't afford to take care of it." The Conservatives believe people should take responsibility for themselves. Ms. Nall seems to believe that no Christians are adopting unwanted babies, which is patently untrue. As a mater of fact, if you visit Utah, you will see white Christian families with adoptive black babies and children, in numbers that exceed any cross-racial adoptions anywhere in the country. Additionally, study after study indicates that Conservative working class Americans give far more to charity than their liberal counterparts (and no, it's not because they're so rich that it doesn't hurt). Ms. Nall also exhibits that gross emotional hatred of religious people and conservatives that seems typical of Left wing secularists; as if this country wasn't in fact BUILT by the religious "nutballs" she curses. That being said, as a Jewish Conservative who believes abortion should be avoided if at all possible, I have to agree that a pharmacist has an obligation to dispense the drugs at his disposal. The story has some odd markings however. First, Planned Parenthood doesn't charge for the morning after pill at all. They request a donation, but that's it. Secondly, the rape angle sounds odd. It makes for higher emotional impact, but I'd be curious to know more factual information. Not that the issue of rape or incest has any true bearing on the value of the life of a child, but i know that that is a typical qualifier in abortion discussions. Finally, and quite parenthetically, there was an odd case of a bus driver in..California I believe, who, as a Vegan, refused to hand out Carl's Junior hamburger coupons to the bus riders as requested by his employer. He was fired, then successfully sued the bus company on the basis of having a right to not have his moral beliefs compromised.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#21)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Cops are given certain powers, but are only allowed to use them in a certain way. Pharmacists are allowed to sell drugs, but only if they do it a certain way.
    So, the government creates an artificial monopoly by putting people in prison for dealing drugs, so the pharmacist should say "thank you for not putting me in prison" in addition to lose the freedom to sit on his hands and not do business with somebody?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    roy, nope, you got that one wrong. A shortened version of my above comment is "Do your job or get fired". There isn't a "If you don't feel like it clause", no matter what you may hope, on an application for any job. You either fulfill the requirements of your employment, which means sometimes going against your own morals, or lose your job. If I was working at a convenience store and a man or woman walks up and wants to purchase some cigarettes. I am anti-smoking, having lost both parents to it. Smoking kills more people than fetuses in this country. I would be within my rights to not sell it to them, since it is my choice. But when I signed the employment contract with the store I worked at I agreed to fulfill all of it's requirements, which include selling cigarettes and beer. Now I can act upon my morals and not sell cigarettes to this man or woman, but I am putting my job in jeopardy because I can't just decide to perform on part of my job but not another. Either I do all of it or be fired. And that is exactly what should happen to this pharmacist. Do your job, no matter what your morals are, or get fired. Simple, if you ask me.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Mr. Kessler, it seems that no matter what you just don't want to accept that this type of thing happens in this country, but it does. Christians, not all of them though, have for some odd reason decided that they are allowed to decide for the rest of us what medication is permissable or not. I don't think Jesus taught anywhere in the New Testament that it was ok to tell others what was right and wrong for them. But he did say something about ridding yourself of an appendage if it offended you. I think the analogy is if this pharmacist doesn't like performing all of his/her job then they should find another one. Otherwise they need to be fired. Not on their religious beliefs, but on the grounds that they didn't do their job. Handing out Carl's Jr. coupons isn't a bus drivers job, hence the name. I bet nowhere on the drivers application did it say "And from time to time you have to hand out coupons to restaurants." If it had and the driver refused the school system would have been withing their bounds to dismiss him/her. Not the same thing, but I'm sure you already knew that.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Posted by scarshapedstar at October 24, 2005 06:40 PM Also, here's the elephant in the corner that the wingnuts love to overlook: I'm a pharmacist with a moral objection to antibiotics. If someone dies of a staph infection due to my "morals", is that good or bad?
    Great point made scarshapedstar here: If everyone starts to refuse to do their jobs because of moral objections, our whole system will break down quickly. I say fire any pharmacist who refuses to dispense drugs to anyone who is qualified to have them, especially if they do so in such a selective and bigoted manner. I also have to say that it is simply incredible how freaking stupid some of the right wingers are on this blog who are defending such obvious BS. (I know I shouldn't be surprised, but always am when I see such blatant idiocy).

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#25)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Oh - here we go....
    The story has some odd markings however. First, Planned Parenthood doesn't charge for the morning after pill at all. They request a donation, but that's it. Secondly, the rape angle sounds odd. It makes for higher emotional impact, but I'd be curious to know more factual information. Not that the issue of rape or incest has any true bearing on the value of the life of a child, but i know that that is a typical qualifier in abortion discussions.
    Succintly put - it is none of your business. What personal interest do you have other than curiousity and/or wanting to hold someone accountable to YOUR beliefs or values? Are you the rapist? You're not being called upon to 'foot the bill.' Within the newspaper article, it is stated, the young woman was unaware of the pay options encouraged at Planned Parenthood. {Did you see it?} Although a churchgoing member of society, I am SICK of those who incessantly insist we adhere to their religious views, beliefs, et al, while they shove them onto others and then cry ‘foul’ when they’re obstructed from smothering society with their crap. I also think - no, I know that others are as well. Enough....it’s time - enough is enough.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#26)
    by LorettaNall on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Ms. Nall also exhibits that gross emotional hatred of religious people and conservatives that seems typical of Left wing secularists; as if this country wasn't in fact BUILT by the religious "nutballs" she curses.
    First...I live in Alabama and I am entitled to be sick to death of right-wing religious extremists. Roy Moore...nuff said. I have nothing against religion in general but instead against the people who think their religion sanctions them to impose their morals on the rest of society. Second..This country was NOT BUILT BY RELIGIOUS NUTBALLS. It was built by people FLEEING religious persecution and set up so as to prevent the same thing from happening here. Please read a history book. You might also check out Thomas Jeffersons bible. Third....I am someone who simply wishes that people would mind their own business. My political affiliation is actually Libertarian which I'm not sure would qualify for "left-wing secularist" without some very serious stretching. Libertarians tend to be more conservative than most Republicans I know....but we follow the U.S. Constituiton and not the bible for our political inspiration. Y'all should try it sometime.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#27)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    When she finally did find a pharmacy with it, she said she was told the pharmacist on duty would not dispense it because of religious and moral objections." Anyone want to lay bets on that pharmacist refusing to dispense to her if she was his daughter?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#28)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Shermbuck,
    A shortened version of my above comment is "Do your job or get fired".
    If that's all you're saying, we're on the same side. The store managers are within their rights to fire the pharmacist, and I hope they do so. The problem is, some people want it do be "do your job (as defined by the government) or lose your license (and thus go to jail if you keep selling prescription drugs)" which is rather different.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#29)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Roy, I'll try it shorter: with certain right come certain responsibilities. And in answer to your question, dont deal drugs (as a pharmacist) if you cant do it in the manner prescribed (couldnt resist). What would you think if the pharmacist decided that they didnt "believe" in prescriptions, and just handed out cocaine?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#30)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    I think pharmacies that refuse to sell certain products need a large sign out front, such as that says WE DO NOT SELL TO PEOPLE WITH WHOM WE HAVE A IDEALOGICAL DIFFERENCE WITH, HAVE A NICE DAY. Stay out of people's lives... How hard is it?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#31)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Given the pharmacists moral [moral???] objections, I have 2 questions I'd like to see him attempt to answer with a straight face: If he owned the pharmacy why was he stocking the drug? If he didn't own the pharmacy why was he working there? People like this make me want to puke.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Finally, and quite parenthetically, there was an odd case of a bus driver in..California I believe, who, as a Vegan, refused to hand out Carl's Junior hamburger coupons to the bus riders as requested by his employer. He was fired, then successfully sued the bus company on the basis of having a right to not have his moral beliefs compromised.
    That's an interesting parenthesis! I bet he won because handing out coupons isn't central to his job description. If he'd refused to drive on Shabbat, that would have likely been a more problematic case... And as for the pharmacists who refuse to do something which is central to their jobs, they have a right to refuse... and their employers have every right to fire them, and I hope they do so. I don't see why these companies should coddle people who act so childishly and harmfully. Unfortunately, if they won't do the right thing, then this issue will have to be settled by lawmakers and courts. The whole free market thing kind of falls apart when it comes to medical issues...

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#33)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    That pharmacist committed malpractice by blocking a patient's access to medically prescribed treatment. It makes no difference what the patient's condition was. He should be fired and have a review before his state's medical board to decide whether he should have his license suspended or revoked and/or a fine imposed for denying a legally prescribed medical therapy. He should also pay for the kid's college.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#34)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    If a child is born the pharmacist will have to provide child support as well as pay for the kids college.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#35)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    sarcastic, it's about as cut and dried as could be: do your job or lose your license, simple as that. it isn't a pharmacist's job to decide for you, or a doctor, for that matter, it's their job to fill the prescription or provide the medication, regardless of their "moral" concerns. if they want a job that takes their "moral" concerns into account, become a priest.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    "I've worked in medicine ALL of my adult life and the first pharmacist that gave me sh*t would be the last." "Do your f@#$ing job, leave your f#%ing morals at home, or otherwise find another line of work." "Down with the right-wing, nut-ball, religious moralists. They have destroyed our once great country and I wish their goddamn rapture would hurry up so the rest of us could live in peace." -- TalkLeft - I was censored on this site for using language much less offensive than this. I guess it must have been due to some of my conservative beliefs. But then again, this site is not about being open-minded. Party on Liberals.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    Here's what pro-choice abortion/reproductive rights women and men need to be doing: Call all local pharmacies to find out which ones have pharmacists and/or policies that allow pharmacists to decide what prescriptions they fill/won't fill. Then we need to circulate this information - at rape crisis and other hotlines and mental health centers. Not only that, stop patronizing those pharamacies and stores that have such policies -- and tell them why. I've already checked with my local drugstore.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#38)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    charley - Read what you wrote – – read it! The very questions you’re asking ‘us’ are what ‘we’ are asking you. Who do you think you are? How is it YOUR moral choices are all that matter and the moral choices of OTHERS mean nothing. ...... Why should YOU be able to trample the beliefs of OTHERS? Oh - so Charley’s moral choices are all that matter and the moral choices of Kitt (et al) mean nothing. Why should Charley be able to trample the beliefs of Kitt?
    charley: "Come to grips with the fact that the primary reason for not stocking the drug was economic - not moral."
    Are you serious? The pharmacist who refused to dispense the drug had it in stock. What’s the frickin’ point there? Why stock a drug you’re not going to dispense? Talk about economic suicide.
    4th paragraph:“When she finally did find a pharmacy with it, she said she was told the pharmacist on duty would not dispense it because of religious and moral objections.”
    I don’t think anyone is slandering pharmacists or pharmacy; I know I’m not. When it comes to medications, interactions and the other intricacies of pharmacology, I would more than likely take the word of a pharmacist over a physician. The bottom line for me is and always has been Patient Care. If you can’t do your job as a pharmacist - find another.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    charley- These people are employees, paid to do a job. That job is to fill legal perscriptions. They are licensed by the state to do the same. If they aren't willing to do it, they need to find other employment. IMO, they should also lose their license for not performing their job duties. What's difficult about this concept? If they don;t want to dispense emergency contraception, fine. Let them work someplace where it's not an issue. I know it's really tough for you to open your mind on anything, but what would your employer say if you announced that you were going to 1)only do the parts of your job you wanted, and 2)publicly pass moral judgements on your firms paying clients? If it was my business, you'd be out the door in a heartbeat for either one. Then again, I believe the purpose of a business is to serve the customer, not some foolish RWNJ's agenda. Give my best to Algernon before your treatments wear off.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#40)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    For Charley it is business as usual, he is speaking from experience and what is good for the goose is good for the gander. He is regularly denied badly needed drugs from his Pharmacist, as is evident from his posts.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#41)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    I don’t care how bad you want something; it’s not the place of the government to force other folks to sell it to you. My in-laws live ~1hr from the nearest store. A logical extension of the ‘reasonable access’ argument would dictate that they have some right to certain goods and services (as regulated by the state, of course) from anyone foolish enough to set up shop in their area. This will come full circle. Sometime soon there will be a medication or procedure you all will have some fundamental moral objection to. How will you feel about pharmacists forced to dispense a drug or physicians forced to perform a procedure to ensure the heterosexuality of a child? Or one that will inoculate children against the effects of alcohol or drugs? Or a drug for euthanasia? Also, a refusal to dispense a given drug does not demonstrate a deficiency of skill or knowledge. Isn’t that why we license pharmacists, to ensure competency? Anyway, this argument would be moot if we could just get the state out of the prescription business. A prescription should be a recommendation, like a shopping list, to be purchased off the shelf at Walgreen’s or wherever. It kills me; folks want to invite the government onto the most intimate and private parts of their lives, but when faced with the consequences beg for more.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#42)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    PW, Your last paragraph works (as an argument), otherwise, federally regulated businesses have to be run a certain way, or shut down. That is why they are regulated

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#43)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    “federally regulated businesses have to be run a certain way, or shut down. That is why they are regulated”
    No, that’s the consequence of federal regulation. The why is far more complicated and mostly the purview of special interest politics.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#44)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    wingnuts-and the police should only have to follow the laws that fit into their personal comfort zone? Right, is that how it goes? Power to the people, anarchy rules, because this is the land of the free, and the wingnuts care about your unborn children.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#45)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    PW, I know many drug dealers who would love your plan. Charley, Are you really this dense, or are you just yanking our chains?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#46)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    “wingnuts-and the police should only have to follow the laws that fit into their personal comfort zone?”
    No Squeaky, it’s like this. The state isn’t about finesse and subtlety; when the state enforces a law or regulation it’s with a knee in your back or a boot on your neck. You loose your job, you loose your property, you loose your livelihood. I know it might make you feel good when this is happening to folks you disagree with, but it’s a transient position. So, lets leave the state out of it. If you want ready access to certain meds then frequent pharmacies that agree with you, and picket those that don’t. Anyway, I doubt you are genuinely concerned about law and order. Several states have or are otherwise considering legislation that allows pharmacists to refuse to fill morally objectionable prescriptions without retribution by employers.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    Mmm, can't wait until the Scientologist refuse to dispense antidepressants, etc. PW the difference between dispensing the Morning After pill and the made up non-existent ones you describe, is that the morning after pill has went through testing and legislation. And the others?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#48)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    PW- Gee I wonder who is behind that lobby. Libertarians? Ha Ha....
    Several states have or are otherwise considering legislation that allows pharmacists to refuse to fill morally objectionable prescriptions without retribution by employers.


    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#49)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    cat_ny- My point doesn’t hinge on the amount of legislation or scrutiny applied to a given drug. Reread the comment. Squeaky- So you see my point. It has been interesting for me to see liberals struggle as a minority party and maintain their affinity for centralized power and government regulation. You might think the spectacle of Republicans churning out reams of legislation and expanding executive powers would have been revolting.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    Ms. Nall, Actually, curiously enough, the Puritans who fled "religious persecution" to found this country, were being persecuted because they were a very conservative religious sect, thus the name "Puritan". So not much has changed, eh?

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#51)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:22 PM EST
    A few people are using the police as a counter-example, as in "and the police should only have to follow the laws that fit into their personal comfort zone?" This is bogus because cops are civil servants. The government and/or the People are the cops' boss, so we get to define the job and fire a cop who doesn't do it the way we say. We are not the pharmacists' boss.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#53)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:22 PM EST
    Target is not particularly French.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#54)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:22 PM EST
    bb-This time it is Fry's not Target. Target has also refused to fill similar prescriptions in other instances.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#55)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:22 PM EST
    My, my, quite a little tempest we have here. Many here seem to be united in their distaste of freedom. If a pharmacist doesn't want to dispense the pill, he certainly has the freedom not to do so. And employers certainly have the freedom to choose whether or not they will require their pharmacists to dispense the pill as a condition of their employment. Whether you all with your knickers in a knot agree or not with the choice some pharmacists make, surely you can't support denying them their freedom? btw, for those who didn't read the link, she got the pill.

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#56)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:23 PM EST
    Give my best to Algernon before your treatments wear off.
    LMFAO! Bring him some flowers for me as well...

    Re: Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill (none / 0) (#57)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:23 PM EST
    The pharmacist denied treatment because he presumed that the woman was pregnant. This is all over a few cells. Maybe. The pharmacist would, by denying treatment, condemn this woman to raising a child born of a rapist? Great morals there.

    Tucson Rape Victim Denied Morning After Pill | 56 comments (56 topical)