Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Letter to US News

My mother cut an article out of her US News & World Report which addressed Plan B and pharmacists. It was written by a medical doctor - and it couldn't have been more correct. The article is entitled "Ask and You Shall Receive." Here's my response:

It was very refreshing to read the "Ask and You Shall Receive" article by Dr. Bernadine Healy. Having just graduated from pharmacy school, I have debated this topic heavily with fellow students and colleagues. It is my impression that most of the fury over Plan B comes from misconceptions about the medication. As Dr. Healy correctly points out, Plan B will not affect an established pregnancy. It acts just as regular birth control pills would - it thickens cervical mucus, prevents ovulation, and prevents implantation of the fertilized egg into the wall of the uterus. It is not RU-486 - as it does not initiate an abortion. In response to the "pharmacist conscience" clause, it unfortunately does not end with Plan B. It has been extended to encompass regular birth control pills as well. It is not unrealistic to envision a pharmacist refusing to sell a package of condoms. I'm not sure where members of my profession obtained the misconception that they could impose their beliefs on patients. It is ethically wrong in my opinion. If we permit a Catholic pharmacist to deny a FDA approved medication based on their belief system, where do we draw the line? The Islamic faith does not permit individuals to use alcohol - whether it is for medicinal purposes or not. Many medications in liquid form do contain alcohol. These are not just cough syrups, but life-saving medications such as phenobarbital for seizures and digoxin for heart failure/atrial fibrillation. This could be a very slippery slope indeed. It's time pharmacists stop pushing their beliefs and start respecting their patients.

Ashirt, PharmD

(It feels great to put the PharmD after my name) :) :) :)

2 Comments:

Blogger Axis of Evil said...

I think its time for every profession to get a "conscience" clause like those in the medical profession have claimed for themselves. Why should the police respond to a domestic violence clause if they feel a man has a biblical right to own his wife and treat her as he pleases? Why should firemen extenguish a fire if two gay men are living in the house? Why should a teacher be forced to have a biracial child in her classroom? Why should a restaurant owner be forced to serve minorities? Why should a bank loan money to a single mother?

I say, to hell with other people's rights if their rights offend my conscience. After all, who needs laws and standards of practice when we all have the God-given right to judge for ourselves.

There is a simple soultion for people who have moral objections to portions of their chosen career field - CHOOSE ANOTHER CAREER FIELD.

8:33 AM  
Blogger ahsirt said...

Very well put. But as it often is with the "religious right", these beliefs exist in a vacuum, where it is ok for them to possess them, but not for anyone else. Can you imagine the public outcry if a firemen refused to extinguish a fire at a gay couple's house? Or better yet, if a teacher refused to teach a bi-racial child? The American Pharmacist Association supports a "pharmacist's right to refuse." The national platform for pharmacists supports this! I have withdrawn my membership. The only time a pharmacist has a right to refuse is if a medication is being used to maintain an addiction or is unsafe. If Joe Blow is getting Oxycontin at 5 different pharmacies, I have a professional liability to refuse, as stated in the in the Code of Federal Regulations. If a doctor wrote for a medication that a patient is allergic to, or if he wrote for an inappropriate dose, I have the responsibility to refuse to fill to protect the patient. I also have to call the physician and notify them as to why the medication is unsafe and ensure an alternative. I don't just get to say, "I'm not filling this." I have to finish the process.

11:46 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home