Over at 4&20 blackbirds back in December, Rebecca wrote about a Broadus' pharmacist's decision not to dispense oral contraception because of religious preferences. A great debate ensued, and it seemed that those registering complaints with the Montana Board of Pharmacy had a good case. Gazette commenter "Liberty Girl":
First of all - John Lane does not own the pharmacy. He is an employee and the only pharmacist for miles. (And suggesting that the pharmacy owner fire him or hire additional staff ignores the reality of provider-shortages in our rural communities) Aside from that fact, the reality is that people across Montana should be concerned that a state-licensed pharmacist can deny services based on his personal beliefs. Pharmacists are critical to the delivery of healthcare in our rural state. Not having any sort of guidance or standards for that licensure means that patients, who have legal prescriptions, can be denied care because the pharmacist disagrees based on his personal religious beliefs. John Lane took an oath to be a pharmacist, not a priest. If he can no longer fulfill the obligations of his chosen profession - for all of his clients - then he should consider a new line of work.
Alas, it was not so. All complaints were dropped, spurring another conversation ensued at the 'birds.
Yesterday, however, Planned Parenthood seemed to have come up with a good compromise: allowing pharmacies to have non-pharmacists dispense pre-packaged contraceptives:
''Customers' access to services in-store, without discrimination or delay, is paramount,'' [Planned Parenthood spokesperson] Stacey Anderson said. ''In Montana, this accommodation may be achieved through a combination of rule-making and/or statute that expressly protects patients' ability to access care and, in the case of rural Montana where pharmacists are limited, allows non-pharmacists to dispense prepackaged birth control.''
Ron Klein, executive director of the Montana Board of Pharmacy, said allowing people who aren't pharmacists to give out birth control would first require action by the state Legislature.
There are two issues here. One, is that it's not advisable to legislate pharmacists to carry certain kinds of stock. That's unreasonable: what if they can't move the product? On the other hand, as Anderson said in the Helena IR piece, like hospitals and other health-care providers, "pharmacists should be regulated to not only protect patients, but also to guarantee nondiscriminatory practices and access..."
Planned Parenthood's suggestion seems eminently reasonable. The pharmacist can adhere to his religious beliefs and not personally dispense the product, yet the patient can still receive her prescription medicine.
Something like this may not be much of an issue in an urban area, where there are plenty of pharmacies to choose from, but in Montana a personal choice to deny women certain kinds of health care could potentially be a big problem.
So...now all that needs to happen is to get a bill throught the state legislature allowing non-pharmacists to be able to dispense contraceptives to patients with prescriptions... |
