New Jersey Forces Pharmacists to Dispense Abortifacient Drugs Regardless of Conscience

LifeSite ^ | November 5, 2007 | Hilary White

[SaintDismas]

Damn is a key word there to these employees, should be to all.

[Wallace T.]

Although I am not a Catholic, I understand the need for church discipline. Why doesn’t the local bishop excommunicate those politicians and judges who claim to be Catholic but who nonetheless support laws or rulings of this nature?

[Sgt_Schultze]

Otherwise, any pharmacy that sells them can damn well ensure their employees don’t block access to them when a customer with a legal perscription shows up to have it filled.

I'm not familiar with the new law. Are you suggesting the way around this would be for the Pharmacy to stop carrying birth control medications?

[tioga]

God gave us free will, NJ took it away. Shame on them.

[epow]

If I were a pharmacist in NJ I would relocate to another state before I would comply with that NJ law. AFAIC a pharmacist who sells an abortifacient to a woman is equivalent to a gun store owner who sells a loaded pistol to a well known hit man for the mob.

[wideawake]

Otherwise, any pharmacy that sells them can damn well ensure their employees don’t block access to them when a customer with a legal perscription shows up to have it filled.

Pharmacists are not sales clerks. They are medical professionals who are paid to exercise their professional judgment.

Professionals like bankers, lawyers, doctors, pharmacists, etc. are employed on the understanding that they will not just do whatever their employer orders them to do, but that they will make a professional decision in accord with ethical standards and the best interests of the client.

Most adults in this country know that pharmacists routinely substitute and modify doctors' prescriptions - often because they are considering the financial needs and medical needs of the client at a level doctors sometimes are unaware of.

Many elderly persons have had their lives saved by a keen-eyed pharmacist who refused to fill a prescription because they knew the client was taking another medication that would cause a dangerous interaction - a medication prescribed by one specialist that the patient forgot to inform another specialist about.

Many employers realize that a pharmacist's judgment may cause a negative short-term economic impact, but save the employer much money in the event that a client dies of a seizure caused by negative drug interaction or a hemorrhage caused by RU-486.

Otherwise, you could simply automate drug dispensation and eliminate pharmacists altogether.

[Wolfie]

Heck, at least we’re coming around to the rights of conscientious objectors. Maybe now we can give all those military folks who refuse combat duty a break.

[Alberta's Child]

Yes, I do. By the same token, I’d also support anyone who refuses to get into a cab driven by people of certain races, ethnic groups, etc.

[Alberta's Child]

You may know more about this law than I do. This article makes it sound as if the law is directed at pharmacists in general, not specifically employees working in pharmacies.

[Between the Lines]

Another possible, just as accurate, wording for the headline could have been: “New Jersey Ensures Pharmacy Customers Can Recieve Legal Perscription Drugs From Any Licensed Pharmacy”

That would be a very misleading headline. There is a wide verity of drugs that are legal for prescription use that many or most licensed pharmacies do not carry what so ever. There are many reasons for this. The drug is too expensive, it has a short shelf life, it requires special storage or handling and if it is a rarely used drug.

New Jersey pharmacies must now fill prescriptions for any drug they stock or locate another nearby pharmacy that carries the drug. They do not have to carry the drug!

I have to wonder what happens when a hemophiliac patient comes into one of NJ's pharmacies with a prescription for Recombinate. Do they arrest the pharmacist for not being able to fill it and not being able to find a local pharmacy which can?

[epow]

Then you support the cabdrivers who refuse service to the blind with a dog, alcoholics with alcohol, immodest women, Jew

I'm not DUMBGRUNT, but if the cabbie owns the cab I say yes, but not if he's just an employee of the cab owner.

But your question is not relevant to the situation in NJ in re abortificients. Refusing cab service to certain classes of people is in no way comparable to refusing to sell a deadly chemical compound for which the only known medical purpose is to kill an unborn human being in his or her mother's womb.

[Between the Lines]

Are you suggesting the way around this would be for the Pharmacy to stop carrying birth control medications?

Pharmacies are not required to carry the drug but they must locate another local pharmacy that does for any patient that has a prescription.

[Jim Noble]

Actually, they don't force anyone to do anything.

They make it a condition of employment, as a pharmacist, to dispense licensed drugs.

[catroina54]

muslim manufactured dilemma cannot compare to knowingly dispensing an abortifacient.
no one is saying these products are NOT to be dispensed as they are a legal pharmaceutical.
someone else can fill the prescription as obviously they are being filled and dispensed.
CVS drug counter here plainly states that plan B is not available at this location/pick up the phone and dial to get the nearest location.

---

the muslims refusing to slide a pork product across a scanner are also full of it as islamics working in our markets simply place the bag around it or wear gloves as cashiers.
if they refuse service to intoxicated passengers or somehow have xRay vision and know you have alcohol in your bag,let them.
you expect them to drive infidels ? you want to ride with them ?
nobody we know uses any aRab cab companies here. we call other services that are even cheaper than medallion cabs/islamics car co.

[epow]

Apparently I got you and Alberta’s Child reversed in my post # 31. I intended to reply to your question asked in # 11 but it seems that I somehow thought that you were replying to DUMBGRUNT, and not that you are DUMBGRUNT.

[BritExPatInFla]

When the Pharmacist is licensed by the state, it IS the business of the state. The prescription drugs in question are legal drugs, and legal for sale in that state, therefore, the state licensed pharmacists have no compelling legal argument against filling the prescriptions.

[bpjam]

“Discussions of morals and matters of conscience are admirable, but....”

Pretty much sums up the Democratic party doesn’t it?

[khnyny]

Another possible, just as accurate, wording for the headline could have been: “New Jersey Ensures Pharmacy Customers Can Recieve Legal Perscription Drugs From Any Licensed Pharmacy”


History is filled with "legal" atrocities throughout the ages, and the willing fools who went along with the pogram.

Oh, and btw, do learn how to spell. It's "receive" not "recieve" and "prescription" not "perscription".

[Mrs. Don-o]

Does the law require all pharmacies to stock all legal drugs at all times? I think not. Could it do so justly? I think not. Can the law --- justly --- require pharmacists to violate their professional ethics, and fill prescriptions known to be harmful or fatal? I think not.

What is more important: to act legally, or to act justly? The latter.

True, the law should be overturned. But until then, conscientious pharmacists must resist.

[NYer]

Why doesn’t the local bishop excommunicate those politicians and judges who claim to be Catholic but who nonetheless support laws or rulings of this nature?

EXCOMMUNICATION