<p>unless state law requires all pharmacists to dispense legal medication, I have no dispute that a business owner has the choice not to serve certain populations. However- an employee must follow their job description and not decide on their own, that the business guidelines don’t apply to them</p>
<p>On the NPR radio show the host asked the attorney who represents Planned Parenthood if she would represent someone that violently opposed abortions. After much stammering she essentially sent NO because it would be a conflict of interest with other clients. Weasel.</p>
<p>Two more die using RU 486. </p>
<p><a href=“http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ABORTION_PILL?SITE=WIMIL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT[/url]”>http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ABORTION_PILL?SITE=WIMIL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT</a></p>
<p>
Okay, that was cute. For future reference, it is impossible to prove absolutes, unless you are going to personally observe every single pregnancy throughout all time and space. But that, my friend, is irrelevant because I never asked you to show that the morning after-pill always prevented implantation, only that it could demonstrably do so even SOME of the time - in other words that there was an iota of statistical/emperical/medical evidence that such a thing was even believable. And there isn’t any.</p>
<p>This has been tested for MANY, MANY times. That it has never materialized should have been its death knell, but alas, stupidity marches on.</p>
<p><a href=“On the mechanisms of action of short-term levonorgestrel administration in emergency contraception - PubMed”>On the mechanisms of action of short-term levonorgestrel administration in emergency contraception - PubMed;
<p><a href=“Pituitary-ovarian function following the standard levonorgestrel emergency contraceptive dose or a single 0.75-mg dose given on the days preceding ovulation - PubMed”>Pituitary-ovarian function following the standard levonorgestrel emergency contraceptive dose or a single 0.75-mg dose given on the days preceding ovulation - PubMed;
<p><a href=“http://www.popcouncil.org/publications/popbriefs/pb11(2)_3.html[/url]”>http://www.popcouncil.org/publications/popbriefs/pb11(2)_3.html</a></p>
<p>And again:
</p>
<p>So yes, I don’t think pharmacists have a medically defendible position that would preclude them from carrying out their proper job, whether it is defined by either the state or the business owner. If that’s actually your position, then fine, but realize that they might as well be objecting to handing out the pills because it might turn patients into unicorns.</p>
<p>and 1000 die smoking cigarette, whats your point</p>
<p>I assume that pharmacists whose “morals” preclude dispensing medication as written will not have any objection to stating such beforehand so physicians can direct patients to pharmacies that will fill their prescriptions as written.
This will save pharmacists the trouble of having to turn away patients, and save patients the trouble of having to search for a pharmacy that will accept their prescription- .</p>
<p>People pushing for RU 486 downplayed its dangers. If that were another drug they’d be suing the maker and everyone else.</p>
<p>How do the dangers of RU 486 compare to the dangers of childbirth?</p>
<p>there is a vaccine for cervical cancer that could save womens lives, but some law makers donlt want to fund it because it might promote sex out of wedlock</p>
<p>and VIAGRA has killed many many many more people </p>
<p>and gee, men haven’t stopped taking it</p>
<p>Wait, I’m confused. So teachers should NOT report students whose parents are illegal aliens, on ethical grounds, but pharmacists should dispense any and all meds prescribed, REGARDLESS of ethical concerns? Sounds like situational ethics. </p>
<p>I have enough faith in most professionals to let them make decisions based on their ethics and professional knowledge.</p>
<p>What does teaching have to do with reporting illegal aliens like the MinuteMen? Apples and oranges…</p>
<p>The salient point is that there is no body of evidence (after many studies) that morning-after pill can prevent the implantation after fertilization and ovulation have completed, and that’s the only stick they can wave against it under ethics. Either these pharmacists are woefully misinformed about their own medicine, or they have other, uglier reasons for their behavior. Neither explanation is particularly inspiring for their employers or their customers. </p>
<p>Don’t work at a store that stocks something you aren’t willing to dispense, or at least don’t expect to keep your job if you do. The pharmacist is supposed to safeguard his clients, not actively work against them.</p>
<p>Would you like a vegan chief at an Outback Steakhouse? Would you support a Jehovah Witness surgeon who refuses blood transfusions for his patients? Would you cheer a zealous Christian Science pharmacist who refuses to dispense anything but prayer? I hope so, because that apparently is your position.</p>
<p>New York Times:</p>
<p>"WASHINGTON, March 17 After receiving reports that two more women died after taking abortion pills, Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest provider of abortion and contraceptive services, announced that it would immediately change the way it gives the medicines.</p>
<p>The change partly resolves a long-running dispute between Planned Parenthood and the Food and Drug Administration over the safest way to provide pill-based abortions.</p>
<p>The F.D.A. has now received reports that six women in the United States died after taking RU-486, or Mifeprex. A seventh died in Canada."
<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/18/national/18abort.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/18/national/18abort.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin</a></p>
<p>If you don’t like or agree with the stated policies and regulations of a store or pharmacy, don’t work there. But it is not up to pharmacists to play the moral, God card and have influence on the legal rights of others.</p>
<p>I hold all those opposed to birth control pills, RU-486, abortion, are going to enjoy living life in the Handmaid’s Tale. Personally, a country in which the government controls an individual’s body is a very scary place to be. And we’re on our way, freight train charging ahead.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This caught my eye. I’m not sure how I feel about this sentiment. I mean, aspirin and other NSAIDs are known to cause complications (and even deaths.) Similarly, people die from common food allergies, but I doubt that anyone is going to call for the end of peanut sales anytime soon.</p>
<p>Now of course RU-486 should be researched, and if it poses a greater danger than necessary, recalled. However, almost any drug is going to have side effects and even deaths. So far, it seems that RU-486, when used properly, is safe enough to still be dispensed. I had a family member die from penicillin. But I’m not going to call for its recall.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not sure I entirely agree. If the pharmacist will refer the customer to another pharmacy or employee that will dispense the medication, then they should be allowed. Especially if it’s a private business. I mean, it’s not entirely uncommon for doctors to say to patients, “I won’t do this, but so-and-so will…”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s an interesting question as to how much power a government should have over its citizens’ rights over their bodies. For example, we clearly seem to have no problem legislating on drug use. But this is somewhat different because abortion affects both the mother and the fetus, which is arguably a human being (I’m not entirely sure it is or isn’t.) Therefore, this becomes much more difficult, legally, than just “you should be allow to do to your body what you wish.” </p>
<p>Again, I’m not saying that I’m for anti-abortion legislation, but I’m interested in the very tricky legal issues.</p>
<p>Truth is, the FDA is really selective about which drugs it pulls.</p>
<p>There are extensive number of cases of heart issues as a result of the drug Ritalin. However, there is not so much as a black box label on the medication, because Ritalin is Novartis’s gravy train, with millions of kids on it.</p>
<p>I am all for safety and efficacy in medication and legal drug usage. Unfortunately, there is a selective eye when it comes to the FDA, as the pharmeceutical companies comprise a very strong political lobby group.</p>
<p>Allmusic,</p>
<p>I’m not sure that deaths in the midrange double digits necessarily counts as “extensive number of cases.” Nor do I believe that the FDA is in cahoots with Novartis. The FDA has pulled more than a few gravy train drugs in the past.</p>
<p>By the way, there is a warning label on the drug, and the Division of Psychiatry Products at the FDA voted 8 to 7 to have a black box put on the drug.</p>
<p>from what I read- Planned parenthood was advising use of the ru-486 differently than the manufacturer advised.
I am not sure why a mechanical abortion was not advised in these cases, but I think that would have been much easier to deal with and safer.
The organization that provided the pill to the two women said it would immediately stop disregarding the approved instructions for the pill’s use.
Or they could have just followed the way the instructions were written.
But it does sound like it needs to be looked at more carefully- on teh other hand I think the morning after pill should be over the counter.</p>
<p>If the drug was misused, then it’s not necessarily a safety issue. After all, if you take too many Tylenol, you can give yourself an ulcer.</p>
<p>Tylenol could give you an ulcer, but it is even more likely to damage your liver.</p>