For the next two weeks we will be discussing this topic. We WILL NOT engage in a discussion about what is or is not an abortion and whether or not abortions should be legal. This topic is the main reason there is comment moderation on this blog and I will not hesitate to reject your comment if I feel it is straying into these areas.
Students: For this week, please use any of the electronic resources at your disposal to research the topic. If you find something interesting, feel free to post a summary or a link as a comment. If you need an area to focus on, here are some suggestions:
What is conscientious objection as it applies to the profession of pharmacy?
What states in the U.S. are seeking to pass or have already passed legislation that addresses a pharmacist's right to refuse to dispense a prescription?
What are the positions of the pharmacy organizations on conscientious objection?
Are there articles published in the literature on this topic?
What medications are at the forefront of this issue?
Mentors: Be ready, the questions for you will be posted next week.
10 comments:
states considering legislation:
"Arizona, Ohio, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Tennessee are hoping to establish legislatively a pharmacist's right to stand on morals with regard to contraception."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3374/is_/ai_n13487925
While googling our topic of conscientious objection this week, I came across an article that shows both viewpoints of whether or not to fill Rxs for emergency contraceptives and it also covers possible solutions to the issue. Here is the link:
http://bixbyprogram.ph.ucla.edu/letters_articles/cantor_baum111504.pdf
Here is a good table showing the states' involvement (in regard to contraceptives, etc.) Table
However, I did find it interesting that while few individual states are fighting for pharmacists' rights to refuse filling prescriptions based on morals, the United States Department of Health and Human Services has a current document enabling all physicians to deny treatment based on beliefs. I do believe it is unfair that physicians are obtaining backing on the federal level while pharmacists struggle for support at the state level.
HHS Guideline
Article about a random survey of Plan-B availability & accuracy of information given by pharmacy staff.
"The project was prompted in part by the story of Tashina Byrd, a Springfield woman who was denied Plan B by a pharmacist who told The Dispatch in early 2007 that he morally opposed it."
Link:
http://ncpa.yellowbrix.com/pages/ncpa/Story.nsp?story_id=122088517&ID=ncpa
Washington weighs lethal meds for terminally ill.
This could create another question of whether or not the RPh would be willing to fill the lethal Rx????
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gEOj2lhkuVJCGiPp-q1UD2ehPnEAD93OEFLO0
Here is an address to a virtual mentor article from the American Medical Association Journal of ethics.
http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2006/05/hlaw1-0605.html
My general opinion is that if physicians and other medical providers have the right to "opt out" of certain procedures and treatment pharmacists should be allowed the same privledge. I am not saying that I agree or disagree with the treatment. My personal opinion on such treatment will be kept to myself. I feel that each individual is entitled to personal opinions. If a condition is not life threatening and no harm will be done to the patient, we as medical professionals should have the right to make personal (moral and ethical) decisions regarding such treatment.
Here is an article that includes comments made by readers about a pharmacist's right to refuse to fill a prescription. This article includes comments supporting both sides of the argument. The link is listed below:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/510299
If physicians obtain the right to refuse to write a prescription, then pharmacists should be able to obtain the right to refuse in filling the prescription. This is another aspect of separation of healthcare. A pharmacist can find another pharmacist to fill the prescription, but should not be actually required to fill it.
Here is an article containing the opinions by professors on this subject in regards to pharmacists, physicians, nurses, and hospitals.
It is through science direct so students must view it on campus.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T7M
-41FTT0S-H&_user=1346651&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_version=1&_urlVersion=0
&_userid=1346651&md5=33a973921b980ad6108710d4d19947a9
I didn't get to discuss this in class but it was in regards to doing no harm to the patient and refusing to dispense certain medications. I know this is a gray area but I began to wonder about a situation in which a woman would come into the pharmacy for emergency contraception such as plan B. If the pharmacist refused to sell the medication and the patient had no other way to get it in time for it to be effective and became pregnant and later underwent an abortion and was seriously injured, became sterile, or died during the procedure; wouldn't refusing to dispense be considered harming the patient by denying the patient their choice and forcing them into more dangerous alternatives, given the medication will not harm their health or interact with other medications they may be taking?
Post a Comment