Posted on 08/19/2005 2:24:44 AM PDT by hocndoc
HoustonChronicle.com -- http://www.HoustonChronicle.com | Section: Local & State
Aug. 18, 2005, 10:34PM
Austin prohibits Walgreens from refusing to fill prescriptions
By LISA FALKENBERG Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN - Texas' capital city became the first in the nation Thursday, according to Planned Parenthood, to prohibit a pharmacy from refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control, emergency contraceptives and other medications. ADVERTISEMENT
The measure, approved unanimously by the Austin City Council, requires Walgreens, the city's pharmaceutical contractor, to fill prescriptions for patients on Austin's medical assistance program "in-store, without discrimination or delay," even if an individual pharmacist declines to fill a prescription based on personal beliefs.
Planned Parenthood hailed the measure as a model for other cities and a strong statement against recent high-profile cases across the country in which pharmacists cited moral objections to filling birth-control prescriptions.
"We haven't heard of any other city to do this," said Danielle Tierney, regional spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood. "Instead of waiting for a woman in Austin to get denied her prescriptions, we're putting in this extra layer of protection and taking a positive, proactive approach to the problem. Our hope is that other city councils will look at this and say, 'What a great idea. We can do this in our community, too.' "
In the Dallas area, several women have been denied prescriptions, including a rape victim who was refused the "morning after pill" and a North Richland Hills mother of two and first-grade teacher, who was denied her birth-control pills.
Joe Pojman of the Texas Alliance for Life downplayed the significance of the provision, which affects only nine Walgreens stores in Austin's medical assistance network.
"Strangely, I don't see it as such a big deal," Pojman said. "I'm just wondering if they're not grasping for something they could call a victory, to have something to show to their donors."
Michael Polzin, a spokesman for Deerfield, Ill.-based Walgreens, said the Austin provision differs from the company's general policy in only one way.
Normally, a Walgreens store manager can refer a customer elsewhere if a pharmacist objects to filling a prescription and there's no one else to fill it, Polzin said. The Austin rule requires the prescription be filled in-store.
"This program was a unique situation, and that's why we agreed to the provision," Polzin said. "I wouldn't see any reason that this would go beyond the single program."
Polzin said he thinks the company's general policy is balanced, meeting its obligation to serve customers and respecting the beliefs of its 16,000 pharmacists nationwide.
"We want our pharmacists to have the ability to step away from that situation. We don't want them to step in the way," he said.
Walgreens' agreement with Austin, which begins Sept. 1, will affect more than 50,000 people using the city's health care clinics, including more than 8,000 families who use it for family planning, said Karen Gross, policy director for Austin City Council member Brewster McCracken, who sponsored the provision.
lisa.falkenberg@chron.com
fill prescriptions for patients on Austin's medical assistance program "in-store, without discrimination or delay," even if an individual pharmacist declines to fill a prescription based on personal beliefs.
Planned Parenthood is the enemy of religious freedom.
Before I believed anything Planned Parenthood said they would have to PROVE IT! Give me the name of the pharmacist and store location.
They would really like to have RU486 over the counter (in case of emergencies you know). Like when they aren't expecting to have unprotected sex. They consider this an emergency.
They want what they want ON DEMAND. Everyone else and their beliefs be damned. They are the only ones who get to CHOOSE (they are big on that word when it's them doing the choosing).
I despise Planed parenthood,but pharmacists should not be allowed to refuse to sell birth control pills or medicines they don't like.This idea is a dog that could come back to bite us all.
Houston, because of shear numbers, may have Austin beat. But, as far as relative numbers, Austin's a bit different from the rest of Texas.
Oh, baloney. Perhaps they should pick another employer or ask to be reassigned, but there's a place for pharmacists with a conscience. (I know I want those who work at my local Walgreens have a conscience and *do not* want them to practice stiffling it.)
The pharmacist most likely does know which patients are on Accutane, etc.- or should, since they could be held accountable for effects.
If you are a biologist, you have studied the embryology of sexually reproducing species - even if it was just in Bio 101 before you specialized. You know that the embryo is a member of the species and should be able to understand that there is no clear concensus on the actual function of hormonal contraception in women who ovulate despite being on the hormone.
Personally, I'm convinced that in the case of normal hormonal birth control pills, the hormones from the corpus luteum are available in much higher levels than that of the pills. However, I'm not so convinced in the case of the post-coital protocols.
In my practice, I won't prescribe OCP's or depoprovera (the shot - which I am convinced is the best at reliably blocking ovulation) without very careful informed consent about the risk and concerns about the effects on the uterus if a woman does ovulate on the hormones. I have only written a prescription for the Progesterone-only pills one time in the last 10 years when I was covering for someone else - even then I explained the 10-fold risk of ectopic pregnancy that these pills carry.
I would only prescribe the "morning-after pill" if I were absolutely certain that the woman couldn't have possibly ovulated within the last 5 days.
I don't think you understand the profession of a pharmacist.
We depend on pharmacists as part of the team - they don't take "orders." They fill prescriptions according to their professional judgement and knowledge.
No one is a slave. We must live up to our contracts unless they are illegal or we can be released. This appears to be a new provision, targeted at a certain group of medications and a certain sub-population of pharmacists.
Again, you do point out the fallacy that this is a "private" transaction.
Much confusion in your post.
Hospitals may indeed refuse patients and do not each have to provide all services. If a hospital accepts federal money, then the EMTALA regulations rule their ER and coverage offered.
Pharmacies in Oregon which carry barbituates - or even simple potassium pills - could also be required to fill prescriptions intended for euthanasia (Physician Assisted "Suicide").
Are you comfortable with a pharmacist using his or her judgement when filling a 'script for a narcotic?
If the pharmacist knows that the patient should not have insulin, cholesterol, or any other medication, it is his or her professional obligation to prevent harm.
There is no risk of the condom being an abortifacient. However, why shouldn't a person's conscience be accomodated, if possible?
""Walgreens' agreement with Austin, which begins Sept. 1, "
The contract is being changed at the last minute by one party.
Thank you for your excellent and informed comments.
Well done.
That's very kind of you. And thanks for the ping!
Exactly my point - I think the pharmacist should have no discretion in the dispensing of medication - if it is a valid prescription, give it to them.
How can a pharmacy deny a woman "her birth control pills"? They aren't hers until they are in her possession. Very manipulative writing here. A pharmacy is first and foremost a business. And a pharmacist is a businessperson.
I hope that nobody sues the pharmacist when he/she fills a bad prescription. This law forces pharmacists to fill scripts no matter what. That is not right. How many members of the city council have pharmacy licenses?
Ahh, but you're assuming that the pharmacist may use his discretion as to whether or not the 'script is "valid."
That's what pharmacists do. And we want them to do so conscientiously.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.