[dangus]

>> This seems to be at the heart of it - it sounds as though Target did offer this exact accomodation, and she refused. <<

I see absolutely no reference to any accomodation made by Target.

>> However, my personal opinion is that a pharmacist should expect that a pharmacy may choose to dispense any and all legal drugs, and may at any time add or remove a drug from the stock, and the pharmacist should expect to be required to participate in that aspect of the business at times when the possible accomodations you mention are not available. <<

Thank God you're not a pharmacist! A pharmacist is most certainly NOT supposed to fill any legal perscription. If he were, you could have a trained monkey do the job, not have a trained professional with an advanced degree!

[A. Goodwin]

The pharmacist was required to dispense the drug "or refer to another pharmacy that does." In other words, she doesn't have to do it, but she has to ensure that the customer is served. That seems fair, but she wanted to wash her hands completely of the whole thing.

A pharmacist is most certainly NOT supposed to fill any legal perscription.

I didn't say fill any prescription, I said "dispense any legal drug". There is a huge difference between filling any prescription that gets slapped down on the counter, and having a full range of drugs in stock to be dispensed as appropriate.