She could and should decline to dispense pseudo-ephedrine if she thinks it will be used to produce methamphetamine. She could and should decline to dispense any other potentially fatal drug if the customer were to say, "I need this proscription now. As soon as I have it, I will deliberately overdose to end my life."
We expect competent professionals to fulfill their moral and professional duties.
Yes, agreed, which is the point I've tried to repeatedly make here.
However, later in the thread, reading through it, someone referred to her as "a pharmacist's assistant" and not a pharmacist. In which case, if she was mere assistant, she was/is not affected by license requirements as are pharamacists, as she would be if she was a (licensed) pharmacist.
It's an important distinction and I am still not sure what the fact is there.