START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
1,338,307 people care about Health Policy

Idaho Pharmacist “Did Not Break Laws” Refusing to Fill Methergine Prescription

Idaho Pharmacist “Did Not Break Laws” Refusing to Fill Methergine Prescription

The Idaho Board of Pharmacy has found the pharmacist who refused to fill a prescription for a bleeding patient she believed may have had an abortion to not have broken any laws.

Via NWCN.com:

The Idaho Board of Pharmacy has concluded a Nampa Walgreen’s pharmacist did not break any state laws when she allegedly refused to fill a prescription last year.

Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest filed a complaint after a nurse called last year and asked for methergine, a medication used to prevent bleeding after childbirth or an abortion.

Planned Parenthood said the pharmacist’s actions were dangerous but the board said since the prescription was obtained from another pharmacy, no danger was presented.

Idaho’s conscience clause, which allows a pharmacist to opt out of filling prescriptions for drugs he or she may have moral issues with, is meant only to apply to drugs such as the morning after pill, that directly cause abortions.

Instead, the pharmacist both tried to violate privacy laws and then withheld a drug meant to stop bleeding that may be associated with abortion but also birth, and refused to pass the prescription to someone else in the pharmacy to be filled.  Yet the Board is claiming that since someone else filled it eventually despite the pharmacist’s roadblocks, the pharmacist did nothing illegal.

Vikie Holbrook, editor of the Idaho Press and pro-lifer, wrote a brilliant column explaining why this pharmacist should be held responsible for her dangerous actions, and why the state’s conscience clause needs to have these potential loopholes addressed:

Twenty-nine years ago this month, I miscarried. I developed an infection and had to have a D&C procedure. It’s common after a miscarriage, but I remember the nurses kept saying to me: “Oh, you are here for an abortion.”

They meant no harm, but I was a mental mess. After wanting a baby for so long, I lost it too early.

Technically, abortion means ending a pregnancy. A miscarriage does that.

I did not have an abortion. I lost my baby. And I was broken-hearted. And I told the nurses that. A week later, I marched in the annual Pro-Life March in Boise because it was so important to me, personally. I felt that I had to make a statement.

The drug is prescribed to postpartum bleeding patients. That could have been me. Forget the fact that the phone call came from a Planned Parenthood practitioner. It could have been me.

It could have been you.

I might have needed that drug to stop the postpartum bleeding. You might need the drug some day for the same reason.

I share this private part of my past, because if I had to pick up this prescription the same pharmacist could refuse me service. Imagine the mental trauma that I would have endured on top of already a very emotional state.

I can certainly understand why a pharmacist might object to handing out the morning-after pill. The law protects people who live by a moral code. The drug is not administered as an “abortion” pill.

It shouldn’t matter to the pharmacist why the drug is being prescribed.

I’m not stupid. I realize that the patient had probably just undergone an abortion. But that’s not what this issue is about. It’s also not about the pharmacist’s right to decline his/her right to provide services that assist in ending a life.

The life already ended. The woman needed something to stop the bleeding. The pharmacist overstepped the line.

Gov. Otter was right in March 2011 when he refused to sign the bill, but he was wrong to let it become law. The law needs to be more specific, and it should not have such a far-reaching effect on drugs that are administered for other reasons.

It was not an abortion drug.

Next time it could be you.

The law needs to be fine-tuned.

Planned Parenthood, meanwhile, is considering reporting the pharmacist to federal agencies for attempting to violate HIPAA privacy laws.

Related Stories: When Conscience Clauses Can Kill

Read more: , , ,

wikimedia commons

quick poll

vote now!

Loading poll...

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

198 comments

+ add your own
9:38PM PDT on May 15, 2012

What is the Idaho Board of Pharmacy waiting for, someone to die? Not every town has multiple pharmacies. Even if they do, what if all the other pharmacists felt the same as this one? If it hasn't happened yet, it will, and people like this pharmacist won't give a damn.

5:50PM PDT on May 15, 2012

This is BULL !

5:49PM PDT on May 15, 2012

This is BULL !

5:49PM PDT on May 15, 2012

This is BULL !

3:35AM PST on Nov 18, 2011

Her job is to hand out prescriptions.. not judge people. She was potentially preventing a life to be saved.

7:20AM PDT on May 2, 2011

Just hand out the prescriptions don't judge the patient

10:50AM PST on Jan 30, 2011

She should have been compassionate and helped.

7:56PM PST on Jan 28, 2011

This issue particularly offends me. A woman has the right to control her own life, just as a man does. Because we are the carriers of life does not mean that we MUST give life -- this complicates a woman's life in ways a man does not understand. These laws offend me. The pharmacist should have passed the RX onto another pharmacist IN THAT PHARMACY. She didn't know that by refusing, the woman might bleed to death; she didn't know if another pharmacy would help this woman. She just said "NO" in her powerful position. She should not be a pharmacist. They are not doctors or nurses, but only trained to know drugs and fill RXes. Technicians (sorry if I am offending any pharmacists, reading). And the bitch should go to jail for endangering the life of a woman.

9:07AM PST on Jan 28, 2011

Forgive the grammatical errors and typos...laptops!!!

And Echo, well said!

9:06AM PST on Jan 28, 2011

Echo; you've opened one more can of worms amongst many already opened regarding 'sperm and eggs'. Remember, we aren't speaking of thoughtful, deep thinking individuals here. They've bought into religious dogma, are have fallen in line, lock-step with all the others on the far right who believe women have no rights and that the mere act of preventing the union of a males sperm and a woman's egg violates the religious sacrement of life.

This country is continuing it's decline in 'liberty and justice for all'. I wonder when all women of this country will be ordered to wear hijabs. Oh...and chastity belts!

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

ads keep care2 free

meet our writers

Julie M. Rodriguez Julie M. Rodriguez is an arts, green living, and political writer based in San Mateo, CA. Her work... more
Story idea? Want to blog? Contact the editors!



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.