| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"RU 486" |
| Date: |
09 Nov 2004 05:56:58 PM |
| Object: |
Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
Druggists refuse to give out pill
By Charisse Jones, USA TODAY
For a year, Julee Lacey stopped in a CVS pharmacy near her home in a
Fort Worth suburb to get refills of her birth-control pills. Then one
day last March, the pharmacist refused to fill Lacey's prescription
because she did not believe in birth control.
"I was shocked," says Lacey, 33, who was not able to get her
prescription until the next day and missed taking one of her pills.
"Their job is not to regulate what people take or do. It's just to
fill the prescription that was ordered by my physician."
Some pharmacists, however, disagree and refuse on moral grounds to
fill prescriptions for contraceptives. And states from Rhode Island to
Washington have proposed laws that would protect such decisions.
Mississippi enacted a sweeping statute that went into effect in July
that allows health care providers, including pharmacists, to not
participate in procedures that go against their conscience. South
Dakota and Arkansas already had laws that protect a pharmacist's right
to refuse to dispense medicines. Ten other states considered similar
bills this year.
The American Pharmacists Association, with 50,000 members, has a
policy that says druggists can refuse to fill prescriptions if they
object on moral grounds, but they must make arrangements so a patient
can still get the pills. Yet some pharmacists have refused to hand the
prescription to another druggist to fill.
In Madison, Wis., a pharmacist faces possible disciplinary action by
the state pharmacy board for refusing to transfer a woman's
prescription for birth-control pills to another druggist or to give
the slip back to her. He would not refill it because of his religious
views.
Some advocates for women's reproductive rights are worried that such
actions by pharmacists and legislatures are gaining momentum.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a provision in September that
would block federal funds from local, state and federal authorities if
they make health care workers perform, pay for or make referrals for
abortions.
"We have always understood that the battles about abortion were just
the tip of a larger ideological iceberg, and that it's really birth
control that they're after also," says Gloria Feldt, president of
Planned Parenthood (news - web sites) Federation of America.
"The explosion in the number of legislative initiatives and the number
of individuals who are just saying, 'We're not going to fill that
prescription for you because we don't believe in it' is astonishing,"
she said.
Pharmacists have moved to the front of the debate because of such
drugs as the "morning-after" pill, which is emergency contraception
that can prevent fertilization if taken within 120 hours of
unprotected intercourse.
While some pharmacists cite religious reasons for opposing birth
control, others believe life begins with fertilization and see
hormonal contraceptives, and the morning-after pill in particular, as
capable of causing an abortion.
"I refuse to dispense a drug with a significant mechanism to stop
human life," says Karen Brauer, president of the 1,500-member
Pharmacists for Life International. Brauer was fired in 1996 after she
refused to refill a prescription for birth-control pills at a Kmart in
the Cincinnati suburb of Delhi Township.
Lacey, of North Richland Hills, Texas, filed a complaint with the
Texas Board of Pharmacy after her prescription was refused in March.
In February, another Texas pharmacist at an Eckerd drug store in
Denton wouldn't give contraceptives to a woman who was said to be a
rape victim.
In the Madison case, pharmacist Neil Noesen, 30, after refusing to
refill a birth-control prescription, did not transfer it to another
pharmacist or return it to the woman. She was able to get her
prescription refilled two days later at the same pharmacy, but she
missed a pill because of the delay.
She filed a complaint after the incident occurred in the summer of
2002 in Menomonie, Wis. Christopher Klein, spokesman for Wisconsin's
Department of Regulation and Licensing, says the issue is that Noesen
didn't transfer or return the prescription. A hearing was held in
October. The most severe punishment would be revoking Noesen's
pharmacist license, but Klein says that is unlikely.
Susan Winckler, spokeswoman and staff counsel for the American
Pharmacists Association, says it is rare that pharmacists refuse to
fill a prescription for moral reasons. She says it is even less common
for a pharmacist to refuse to provide a referral.
"The reality is every one of those instances is one too many,"
Winckler says. "Our policy supports stepping away but not
obstructing."
In the 1970s, because of abortion and sterilization, some states
adopted refusal clauses to allow certain health care professionals to
opt out of providing those services. The issue re-emerged in the
1990s, says Adam Sonfield of the Alan Guttmacher Institute, which
researches reproductive issues.
Sonfield says medical workers, insurers and employers increasingly
want the right to refuse certain services because of medical
developments, such as the "morning-after" pill, embryonic stem-cell
research and assisted suicide.
"The more health care items you have that people feel are
controversial, some people are going to object and want to opt out of
being a part of that," he says.
In Wisconsin, a petition drive is underway to revive a proposed law
that would protect pharmacists who refuse to prescribe drugs they
believe could cause an abortion or be used for assisted suicide.
"It just recognizes that pharmacists should not be forced to choose
between their consciences and their livelihoods," says Matt Sande of
Pro-Life Wisconsin. "They should not be compelled to become parties to
abortion."
.
|
|
| User: "magnulus" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
14 Nov 2004 02:00:07 AM |
|
|
Any pharmacist that refuses to hand out a perscription for a drug that
somebody requests should be taken out to an isolated field and shot, then
his body should be burned and turned into fertilizer to help third-world
farmers. Prefferably in the cheapest, most humane way possible. We don't
want people to needlessly suffer.
Failing that, find out where the pharmacist has his car parked and pour
corn syrup in the gas tank and slash the tires.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joann Evans" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
15 Nov 2004 09:09:10 PM |
|
|
magnulus wrote:
Any pharmacist that refuses to hand out a perscription for a drug that
somebody requests should be taken out to an isolated field and shot, then
his body should be burned and turned into fertilizer to help third-world
farmers. Prefferably in the cheapest, most humane way possible. We don't
want people to needlessly suffer.
Failing that, find out where the pharmacist has his car parked and pour
corn syrup in the gas tank and slash the tires.
Damn, don't be shy now, tell us how you *really* feel...! :)
--
You know what to remove, to reply....
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Dixie Clits" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
11 Nov 2004 08:28:59 PM |
|
|
"RU 486" <ru@four.eighty.six> wrote in message
news:XSM58SGI38300.7478935185@anonymous.poster...
Druggists refuse to give out pill
By Charisse Jones, USA TODAY
For a year, Julee Lacey stopped in a CVS pharmacy near her home in a
Fort Worth suburb to get refills of her birth-control pills. Then one
day last March, the pharmacist refused to fill Lacey's prescription
because she did not believe in birth control.
"I was shocked," says Lacey, 33, who was not able to get her
prescription until the next day and missed taking one of her pills.
"Their job is not to regulate what people take or do. It's just to
fill the prescription that was ordered by my physician."
Some pharmacists, however, disagree and refuse on moral grounds to
fill prescriptions for contraceptives. And states from Rhode Island to
Washington have proposed laws that would protect such decisions.
Mississippi enacted a sweeping statute that went into effect in July
that allows health care providers, including pharmacists, to not
participate in procedures that go against their conscience. South
Dakota and Arkansas already had laws that protect a pharmacist's right
to refuse to dispense medicines. Ten other states considered similar
bills this year.
The American Pharmacists Association, with 50,000 members, has a
policy that says druggists can refuse to fill prescriptions if they
object on moral grounds, but they must make arrangements so a patient
can still get the pills. Yet some pharmacists have refused to hand the
prescription to another druggist to fill.
In Madison, Wis., a pharmacist faces possible disciplinary action by
the state pharmacy board for refusing to transfer a woman's
prescription for birth-control pills to another druggist or to give
the slip back to her. He would not refill it because of his religious
views.
Some advocates for women's reproductive rights are worried that such
actions by pharmacists and legislatures are gaining momentum.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a provision in September that
would block federal funds from local, state and federal authorities if
they make health care workers perform, pay for or make referrals for
abortions.
"We have always understood that the battles about abortion were just
the tip of a larger ideological iceberg, and that it's really birth
control that they're after also," says Gloria Feldt, president of
Planned Parenthood (news - web sites) Federation of America.
"The explosion in the number of legislative initiatives and the number
of individuals who are just saying, 'We're not going to fill that
prescription for you because we don't believe in it' is astonishing,"
she said.
Pharmacists have moved to the front of the debate because of such
drugs as the "morning-after" pill, which is emergency contraception
that can prevent fertilization if taken within 120 hours of
unprotected intercourse.
While some pharmacists cite religious reasons for opposing birth
control, others believe life begins with fertilization and see
hormonal contraceptives, and the morning-after pill in particular, as
capable of causing an abortion.
"I refuse to dispense a drug with a significant mechanism to stop
human life," says Karen Brauer, president of the 1,500-member
Pharmacists for Life International. Brauer was fired in 1996 after she
refused to refill a prescription for birth-control pills at a Kmart in
the Cincinnati suburb of Delhi Township.
Lacey, of North Richland Hills, Texas, filed a complaint with the
Texas Board of Pharmacy after her prescription was refused in March.
In February, another Texas pharmacist at an Eckerd drug store in
Denton wouldn't give contraceptives to a woman who was said to be a
rape victim.
In the Madison case, pharmacist Neil Noesen, 30, after refusing to
refill a birth-control prescription, did not transfer it to another
pharmacist or return it to the woman. She was able to get her
prescription refilled two days later at the same pharmacy, but she
missed a pill because of the delay.
She filed a complaint after the incident occurred in the summer of
2002 in Menomonie, Wis. Christopher Klein, spokesman for Wisconsin's
Department of Regulation and Licensing, says the issue is that Noesen
didn't transfer or return the prescription. A hearing was held in
October. The most severe punishment would be revoking Noesen's
pharmacist license, but Klein says that is unlikely.
Susan Winckler, spokeswoman and staff counsel for the American
Pharmacists Association, says it is rare that pharmacists refuse to
fill a prescription for moral reasons. She says it is even less common
for a pharmacist to refuse to provide a referral.
"The reality is every one of those instances is one too many,"
Winckler says. "Our policy supports stepping away but not
obstructing."
In the 1970s, because of abortion and sterilization, some states
adopted refusal clauses to allow certain health care professionals to
opt out of providing those services. The issue re-emerged in the
1990s, says Adam Sonfield of the Alan Guttmacher Institute, which
researches reproductive issues.
Sonfield says medical workers, insurers and employers increasingly
want the right to refuse certain services because of medical
developments, such as the "morning-after" pill, embryonic stem-cell
research and assisted suicide.
"The more health care items you have that people feel are
controversial, some people are going to object and want to opt out of
being a part of that," he says.
In Wisconsin, a petition drive is underway to revive a proposed law
that would protect pharmacists who refuse to prescribe drugs they
believe could cause an abortion or be used for assisted suicide.
"It just recognizes that pharmacists should not be forced to choose
between their consciences and their livelihoods," says Matt Sande of
Pro-Life Wisconsin. "They should not be compelled to become parties to
abortion."
I bet you that pharmacist is a cocksucking gay.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "nospam" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
09 Nov 2004 10:18:15 PM |
|
|
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
The solution to this situation is simple. If a pharmacist refuses to
fill a prescription - whether for birth control, pain control, or any
other drug - see the manager and tell him/her that you will no
longer shop there, and have the spine to actually never set foot
in that store, no matter if it is inconvenient to do so.
We had censorship by the left not so long ago and now we have
it by the right. What a country! We should change the name of
our country to United States of Intolerant Americans.
Pete
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 11:36:30 AM |
|
|
"nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<bEgkd.22488$KJ6.5630@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
Sometimes, filling the perscription early is not a valid option,
especially since no other information is provided. Her insurance
company many not allow early refills. (I know someone that is in this
position with more important medicine for his health.) She could have
been on a trip, business or personal, and could not refil the
prescription before that day. She could have been sick for the last
few days, and wasn't able to get to the pharmacy.
Without complete situational information, an informed opinion is not
possible.
The solution to this situation is simple. If a pharmacist refuses to
fill a prescription - whether for birth control, pain control, or any
other drug - see the manager and tell him/her that you will no
longer shop there, and have the spine to actually never set foot
in that store, no matter if it is inconvenient to do so.
That, I agree with. Add that you will tell your friends about the
insidence. Losing one person is not a problem for most businesses.
Losing a lot is.
We had censorship by the left not so long ago and now we have
it by the right. What a country! We should change the name of
our country to United States of Intolerant Americans.
Pete
I do not remember any censorship by the left. However, I have no
problem with finding censorship by the right.
Mark Sebree
.
|
|
|
| User: "No 33 Secretary" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 12:01:14 PM |
|
|
(Mark Sebree) wrote in
news:c30d43e8.0411100936.7286f3e4@posting.google.com:
"nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<bEgkd.22488$KJ6.5630@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
Sometimes, filling the perscription early is not a valid option,
especially since no other information is provided.
This is apparently quite common.
Her insurance
company many not allow early refills. (I know someone that is in this
position with more important medicine for his health.) She could have
been on a trip, business or personal, and could not refil the
prescription before that day. She could have been sick for the last
few days, and wasn't able to get to the pharmacy.
Her car may have broken down on the way there the first time. There are
many reasons beyond the patient's control why a prescription might be
filled at the last minute.
Without complete situational information, an informed opinion is not
possible.
The solution to this situation is simple. If a pharmacist refuses to
fill a prescription - whether for birth control, pain control, or any
other drug - see the manager and tell him/her that you will no
longer shop there, and have the spine to actually never set foot
in that store, no matter if it is inconvenient to do so.
That, I agree with. Add that you will tell your friends about the
insidence. Losing one person is not a problem for most businesses.
Losing a lot is.
Indeed. Or just make a scene on the spot, with yelling and screaming and
accusations of religious discrimination, so the customers _in the store_
know exactly how they do business. This is one of the most powerful tools
available to a customer victimized by shitty customer service. It's far
easier to discount customers you might lose in the future than it is people
walking out the front door right now.
And if it's a chain store, remember to tell them you'll be writing a letter
to their corporate office about the matter, as well.
--
Terry Austin
www.hyperbooks.com
Campaign Cartographer now available
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "rhoda penmark" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
09 Nov 2004 10:42:13 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:18:15 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
That has nothing to do with it. The woman should have been able to
refill her scrip at *her* convenience, not in advance on the off
chance that some Jay-sus freak will have a problem with the medication
prescribed to her by her doctor.
What's more, many prescription plans do not permit refills until the
very last second. Mine is quite strict about refilling scrips before
the 30 days is up.
While it is appalling that any pharmacist allows dogma to interfere
with the job he or she is required to do...dispensing medicine...it is
criminal that the offending pharmacists would not transfer the
prescription to another pharmacy to be filled. That is hijacking that
patient's rights...placing that woman in a hopeless and desperate
situation... and I would hope that every woman who has been a victim
of such garbage sues the living daylights out of both the pharmacist
and the company fool enough to employ him or her.
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Wm. Seabrooke" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 12:03:55 AM |
|
|
"rhoda penmark" <rhoda@thebadseed.com> wrote in message
news:so63p0trd1epif200rm3aes6h4mqufrm47@4ax.com...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:18:15 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
That has nothing to do with it. The woman should have been able to
refill her scrip at *her* convenience, not in advance on the off
chance that some Jay-sus freak will have a problem with the medication
prescribed to her by her doctor.
What's more, many prescription plans do not permit refills until the
very last second. Mine is quite strict about refilling scrips before
the 30 days is up.
While it is appalling that any pharmacist allows dogma to interfere
with the job he or she is required to do...dispensing medicine...it is
criminal that the offending pharmacists would not transfer the
prescription to another pharmacy to be filled. That is hijacking that
patient's rights...placing that woman in a hopeless and desperate
situation... and I would hope that every woman who has been a victim
of such garbage sues the living daylights out of both the pharmacist
and the company fool enough to employ him or her.
Beautiful! WoW! I think I'm in love : )
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "junegill" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 06:26:25 AM |
|
|
"rhoda penmark" <rhoda@thebadseed.com> wrote in message
news:so63p0trd1epif200rm3aes6h4mqufrm47@4ax.com...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:18:15 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
That has nothing to do with it. The woman should have been able to
refill her scrip at *her* convenience, not in advance on the off
chance that some Jay-sus freak will have a problem with the medication
prescribed to her by her doctor.
What's more, many prescription plans do not permit refills until the
very last second. Mine is quite strict about refilling scrips before
the 30 days is up.
While it is appalling that any pharmacist allows dogma to interfere
with the job he or she is required to do...dispensing medicine...it is
criminal that the offending pharmacists would not transfer the
prescription to another pharmacy to be filled. That is hijacking that
patient's rights...placing that woman in a hopeless and desperate
situation... and I would hope that every woman who has been a victim
of such garbage sues the living daylights out of both the pharmacist
and the company fool enough to employ him or her.
Tsk, I think you're all overreacting. Why should that poor pharmacist have
to fulfil his/her contractual obligations if s/he suspects that a customer
might act in a way that wouldn't earn the pharmacist's approval?
Non-smoking shop assistants should also be permitted to refuse to sell those
nasty cigarettes to customers, and heaven forfend that teetotal shop
assistants should be forced to sell the demon drink. Similarly animal
rights activists and vegetarians should be allowed to work in butchers'
shops and refuse to sell meat to those unfeeling customers who enjoy a
steak. As for what newsagents and librarians should be allowed to withhold
from purchase or loan ... well, I won't even go there. What's the matter
with you Americans that you don't want to be dictated to about your
behaviour by all and sundry? (Just in case some irony-challenged person
reads this post: it was sarcasm.)
There was a similar case in the UK 2 or 3 years ago, and the store, Asda,
which I think is now a subsidiary of Wal-Mart, backed the employee. Since
that time I have never shopped there - I know that my little protest won't
hurt them, but a few thousand more such protests would have an effect, so I
encourage UK shoppers to boycott Asda and US shoppers to boycott Wal-Mart,
until such time as they back their customers' rights.
--
June G
# 364
http://uk.geocities.com/junegill@btopenworld.com/webpages/index.html.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 07:09:10 PM |
|
|
In Message-ID:<cmt1dh$cqs$1@hercules.btinternet.com> posted
on Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:26:25 +0000 (UTC), junegill wrote:
"rhoda penmark" <rhoda@thebadseed.com> wrote in message
news:so63p0trd1epif200rm3aes6h4mqufrm47@4ax.com...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:18:15 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
That has nothing to do with it. The woman should have been able to
refill her scrip at *her* convenience, not in advance on the off
chance that some Jay-sus freak will have a problem with the medication
prescribed to her by her doctor.
What's more, many prescription plans do not permit refills until the
very last second. Mine is quite strict about refilling scrips before
the 30 days is up.
While it is appalling that any pharmacist allows dogma to interfere
with the job he or she is required to do...dispensing medicine...it is
criminal that the offending pharmacists would not transfer the
prescription to another pharmacy to be filled. That is hijacking that
patient's rights...placing that woman in a hopeless and desperate
situation... and I would hope that every woman who has been a victim
of such garbage sues the living daylights out of both the pharmacist
and the company fool enough to employ him or her.
Tsk, I think you're all overreacting. Why should that poor pharmacist have
to fulfil his/her contractual obligations if s/he suspects that a customer
might act in a way that wouldn't earn the pharmacist's approval?
Non-smoking shop assistants should also be permitted to refuse to sell those
nasty cigarettes to customers, and heaven forfend that teetotal shop
assistants should be forced to sell the demon drink. Similarly animal
rights activists and vegetarians should be allowed to work in butchers'
shops and refuse to sell meat to those unfeeling customers who enjoy a
steak. As for what newsagents and librarians should be allowed to withhold
from purchase or loan ... well, I won't even go there. What's the matter
with you Americans that you don't want to be dictated to about your
behaviour by all and sundry? (Just in case some irony-challenged person
reads this post: it was sarcasm.)
All good points, but why stop there? Perhaps staff in
clothing stores should be allowed to refuse to provide a
customer with clothing that seems too revealing, or even
clothing that makes the customer look silly.
Staff in bookstores could censor reading material, staff in
music stores could refuse to sell what they might consider
"immoral" music.
There was a similar case in the UK 2 or 3 years ago, and the store, Asda,
which I think is now a subsidiary of Wal-Mart, backed the employee. Since
that time I have never shopped there - I know that my little protest won't
hurt them, but a few thousand more such protests would have an effect, so I
encourage UK shoppers to boycott Asda and US shoppers to boycott Wal-Mart,
until such time as they back their customers' rights.
Actually, there are some other ways to increase pressures on
pharmacies who refuse to dispense legitimate prescriptions.
I don't know if it is still true or not, but at one time in
the US many large retail stores only sublet a corner of the
store to a pharmacist as an excuse to stay open on Sundays.
Complaints to the store manager or to the CEO of a retail
chain that you and others won't buy anything at their damned
store unless they get a more tolerant pharmacist is one
possibility.
If complaining to a corporation, don't even bother with
complaining to staff at any level. Go straight to the top.
Write letters, send them airmail by security post, or
registered mail, or whatever your country calls it. Request
a return receipt. If do this, you at least know that it
reaches the personal secretary of the CEO and probably the
CEO himself.
OK, this will may cost readers a few dollars, but how much
is freedom worth?
How about small local pharmacists which are not part of a
chain or corporation? Well, the supply of prescriptions is
actually only a small part of the revenue of such a
business. Most is the sale of non prescription items.
Now I am not normally a protester. I don't attend organized
protests, carry signs, and so on.
Yet one of my pet dislikes is when supermarkets have several
unattended checkout positions, with only two or three manned
which leads to long delays.
I have been known to abandon one or even two full carts of
groceries rather than wait in a long line, walk out, and
shop elsewhere. Sometimes I even leave a note in the cart
explaining why I abandoned it.
Yes, OK, it may take me almost as much time to go elsewhere
and buy the same items as to wait in line.
However, perhaps the guilty supermarket will provide more
staff when delays start happening, even if they have to raid
the office and put clerks and the manager himself at a cash
register to ease the load.
If leave cartloads of stuff around, someone has to spend the
time to go around and replace it all on the shelves, and
this takes more time than it would have taken to put that
person at a cash register. If enough people do this, the
supermarket management will eventually get the message to
keep enough checkouts open.
Can the same technique be used against small independent
chemists? Probably. If I or my wife had a legal
prescription refused, there would be a temptation to recruit
a number of friends, acquaintances, or whatever.
Over a period of an hour or day they could show up at the
pharmacy, ask the pharmacist a lot of questions to waste his
or her time, then select a lot of expensive items to make
his or her greed for profit show.
However, in most jurisdictions a sale or transaction is not
complete until the buyer actually pays for the products. In
these jurisdictions, the buyer could wait until he, her or
staff ask for payment.
Then the buyer could say something along the lines of "Hey,
I heard that some pharmacists were now rejecting legal
prescriptions for things like contraceptives! Can you, or
your pharmacist, guarantee that this has never happened
here?
Each "objection" should be different, of course. [on
source: heard or read it on the internet, the media, etc.]
Or even more frightening to the malefactor, "I heard a
rumor, it is all over town that some pharmacists are trying
to impose their beliefs on all customers."
A clerk, not wanting to try to explain to the boss why a
customer stalked out leaving a counter full of products,
will probably summon the managing pharmacist, or owner.
If the protestors are quite sure that the pharmacy in
question has refused to fill a contraceptive prescription,
then they could tell him that they have contrary
information, and have no need to do any further business
with someone they cannot trust.
Or, a more moderate approach of a shrug, and a comment that
who knows where the truth lies....but still walk out.
Perhaps with a "there is no smoke without fire" or a similar
comment.
In some jurisdictions, it might be legal and acceptable to
print up some warning stickers, like bumper stickers, and
stick them to the footpath or sidewalk outside the offending
pharmacy. As a warning to customers with contraceptive
prescriptions that this shop may refuse to fill them.
After all, why should they have to suffer embarrassment or
worse yet, missed pills?
Or probably better yet, form local or national organizations
to support the freedom of legal contraceptive prescriptions,
and provide window signs or stickers _only_ to pharmacies
["chemists shops" in UK usage] who will guarantee to honor
all legal prescriptions. [Note: the sign or the sticker
legally remains the property of the issuing organization and
can be immediately withdrawn if the agreement is broken.]
Another technique would be to send the protesters to
competing pharmacies and asking up front whether the
pharmacy will accept prescriptions for contraceptives. If
so, the protestors can tell them that they are glad to shop
at a tolerant pharmacy and buy something.
It shouldn't take long for the tolerant pharmacists to see
the advantage of trying to drive the less tolerant
pharmacists out of business.
Just some ideas from a conservative Bible- believing
Christian, of course.
Regards,
"nilkids"
[ Posting from alt.support.childfree, which is the only
group of the above that I actually follow.]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 07:00:47 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:26:25 +0000 (UTC), "junegill"
<junegill@btinternet.com> in alt.abortion with message-id
<cmt1dh$cqs$1@hercules.btinternet.com> wrote:
"rhoda penmark" <rhoda@thebadseed.com> wrote in message
news:so63p0trd1epif200rm3aes6h4mqufrm47@4ax.com...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:18:15 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
That has nothing to do with it. The woman should have been able to
refill her scrip at *her* convenience, not in advance on the off
chance that some Jay-sus freak will have a problem with the medication
prescribed to her by her doctor.
What's more, many prescription plans do not permit refills until the
very last second. Mine is quite strict about refilling scrips before
the 30 days is up.
While it is appalling that any pharmacist allows dogma to interfere
with the job he or she is required to do...dispensing medicine...it is
criminal that the offending pharmacists would not transfer the
prescription to another pharmacy to be filled. That is hijacking that
patient's rights...placing that woman in a hopeless and desperate
situation... and I would hope that every woman who has been a victim
of such garbage sues the living daylights out of both the pharmacist
and the company fool enough to employ him or her.
Tsk, I think you're all overreacting. Why should that poor pharmacist have
to fulfil his/her contractual obligations if s/he suspects that a customer
might act in a way that wouldn't earn the pharmacist's approval?
Non-smoking shop assistants should also be permitted to refuse to sell those
nasty cigarettes to customers, and heaven forfend that teetotal shop
assistants should be forced to sell the demon drink. Similarly animal
rights activists and vegetarians should be allowed to work in butchers'
shops and refuse to sell meat to those unfeeling customers who enjoy a
steak. As for what newsagents and librarians should be allowed to withhold
from purchase or loan ... well, I won't even go there. What's the matter
with you Americans that you don't want to be dictated to about your
behaviour by all and sundry? (Just in case some irony-challenged person
reads this post: it was sarcasm.)
There was a similar case in the UK 2 or 3 years ago, and the store, Asda,
which I think is now a subsidiary of Wal-Mart, backed the employee. Since
that time I have never shopped there - I know that my little protest won't
hurt them, but a few thousand more such protests would have an effect, so I
encourage UK shoppers to boycott Asda and US shoppers to boycott Wal-Mart,
until such time as they back their customers' rights.
Wal-Mart is well known for it's social policies. It censors it's
videos, music, and books.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "nospam" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 08:46:10 AM |
|
|
The woman should have been able to refill her scrip at *her*
convenience
Yes, I agree, but don't add to the problem by waiting until the last
second.
it is criminal that the offending pharmacists would not transfer the
prescription to another pharmacy to be filled.
No, I think not. It is hardly a criminal offense.
placing that woman in a hopeless and desperate situation
A better example of hysterical hyperbole could hardly be found.
All the woman had to do was phone her doctor and have the
prescription phoned into a different pharmacy.
and I would hope that every woman who has been a victim
of such garbage sues the living daylights out of both the pharmacist
and the company fool enough to employ him or her
Under what theory? Breach of contract? Negligence? Toxic
torts? I do not agree with fundamentalist pharmacists, but I suspect
their actions are within the law, something you clearly do not under-
stand.
Pete
.
|
|
|
| User: "Donna Evleth" |
|
| Title: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 01:18:34 PM |
|
|
Dans l'article <SQpkd.22900$KJ6.10041@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> a écrit :
A better example of hysterical hyperbole could hardly be found.
All the woman had to do was phone her doctor and have the
prescription phoned into a different pharmacy.
Are all prescriptions in the US "phoned in?" I wouldn't care for that at
all, it would truly restrict my freedom of choice of pharmacies.
Here in France I take my prescription in my own hand to the pharmacy of my
choice. If they cannot or will not fill my prescription, then I take my
prescription elsewhere, immediately. I don't have to phone the doctor, who
has to phone another pharmacy. The system I use here may seem archaic, but
it certainly saves all the complications involved in the system described
above.
Donna Evleth
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 07:21:36 PM |
|
|
"Donna Evleth" <devleth@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:<41925b3f$0$18541$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr>...
Dans l'article <SQpkd.22900$KJ6.10041@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> a écrit :
A better example of hysterical hyperbole could hardly be found.
All the woman had to do was phone her doctor and have the
prescription phoned into a different pharmacy.
Are all prescriptions in the US "phoned in?" I wouldn't care for that at
all, it would truly restrict my freedom of choice of pharmacies.
Here in France I take my prescription in my own hand to the pharmacy of my
choice. If they cannot or will not fill my prescription, then I take my
prescription elsewhere, immediately. I don't have to phone the doctor, who
has to phone another pharmacy. The system I use here may seem archaic, but
it certainly saves all the complications involved in the system described
above.
If for whatever reason you don't have the prescription in hand, your
doctor may, on your request, phone it in to the pharmacy of your
choice. If a phramacist refused to fill a valid prescription for me,
and refused to return the scrip, I would at the very least inform the
doctor, and suggest that patients be referred to another pharmacist.
However, as has been pointed out elsewhere, going to a different
pharmacist might not always be an option.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "nospam" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 08:51:05 PM |
|
|
A better example of hysterical hyperbole could hardly be found.
All the woman had to do was phone her doctor and have the
prescription phoned into a different pharmacy.
Are all prescriptions in the US "phoned in?" I wouldn't care for that
at all, it would truly restrict my freedom of choice of pharmacies.
I have no idea what the percentages are, but it is quite common for
prescriptions to be phoned in by the doctor's office. Many times I
have asked for a prescription only to be told that they would phone
it in. I think you misunderstand this. The doctor will phone it in to
any pharmacy you like. The choice is yours, not the doctor's.
Pete
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
11 Nov 2004 05:37:43 PM |
|
|
In
Message-ID:<tsAkd.23554$KJ6.15138@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
posted on Thu, 11 Nov 2004 02:51:05 GMT, nospam wrote:
A better example of hysterical hyperbole could hardly be found.
All the woman had to do was phone her doctor and have the
prescription phoned into a different pharmacy.
Are all prescriptions in the US "phoned in?" I wouldn't care for that
at all, it would truly restrict my freedom of choice of pharmacies.
I have no idea what the percentages are, but it is quite common for
prescriptions to be phoned in by the doctor's office. Many times I
have asked for a prescription only to be told that they would phone
it in. I think you misunderstand this. The doctor will phone it in to
any pharmacy you like. The choice is yours, not the doctor's.
Pete
This is of no use if you don't know that the pharmacist
might not refuse to fill it, might not have it in stock, or
whatever.
Am curious about why any GP should refuse to provide the
patient with a written prescription, although these days
would think that most GPs [in Australia at least] would
offer a computer generated prescription.
Why go to the trouble of making a phone call? Actually, am
not even sure that a phoned prescription would be legal, as
would offer too much opportunity for fraud.
Is the GP himself going to make the call, or delegate it to
his office nurse? How is the pharmacist going to possibly
verify the scrip? If it is counterfeit, how is the
pharmacist going to prove he checked back?
If phoned scrips are current practice in the US, this seems
pretty slack to me.
Regards,
"nilkids"
[reading and posting in alt.support.childfree. On email
request from Yves Bellefeuille
<yan@storm.ca>
FAQ Maintainer, rec.travel.europe
am no longer posting to that group]
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kenny McCormack" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 08:56:42 AM |
|
|
In article <SQpkd.22900$KJ6.10041@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
nospam <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
....
A better example of hysterical hyperbole could hardly be found.
All the woman had to do was phone her doctor and have the
prescription phoned into a different pharmacy.
Wrong on technical grounds.
The point is that all of the above takes time and days could go by in the
process. You are aware, are you not, that you have to take one pill
a day, every day, in order for it to work. It is not as simple as "Don't
have a pill today? Then don't have sex today."
.
|
|
|
| User: "rhoda penmark" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 10:49:49 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:56:42 GMT, (Kenny
McCormack) wrote:
In article <SQpkd.22900$KJ6.10041@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
nospam <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
...
A better example of hysterical hyperbole could hardly be found.
All the woman had to do was phone her doctor and have the
prescription phoned into a different pharmacy.
Wrong on technical grounds.
The point is that all of the above takes time and days could go by in the
process. You are aware, are you not, that you have to take one pill
a day, every day, in order for it to work. It is not as simple as "Don't
have a pill today? Then don't have sex today."
Thank you, Kenny.
Being late taking the Pill by even a couple of hours places a woman at
a much higher risk of falling pregnant from previous sexual activity.
Simply "phoning the doctor for another prescription" is not a
solution. My doctors work various and sundry hours, and after 4:00pm,
you pretty much have to leave a voicemail message or a message with
the answering service.
However, none of this is the point. No, I will *not* make changes in
*my* schedule because some Freak for Jesus has decided that my
reproductive rights should be violated in the name of Christ. My
prescription choices are between me and my doctors...no one else. To
suggest that women all over the country should take extra pains on
behalf of this dogmatic nonsense is merely sanctioning the behavior of
these whackjobs.
$cientologists are against psychiatric medications. Should they be
permitted to deny a schizophrenic his or her medication? Should they
be permitted to place society at peril by forcing a dangerously
mentally ill patient to walk the streets unmedicated...all in the name
of L. Ron Hubbard?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Dollar Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 09:23:17 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 21:42:13 -0700 in alt.atheism, rhoda penmark
<rhoda@thebadseed.com> defied the status quo and scrawled upon the toilet stall:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:18:15 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
That has nothing to do with it. The woman should have been able to
refill her scrip at *her* convenience, not in advance on the off
chance that some Jay-sus freak will have a problem with the medication
prescribed to her by her doctor.
I agree with that. If a pharmacy is going to allow its pharmacists the
convenience of deciding not to fill a prescription on a whim, they need to
explicitly post notice of this somewhere. That way people at least have a
chance to expect it. Ah, but actually admitting to one's own policies might not
be in the best interests of dishonestly luring customers to one's pharmacy...
--
L8r,
Uncle Dollar Bill
"Opinions are like people - every ***** has one..."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Earl Evleth" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 07:04:23 AM |
|
|
in article hgc4p0ljb1o9kcfmdhak2lg4a7c8jh4vbq@4ax.com, Uncle Dollar Bill at
UncleDollarBill@SpamMeNot.com wrote on 10/11/04 16:23:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 21:42:13 -0700 in alt.atheism, rhoda penmark
<rhoda@thebadseed.com> defied the status quo and scrawled upon the toilet
stall:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:18:15 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
That has nothing to do with it. The woman should have been able to
refill her scrip at *her* convenience, not in advance on the off
chance that some Jay-sus freak will have a problem with the medication
prescribed to her by her doctor.
I agree with that. If a pharmacy is going to allow its pharmacists the
convenience of deciding not to fill a prescription on a whim, they need to
explicitly post notice of this somewhere. That way people at least have a
chance to expect it. Ah, but actually admitting to one's own policies might
not
be in the best interests of dishonestly luring customers to one's pharmacy...
The European view, or more specifically the French view is that certain
activities are under license with the state and must provide the service the
law requires.
Buralists in France are licensed to sell things like stamps, metro tickets,
cigarettes, phone cards etc. One buralist tried to charge extra for postage
stamps which is illegal and this made the TV news.
The same with pharmacists. Their items are controlled in various fashions.
The nice thing about French pharmacists is that the will provide free first
aid. Once I cut my finger with a cutter and went next door and they poured
hydrogen oxide on the wound, bandaged it and charged me for materials. My
wife was once bitten by our dog (he was ill snapped at her) and got
treatment in a pharmacy. They tell you to visit a doctor however usually
one does not. I was saw a man hit by a car and in a flash the pharmacists
dashed out of a nearby pharamcy to perform first aid. That all occurred
with less than 30 seconds of the collision.
Earl
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
11 Nov 2004 12:06:27 AM |
|
|
In Message-ID:<BDB7D066.25DDB%evleth@wanadoo.fr> posted on
Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:04:23 +0100, Earl Evleth wrote:
in article hgc4p0ljb1o9kcfmdhak2lg4a7c8jh4vbq@4ax.com, Uncle Dollar Bill at
UncleDollarBill@SpamMeNot.com wrote on 10/11/04 16:23:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 21:42:13 -0700 in alt.atheism, rhoda penmark
<rhoda@thebadseed.com> defied the status quo and scrawled upon the toilet
stall:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:18:15 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
That has nothing to do with it. The woman should have been able to
refill her scrip at *her* convenience, not in advance on the off
chance that some Jay-sus freak will have a problem with the medication
prescribed to her by her doctor.
I agree with that. If a pharmacy is going to allow its pharmacists the
convenience of deciding not to fill a prescription on a whim, they need to
explicitly post notice of this somewhere. That way people at least have a
chance to expect it. Ah, but actually admitting to one's own policies might
not
be in the best interests of dishonestly luring customers to one's pharmacy...
The European view, or more specifically the French view is that certain
activities are under license with the state and must provide the service the
law requires.
Buralists in France are licensed to sell things like stamps, metro tickets,
cigarettes, phone cards etc. One buralist tried to charge extra for postage
stamps which is illegal and this made the TV news.
The same with pharmacists. Their items are controlled in various fashions.
The nice thing about French pharmacists is that the will provide free first
aid. Once I cut my finger with a cutter and went next door and they poured
hydrogen oxide on the wound, bandaged it and charged me for materials.
Hydrogen oxide, or alternatively hydrogen monoxide. That
is water, or H20. :-)
Are you _really sure_ it wasn't hydrogen peroxide, or H202?
This releases oxygen on contact with organic material. The
usual concentration is around 3%. 6% is used for bleaching
hair. 30% or greater is used as rocket fuel. :-)
My
wife was once bitten by our dog (he was ill snapped at her) and got
treatment in a pharmacy. They tell you to visit a doctor however usually
one does not. I was saw a man hit by a car and in a flash the pharmacists
dashed out of a nearby pharamcy to perform first aid. That all occurred
with less than 30 seconds of the collision.
Yep, OK, not trying to be too tough with you. Just a bit
sensitized by Preston who just seems to be a bit reluctant
to discuss issues of Christian faith and even refuses to
read all of my posts.
Yes, Earl, will agree that most health care workers in most
advanced countries are willing to offer "first aid"
assistance at little cost.
Am an American, but soon after coming to Sydney, Australia,
had a periodontal abscess behind a tooth.
Anyone who has had one doesn't need as description. For
those who haven't, extremely painful. Extremely difficult
or even probably impossible, to find a dentist on a Sunday
at the time.
However, pharmacists [or what Australians or Englishmen
would call "pharmaceutical chemists"] were authorized to
dispense single doses of quite powerful analgesics in a
"single dose".
If you ever visit the US, though, don't expect such
treatment. Yes, you might get it at a hospital emergency
room, but be sure you have lots and lots of insurance!
Regards,
"nilkids"
[posting from alt.support.childfree]
Earl
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 04:21:18 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:18:15 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
The solution to this situation is simple. If a pharmacist refuses to
fill a prescription - whether for birth control, pain control, or any
other drug - see the manager and tell him/her that you will no
longer shop there, and have the spine to actually never set foot
in that store, no matter if it is inconvenient to do so.
We had censorship by the left not so long ago and now we have
it by the right. What a country! We should change the name of
our country to United States of Intolerant Americans.
Not that easy in some places. Eg if Walmart has put the local
pharmacies out of business.
Pete
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ellie C" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 08:18:18 AM |
|
|
nospam wrote:
She was able to get her prescription refilled two days later at
the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay.
This woman was an idiot to wait until she was completely out of
pills to refill her prescription. Do it at least a week early.
The solution to this situation is simple. If a pharmacist refuses to
fill a prescription - whether for birth control, pain control, or any
other drug - see the manager and tell him/her that you will no
longer shop there, and have the spine to actually never set foot
in that store, no matter if it is inconvenient to do so.
We had censorship by the left not so long ago and now we have
it by the right. What a country! We should change the name of
our country to United States of Intolerant Americans.
Pete
Many insurance companies won't pay for a drug until x number of days
have passed since you last filled the prescription. I ran into this all
the time with a medication I was taking. I had to wait practically until
the last day and was not allowed to buy more than one month's worth at a
time. Guess the insurance company figured I could get run over by a
truck or something and then they'd be out all that wasted money.
.
|
|
|
| User: "nospam" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 08:50:51 AM |
|
|
Many insurance companies won't pay for a drug until x number of
days have passed since you last filled the prescription.
I think all insurance companies have this restriction. However, they
usually allow refills a week early. As I wrote before, fundamentalist
pharmacists are clowns, but don't wait until the last minute to allow
these nuts to ruin your day.
Pete
.
|
|
|
| User: "rhoda penmark" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 10:44:18 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:50:51 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
Many insurance companies won't pay for a drug until x number of
days have passed since you last filled the prescription.
I think all insurance companies have this restriction. However, they
usually allow refills a week early. As I wrote before, fundamentalist
pharmacists are clowns, but don't wait until the last minute to allow
these nuts to ruin your day.
Pete
But Pete, some of us want to prove a point, dammit! ;-)
Quite right...you can get the refill policy waived by your insurance
company, but you might have to jump through some hoops. I am on a
number of medications for a condition I have and I was planning a
two-week trip to England one summer. My pills would all run out in
the middle of my vacation. I managed to get all of my refills early,
but only after my doctor's office called the insurance company
personally and authorized an override.
I still am gobsmacked (love that word) at the unmitigated gall of
these pharmacists, subjecting women to their warped view of morality.
I am happily married and sexually active and I take the Pill. That is
between me and my husband, and me and my OB-GYN. It's my choice to
make love with my spouse, and it's my choice to decide as to whether
or not I fall pregnant as a result.
Isn't it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 08:50:53 PM |
|
|
In Message-ID:<94h4p0dne7qa6qlcd3pq0rmgr1e975ogq2@4ax.com>
posted on Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:44:18 -0700, rhoda penmark
wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:50:51 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
Many insurance companies won't pay for a drug until x number of
days have passed since you last filled the prescription.
I think all insurance companies have this restriction. However, they
usually allow refills a week early. As I wrote before, fundamentalist
pharmacists are clowns, but don't wait until the last minute to allow
these nuts to ruin your day.
Pete
But Pete, some of us want to prove a point, dammit! ;-)
Quite right...you can get the refill policy waived by your insurance
company, but you might have to jump through some hoops. I am on a
number of medications for a condition I have and I was planning a
two-week trip to England one summer. My pills would all run out in
the middle of my vacation. I managed to get all of my refills early,
but only after my doctor's office called the insurance company
personally and authorized an override.
I still am gobsmacked (love that word) at the unmitigated gall of
these pharmacists, subjecting women to their warped view of morality.
I am happily married and sexually active and I take the Pill. That is
between me and my husband, and me and my OB-GYN. It's my choice to
make love with my spouse, and it's my choice to decide as to whether
or not I fall pregnant as a result.
Isn't it?
Um, if you are in the US or some other countries,
apparently possibly not.
Perhaps you should consider moving to a country with much
more personal freedom?
Regards,
"nilkids"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "khan" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 04:17:36 PM |
|
|
rhoda penmark wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:50:51 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
Many insurance companies won't pay for a drug until x number of
days have passed since you last filled the prescription.
I think all insurance companies have this restriction. However, they
usually allow refills a week early. As I wrote before, fundamentalist
pharmacists are clowns, but don't wait until the last minute to allow
these nuts to ruin your day.
Pete
But Pete, some of us want to prove a point, dammit! ;-)
Quite right...you can get the refill policy waived by your insurance
company, but you might have to jump through some hoops. I am on a
number of medications for a condition I have and I was planning a
two-week trip to England one summer. My pills would all run out in
the middle of my vacation. I managed to get all of my refills early,
but only after my doctor's office called the insurance company
personally and authorized an override.
I still am gobsmacked (love that word) at the unmitigated gall of
these pharmacists, subjecting women to their warped view of morality.
I am happily married and sexually active and I take the Pill. That is
between me and my husband, and me and my OB-GYN. It's my choice to
make love with my spouse, and it's my choice to decide as to whether
or not I fall pregnant as a result.
Isn't it?
Let me guess how many fundie pharmies have refused to issue fertility
drugs or hard-on enhancing drugs.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 06:04:28 PM |
|
|
"khan" <critter8875@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:3swkd.7470$Ow7.2843@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
rhoda penmark wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:50:51 GMT, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
Many insurance companies won't pay for a drug until x number of
days have passed since you last filled the prescription.
I think all insurance companies have this restriction. However, they
usually allow refills a week early. As I wrote before, fundamentalist
pharmacists are clowns, but don't wait until the last minute to allow
these nuts to ruin your day.
Pete
But Pete, some of us want to prove a point, dammit! ;-)
Quite right...you can get the refill policy waived by your insurance
company, but you might have to jump through some hoops. I am on a
number of medications for a condition I have and I was planning a
two-week trip to England one summer. My pills would all run out in
the middle of my vacation. I managed to get all of my refills early,
but only after my doctor's office called the insurance company
personally and authorized an override.
I still am gobsmacked (love that word) at the unmitigated gall of
these pharmacists, subjecting women to their warped view of morality.
I am happily married and sexually active and I take the Pill. That is
between me and my husband, and me and my OB-GYN. It's my choice to
make love with my spouse, and it's my choice to decide as to whether
or not I fall pregnant as a result.
Isn't it?
Let me guess how many fundie pharmies have refused to issue fertility
drugs or hard-on enhancing drugs.
I have a feeling they wouldn't have a problem with the "hard-on enhancing"
drugs. Shoot, I bet most televangelists are on Viagra ;)
--
---------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "No 33 Secretary" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 06:54:35 PM |
|
|
"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in
news:2vfokcF2k6rk0U1@uni-berlin.de:
I have a feeling they wouldn't have a problem with the "hard-on
enhancing" drugs. Shoot, I bet most televangelists are on Viagra ;)
Given how most of their wives look, I can't imagine they could get it up
any other way.
--
Terry Austin
www.hyperbooks.com
Campaign Cartographer now available
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W.T. Meakin" |
|
| Title: Re: Moralist Pharmacists Refusing To Fill Prescriptions |
10 Nov 2004 08:47:39 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns959DAC03BF09Ataustinhyperbookscom@216.168.3.50>,
taustin+usenet@hyperbooks.com says...
I have a feeling they wouldn't have a problem with the "hard-on
enhancing" drugs. Shoot, I bet most televangelists are on Viagra ;)
Given how most of their wives look, I can't imagine they could get it up
any other way.
What makes you think it's for their wives? Bill.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
