A Prescription For Hubris
Hat tip to this point made by John at AMERICAblog. He has linked to an article about another attempt by fundie pharmacists, this time in Washington state, to try to reject filling prescriptions with which they are not morally comfortable.
He says:
However, I'm amazed the fundies are rallying behind this as their cause du jour because — honestly — how successful do they hope to be? In this day and age, people can get prescriptions filled over the Internet and through the mail. As a matter of fact, a good buddy of mine is the manager of a national chain that specializes in prescriptions the company fills and sends you through the mail. Aside from assuring whether the prescriptions are legitimate, there are no questions asked, no pharmacists who get their panties in a bundle (read that: are truly professional). If anyone is having any problems at all with a pharmacist he or she is currently encountering, let me know. I'd pass happy to pass on the name of the company.
The measure here should be what is in the interest of the patient. These fundies have to realize not everyone they deal with are Christian. Not everyone has a code in their own chosen faith to prevent them from things . If it's not wrong for the patient, the pharmacist should not have any prerogative to thwart his or her own domain over his or her body. That's hubristic, mean-spirited and immoral.
With that said, I'm certain at some point someone will publish the names of pharmacists who wish to behave like this, and those folks will pay the price in lost business for their actions. However, I actually wouldn't be surprised to find there are only a small number on the list and that this is just another instance of a few rotten Christians spoiling the whole basket — casting a poor light on the Christians and pharmacists who are actually decent people.
He says:
Hey, sounds good to me, so long as it works the other way around too. Can we turn religious right pharmacists away from our emergency rooms because they offend our sense of morality?I'm behind efforts to squealch such measures because patients' rights trump pharmacists' rights, in my book. It's the nature of the job. What next? Will the 10-minute lube guy refuse to give you an oil change if you're driving a Ford (see previous post)?
However, I'm amazed the fundies are rallying behind this as their cause du jour because — honestly — how successful do they hope to be? In this day and age, people can get prescriptions filled over the Internet and through the mail. As a matter of fact, a good buddy of mine is the manager of a national chain that specializes in prescriptions the company fills and sends you through the mail. Aside from assuring whether the prescriptions are legitimate, there are no questions asked, no pharmacists who get their panties in a bundle (read that: are truly professional). If anyone is having any problems at all with a pharmacist he or she is currently encountering, let me know. I'd pass happy to pass on the name of the company.
The measure here should be what is in the interest of the patient. These fundies have to realize not everyone they deal with are Christian. Not everyone has a code in their own chosen faith to prevent them from things . If it's not wrong for the patient, the pharmacist should not have any prerogative to thwart his or her own domain over his or her body. That's hubristic, mean-spirited and immoral.
With that said, I'm certain at some point someone will publish the names of pharmacists who wish to behave like this, and those folks will pay the price in lost business for their actions. However, I actually wouldn't be surprised to find there are only a small number on the list and that this is just another instance of a few rotten Christians spoiling the whole basket — casting a poor light on the Christians and pharmacists who are actually decent people.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home