To think if a pharmacist refuses to dispense medication due to religious or personal beliefs

I don't think any religious beliefs that stop someone from doing the whole of their job should be allowed. The law should be amended to reflect this. And it should be the same in any profession. Want to be a registrar? No exemption from marrying gay couples. Working in a cafe and vegan? Serve the customers their cheese sarnies. Bollocks to the lot of it.

Just in case anyone googles this in future in a panic - the MAP (Levonelle and Ulipristal/EllaOne) will not interrupt a pregnancy, but it's not recommended to take when pregnant, probably obviously.

But @VincentVanGoth there are many other reasons why a medicine should only be provided by a trained HCP - previous ectopics, high BMI, outwith the recommended timing window for that specific method, ongoing advice about long-acting contraception. The MAP should not be used regularly so no, it shouldn't be on the shelf next to the condoms and toothpaste.

I remember being told during my nurse training, that the only thing we are allowed to refuse to do on religious grounds. Was assisting with abortions. But we had to care for the woman before and after the procedure.

I don’t know how people don’t know this.
It isn’t pharmacists getting qualified and then deciding not to do part of their job.
It’s enshrined in the job before they even start that they will have the right to decline to prescribe certain things. So they are fulfilling all parts of the job since this part is effectively optional.

There's a pharmacy near me that doesn't dispense birth control. I go elsewhere because of this (always will do even though I'm not even on birth control any more).

Staff with these beliefs should have to work in a large pharmacy where there are at least 2 pharmacists (and the other one is happy to prescribe) they shouldn't be allowed to work in very rural locations where the nearest pharmacy could be many miles away. Same with GPs who refuse abortions, they should work in a large practice where many other GPs a women can see.

It is ridiculous though. A nurse was suspended for discreetly demonstrating her religious beliefs by wearing a small cross necklace, which had no significant impact on patient care. Yet people can use their religious beliefs to not provide appropriate medical care, and thats allowed. Its bonkers!

If you're pregnant with a very much wanted baby - or if you didn't know that you were pregnant, but would definitely have wanted the baby - and you take the MAP by accident/mistake/given it without knowing/forced to take it, it can indeed have very far-reaching consequences.

If it were a drug that would only prevent something that everybody agrees is always unpleasant and clearly unwanted - such as a cold, headache, back pain or such - with no other potential side-effects, there wouldn't be the same problem. However, pregnancy (or even potential pregnancy) very much does not carry that same universal sentiment: for some women, it's their biggest dream come true; whilst for others, it's their worst nightmare.

I think it’s acceptable. Healthcare professionals are allowed to be conscientious objectors, if handled correctly.

There's a huge shortage of pharmacists. I think we should value them a bit more and be grateful for what they do.

The NHS is doing a recruitment drive for overseas pharmacists, like many other professions.

I can't see this getting any easier. It is definitely something that needs to be looked at.

Termination/abortion care is as far as I know the only area of healthcare you are able to opt out of. I am OK with that because I'd rather not have somebody doing something they don't feel comfortable with.

The issue is that pharmacists give it out themselves, so they essentially prescribe it. It is high dose hormones and not suitable for everyone so definitely not OK to be over the counter.

What’s to stop a man picking it up & then slipping it to his partner without her knowing?

I get that, but what I mean is that controlled drugs could kill if misused whereas the most that the MAP would give you a headache or make you feel a bit sick. I don’t see why it can’t be picked up as easily as condoms

1. MAP only become available OTC in pharmacies in 2001 so if you trained before that, there would be no way of knowing that dispensing it was expected of you. Prior to that it was only available directly from a GP or nurse (in a family planning clinic) & had nothing to do with pharmacists.
2. During pharmacy training, you are clearly told you do not have to dispense any medications that are against your beliefs so it’s no good saying “it’s part of their job” when they were told otherwise because yes, they might not have spent time & money pursuing that career path if they were told differently
3. There is a huge shortage of pharmacists as it is, removing the ones that object to MAP is only going to make the situation worse for everyone else while not getting women the MAP they need any quicker
4. Taking the stance of “it’s their job” is a slippery slope as you never where society is headed in the future. At the moment, you need to be 18 for gender transition surgery but how long do you think it will be before the age is lowered? Should highly skilled surgeons then be forced out of their jobs because they object to cutting healthy body parts off a child who want to transition because they didn’t foresee that this is where society was headed when they entered medical school?

As long as there is somebody else mmediately available then I don't see a problem.

The patient shouldn't have to travel 3 miles or wait for 2 hours to get the medication they have been prescribed

That's by no means the only criterion for drugs being controlled.

Insulin for people with diabetes isn't available in the UK without a prescription - even though it's the same stuff that most people already produce plentifully in their own bodies.

I used to work with a number of gynecologists. The ones who refused to perform abortions were generally the ones who specialized in fertility. So I think it wasn't so much that they had ethical or religious objections to the principle of abortion, but more that they spent the majority of their days working with women to help them become pregnant and have babies, and so over time, felt less and less comfortable with also being involved in doing the opposite. Should they then have to retire or change their specialty completely? I don't know - but that seems unfair to the hundreds of women they helped (and its not as if we're overrun with qualified health professionals).

Some people do indeed disagree with all contraception.

Plenty of others don't have a problem with contraception that prevents the sperm meeting the egg, but they have the conviction that human life begins at conception - and if conception has (or could have) taken place, they refuse to be in any way responsible for ending that human life.

Then it should be declassified to the same as paracetamol/canestan etc, that you can buy in the supermarkets with no one supervising. I doubt it’s addictive, which is what controlled drugs usually are.

I think pharmacists should have the right to refuse to dispense medication if it's against their moral/religious beliefs but most pharmacies have more than one dispensing pharmacist available at some point during the day, or the person concerned could go to a different pharmacy for their prescription. I doubt very much that one pharmacist's refusal to dispense a particular medication would stop the patient from being able to get their prescription dispensed.

That works for lots of people, but there are many reasons why this is simply not possible for everyone. Usually those most vulnerable are those who pay the price.

You say that, but I do some work with victims of sexual and domestic violence. Some women are incredibly tightly controlled. I am at the very periphery, yet I have met several women who have had children because they could not access map or an abortion.

Perhaps a woman has taken risks to get to that chemist, perhaps this is her only chance. No, it is nit that common, but it should never, ever be allowed to happen.

Go to another pharmacy. Doctors can also refuse to perform abortion for religious beliefs.

This is not true. (In the UK at least)

In answer the original OP, of course they can but they should organise to refer you to someone that will dispense the MAP.

When I worked in a GP practice it was so frustrating to see women and young girls have their terminations delayed by weeks sometimes trying to get a GP to refer. They all worked part time so to catch a GP happy to sign the referral was usually a few days. YADNBU

They are, but they are dependent on prescriptions coming from the NHS. So they should act in the patients best interests, or not be allowed to dispense for the health service.

NHS staff are not paid a salary to impose their ethical or moral stance on patients - What would happen if a patient refused to be treated by a medical professional of a particular religion race or sexual orientation 👍☘️🙏🏽