Trans woman angry after being treated like a er... woman

God that pisses me off so much. Why should a woman have to trek to another pharmacy just because a MAN has some idiotic belief that it’s morally wrong to prescribe a tablet to make some cells detach and exit the body?

Don't assume it was a man. One of the links here refers to he, one just to pharmacists. I've found other reports where female pharmacists have refused. Opinion polls in UK generally show more opposition to abortion by women than men.

Um, it's not ok for anyone to be treated like this by a pharmacist.

Good on that woman for standing up for herself and other women, who as you say, have a history of being denied medical care.

I remember being public ally questioned and humiliated when I tried to buy some diflucan, they refused to sell it because I hadn’t tried cream first. Even though I know how best to manage thrush in my vagina. It is available over the counter. They should not have to drill you infront of other customers. I complained later I don’t think it went anywhere though

God that pisses me off so much. Why should a woman have to trek to another pharmacy just because a MAN has some idiotic belief that it’s morally wrong to prescribe a tablet to make some cells detach and exit the body? You truly have to be living on some different planet to believe that one day after conception there is a sacred life there and if you won’t dispense, it should be YOUR responsibility to ensure that someone else on the presmises will. Not to send the woman away to god knows where.
Fucks me off big time and I bet most of the objectors are indeed men. Fuck the fuck off.

As for being treated like a woman - that is what they wanted, isn't it? The problem is, being raised as male, they think women are just making up shit, and when similar happens, they think it is 'transphobia', rather than run of the mill, misogyny.

Quite a few women in the UK have been refused the MAP and OCP on the basis it 'offends' the (male!) pharmacist. I believe it is still part of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society guidelines. From the DailyFail article linked above (woman trying to obtain MAP):

"It would appear on the face of it that the pharmacist was operating within the bounds of the code of ethics and standards set out by the RPS - which states that where a pharmacist's religious beliefs prevent them from providing a service, they must advise patients of alternative sources for the service requested."

It frequently happens after hours or weekends, with few other local alternatives in many cases. Frankly, if 'religious beliefs' are to be upheld in this way, then those pharmacists should not be permitted to work on those shifts. They can suffer for their religious beliefs, not the clients.

I understand your point Angry but I am personally ok with medical people having an ethical / religious position on such matters as long as the women is referred to an alternative facility who will be able to accomodate it

There is no justification for taking on a job like this and refusing to dispense a legal, prescribed drug.

Especially for patients who have a hard time getting the time off work/away from other responsibilities to attend multiple appointments, or for whom how to get to those appointments is an issue in terms of time, cost, availability, etc.

I feel like religious people need to park their beliefs at the door when they go into work or, if they are unable or unwilling to do that, not pursue careers where that's likely to be an issue. Like if you really want to be a doctor but are absolutely unwilling to provide any service that in your opinion is adjacent to abortion become a podiatrist, or an ear nose and throat specialist, or even a dentist.

I understand your point Angry but I am personally ok with medical people having an ethical / religious position on such matters as long as the women is referred to an alternative facility who will be able to accomodate it.

Logistically, it could well be a hard call, I agree.

One year DH and I both caught the flu and ended up buying stuff for it separately since we both did so on our lunch breaks at work. I got quizzed about why I was buying 2 different types (because I want something to help me sleep at night and don't want something that will make me sleepy during the day, you idiot), he did not.

My local chemist also,refuses to let me have phenegan which is an over the counter anti histamine. He’s told me to go and get it prescribed as he thinks (rightly) there’s other stuff I can take for my hay fever.

I don’t have hay fever, I take it to knock me out. But I now go to Tesco and they don’t bat an eyelid.

just 6 weeks ago, at the tesco pharmacy in uttoxeter, the pharmacist reuse to sell me 1% hydrocortisone cream - right after they sold a man the same cream with NO questioning, until i asked if they really wanted me to get my breasts out - which was where the rash was - in front of the gathered audience in the middle of the shop.

fucking arseholes - and yes women are treated differently to men.

I have been refused the MAP from a GP due to religious beliefs. The justification given is that if they do precribe and it failed, then they would be obliged to authorise the next step: abortion.

Again I'd say that their beliefs are not an acceptable justification for refusing to do the job for which they were hired. I mean, great that you were able to get it sorted out via a referral, but given that MAP is time sensitive really not appropriate or patient friendly to be adding extra steps that take extra time.

I agree, the decision over what to prescribe is between a patient and their doctor. The pharmacist has no business deciding whether or not that decision is correct.

No - pharmacists have a vital role in ensuring that the correct prescription has been written, both in the UK and in the US. Google "medication error" for details, but don't discount pharmacists as some kind of bean counters who just put the pills in the pots on request

The pharmacist also needs to ensure that the prescription meets the rules of the NHS (in the UK) or the insurance company (UK or particularly US). One of my family members has to take a very expensive medicine because he has serious reactions to the more commonly prescribed, significantly cheaper alternative. About 1/3 times he has taken the prescription to be filled, he has to wait while they phone the GP surgery to confirm that X is to be dispensed, not Y. Similarly, I was prescribed retinoids in the US to treat my acne, but I could never get it filled the same day, I always had to return two days later to collect it because as well as treating acne it can be used for cosmetic purposes (reducing wrinkles) and the insurance company would cover the medical use but not the cosmetic use, and insisted on authorising every single dispensing of the drug.

So yes, the pharmacist was right to pause on whether the correct prescription had been written (female hormones for an obviously male patient; first time ever getting this prescription). But they should have spoken discreetly to the patient and / or called the doctor to confirm that it was correct. It's not a conversation to be had in public in front of other customers

Pharmacists challenge presciptions all the time, especially in hospital pharmacies. Junior doctors in particular frequently make (lethal) errors in prescribing and it is absolutely the pharmacist's job to ensure that the correct dose is dispensed.

I have been refused the MAP from a GP due to religious beliefs. The justification given is that if they do precribe and it failed, then they would be obliged to authorise the next step: abortion.

It was rather frustrating but I was advised to go to the Family Planning Clinic so it wasn't as though I was left without options. I'm ok with it generally, inconvenient though it was. I wouldn't be if it removed my having access to the medication/procedure entirely obviously.

No, madam, it's really not their job to get into 15 minute arguments with young women about whether or not their period symptoms are severe enough to justify buying an over the counter medication.

That's my point. If they think there's an error that's totally different and part of their job to check. That doesn't mean they should refuse to dispense, or question the patient in public. A discussion in private and/or contacting the prescribing doctor should be the response.

Nurofen plus is addictive, of course they question why you want to buy it, that’s the pharmacists job.
They study for 4 years for a masters degree and then a years pre-reg training before they can practice as a pharmacist.

If a pharmacist feels that they absolutely must question a customer about what's been prescribed I really don't see why they can't pull them aside to a more private spot to do so, but a lot of them seem to have a bit of a taking pleasure in exercising whatever small measure of power they feel they have issue. As a young adult I once got a quite bizarre grilling about why I was buying Nurofen Plus (not even prescription) at a counter at Boots.

I agree, the decision over what to prescribe is between a patient and their doctor. The pharmacist has no business deciding whether or not that decision is correct.

That actually isn’t true. They’re pharmacists not dispensers, they’re not there to do as they’re told. They have more knowledge about medication than doctors do. Totally agree that they shouldn’t be making moral decisions but medical ones they should be.

The drug I struggle getting sometimes is a type of antibiotic because I’m prescribed it at a dose which is considered unsafe and long term (years). If the doctor had made a mistake the chemist would be in trouble along with the doctor. They’re supposed to question stuff if they think it’s the wrong dose or drug.

A man being prescribed female hormones is unusual. Yes, maybe the pharmacist was being a dick in which case there’s no excuse. But maybe he thought it was a mistake.

"I didn't want to answer why I had been prescribed this hormone therapy combination by my doctor.”

And that’s the crux of the problem. I assume in America it’s similar to the U.K. and pharamacists have a duty to check that what they’re giving is correct and safe.

I’ve had a prescription refused in the U.K. because the pharmacist didn’t believe the dose was right and that the doctor had made a mistake. I tried to explain that it wasn’t a mistake but I agreed the doctor was prescribing off guidelines. Pharmacist still refused until they got hold of the doctor and spoke to them.

I wonder if this pharmacist thought it was an error? If the person was still obviously male and had been prescribed female hormones the pharmacist may have thought it was an unsafe error. Especially if they haven’t come across it before. Why didn’t the person explain what it was for? They could have asked to speak privately to the pharamacist....though the pharmacist should have offered that in the first instance.

Agree Lass. Doesn’t matter if someone’s condition is obvious to others. Nobody should be asked to disclose sensitive medical information in front of strangers in a store. If the pharmacist has a query with the prescription they can call the prescribing doctor or take the patient into a side-room.

The most relevant bit was the claim that by asking questions the pharmacist was "outing" the trans person in question, as if the pharmacist was the only person in the shop with eyes

That isn't relevant to the patient's right to privacy. I've had Boots pharmacists attempting to question what my private prescription is for with other customers clearly in earshot.

Saying, as I did, "I am not discussing my health issues , for which my doctor has issued a prescription , with you " draws attention.

Like saying "OK, I will take this job as a hotel concierge, but I refuse to give anyone directions or help them with any other issues that may come up". But with far more alarming potential consequences.