Pharmacist's religious/moral objection to emergency contraception

[lilly0]

A while ago I went into Boots to buy the MAP. The pharmacist on duty wouldn't prescribe to me for religious reasons but pointed another pharmacy to me no biggy I thought but then I thought about it. Why would a pharmacist object to emergency contraception it isn't an abortion pill they don't seem to mind selling condoms and dispensing the pill ?
Is there any reason not to sell the MAP ?

Pharmacies should be legally required to
either
ensure they always have one other member of staff on duty who will give out the MAP
or
contact the next pharmacy to check that staff there will provide it AND provide / pay for free taxi service both ways on request.

They shouldn’t be in the job if they cannot discharge their duties.

First do no harm, etc.

I’d complain to boots. You won’t get them disciplined because it’s their legal right but it’s always good to have your voice heard.

Agree wholeheartedly with pps saying simply signposting to another pharmacy is not enough. And that this risks low income and vulnerable women being unable to access/scared off.

Disgraceful.

What next? Bar staff who refuse to serve alcohol on religious grounds? Nowhere near as important clearly, but the principle is the same

It is clearly not the same at all. No one with a religious objection to serving alcohol would be working in a bar or even be in a bar.

Diddums to middle aged, middle class religious types having to change careers. Tiny violins.

Nice bit of ageism, classism and religious discrimination there. Well done! Nowhere does the OP refer to age or class (how would she know?) so you are being ridiculous.

As PP have said the MAP can prevent implantation of an already fertilised egg, so I assume that's his objection.
The pharmacist should have signs on the door stating it's not provided there to avoid anyone becoming so embarrassed that they don't seek it elsewhere.
It sounds as though the pharmacist was polite and directed you elsewhere though so I don't feel as though he's done anything wrong.

When I was being interviewed for my casino job, they flat out said to me, "people are going to be drinking and gambling at our casino where we serve drinks and deal cards. Is that going to be an issue for you morally?"

That's the time to raise moral objections. Before the contract is signed and you can walk away. Not after you sign the contract and start cashing the paychecks. I do not believe you get to pick and choose the parts of a job you want to do--the job is the job, the good, the bad, and the ugly.

I don't like to vacuum but it's part of my current job. I do it because it's what I'm being paid to do. If at any time that becomes an issue for me, I know where the door is. I think you get to have your morals on your own time, regarding your own person/body, but you don't get to push them on anyone else, and you don't get to use them as an excuse to refuse to do parts of the job (while still cashing the full paycheck of said job).

Sorry I made a comment earlier about the coil just preventing a pregnancy establishing itself and realised I had better check if this was still the case! It does do this according the NHS, but it tries and prevents fertilisation first. I copied the NHS wording below.
The IUS releases a progestogen hormone into the womb. This thickens the mucus from your cervix, making it difficult for sperm to move through and reach an egg. It also thins the womb lining so that it's less likely to accept a fertilised egg. It may also stop ovulation (the release of an egg) in some women.

I know this may be comparing oranges to apples but....
How can a pharmacist refuse to sell you MAP on religious/moral grounds when a B and B gets fined/sued for refusing a room to a gay couple for the same reasons?

Nice bit of ... religious discrimination there. Well done!

It's always religious discrimination when these types of people want to push THEIR religion on other people and get told they can't. Newsflash: literally no person anywhere is saying this pharmacist can't be a Christian, or that this pharmacist has to take these pills they object to so strenuously.

What we ARE saying is that this pharmacist signed on to do a job. Now we expect them to DO that job,or find another.

I thinks that's outrageous and would have complained.

I copied and pasted how the morning after pill works from the most used morning after pill in the UK.

• It is thought to work mainly by preventing or delaying ovulation (the release of the egg).
• It is believed that the levonorgestrel tricks the body into thinking that ovulation has already occurred (due to the high levels of synthetic progesterone), preventing the release of the egg.
• It causes an increase in the thickness of mucus in the cervix forming a barrier to make it difficult for sperm enter the womb.

No where does it say the egg has already been fertilised by the sperm. So it is essentially still just an egg waiting to be expelled with the normal menstrual cycle.

As far as I'm concerned there shkukd not be this obstacle to getting the MAP.

When fictional deitys are more important than a potential abuse victim not wanting a rape baby and having access to emergency contraception something is very wrong.

You have no idea what someone coming into that pharmacy may have had going on and making their lives more difficult or embarrassing isn't on.

Another one who agrees with the principle that it should be dispensed and that a 'conscientious objection' should not be allowed.

People saying it's OK because the OP was redirected to another pharmacy, are overlooking the fact that for women in rural and remote communities another pharmacy could be fucking miles away. There is a small window of effectiveness for the MAP. If you are a woman who doesn't drive, is dependent on public transport and who is on a low income - and also potentially trying to juggle getting the MAP around work and other commitments - then simply going to another pharmacy is not always as simple as it sounds.

I used to live in a rural community where the bus operated twice a day - once out and once back. It took 90 minutes to get into town. Going to a pharmacy in another town would be been impossible on the same day - and that's not even getting into the financial cost of shelling out for multiple bus fares if you're trying to scrape the money together to pay for the MAP in the first place.

But hey, it's only women that suffer the consequences of this 'conscientious objection', so who gives a shit?

Newsflash: literally no person anywhere is saying this pharmacist can't be a Christian, or that this pharmacist has to take these pills they object to so strenuously.

You are assuming yourself by saying they are Christian.

OP hasn't been back btw.

A nurse also can refuse to take part in situations they find morally objectionable.
Don't forget some people will have trained prior to their use so you can't really expect them to re train.

That's ridiculous; YANBU

I can understand vets, surgeons, GPs etc being allowed to refuse to do something on moral grounds as a) they have to actually perform a procedure that, to them, is wrong and b) there will be other vets/surgeons/doctors in the same place to take over for them.

But the pharmacist is just selling stuff. It's present in the shop already. All they have to do is take money and hand it over - that's the job of someone in retail. I don't see it as any different from a religious/moral reason vegetarian supermarket cashier refusing to sell meat to a customer (presumably they can't do that?!)

I can understand vets, surgeons, GPs etc being allowed to refuse to do something on moral grounds as a) they have to actually perform a procedure that, to them, is wrong and b) there will be other vets/surgeons/doctors in the same place to take over for them

Yeah people can just weeks for another appointment can't they.

Not as if they may have had trouble leaving the house under watchful eyes if abusive or disapproving families to attend the first one is It.

Leave your god at home. He's yours not mine and has no place determining what someone wants to do with their body.

A nurse can refuse to hand over the instruments to the dr performing the procedure.

Thing is there aren't enough people prepared to do there roles anyway. Why would you want some to walk away? The pharmacy might close altogether then.

I changed my GP of many years after he refused to refer me for a termination. I think it’s appalling that nonsensical beliefs in imaginary beings can override hard fought for reproductive rights.

...out of interest, would the pharmacist also be within his/her rights to refuse to sell condoms? Or prescribe the contraceptive pill?

I don’t necessarily think anyone should be forced to dispense medication they don’t believe in but I too worry about the poor teenage girl/vulnerable woman being completely put off trying elsewhere by a judgemental pharmacist.

I think it’s actually the implied judgement that I’m most uncomfortable with. The fact that they are taking a ‘moral’ stand is completely irrelevant and it is unnecessary and unprofessional to point this out. Certainly in this situation, a simple ‘I’m sorry, but the MAP isn’t available at the minute. Have you tried the pharmacy around the corner?’ would surely have sufficed. They of course have the right to refuse, but it should absolutely be in a non-judgemental manner.

In any case, a huge company such as Boots has absolutely no excuse for not having an additional pharmacist present to prevent these situations. Or is this yet another company sanctioned way to illustrate their absolute lack of respect for women’s choices?

They are in the wrong job if they aren't willing to dispense certain items.

Can't believe it is even ok for pharmacists to do this.

Personal beliefs should be left at the door if you are doing a job like that. Or don't work there.

I don't think pharmacists or doctors should be able to opt out of parts of their job.

I work for the civil service and my job is to implement the policies of the elected Govt of the day - irrespective of my own views. If I don't wish to, I'd be expected to get another job. Not sure why medical people should be treated differently.

It's fine for someone to object to MAP on moral/religious grounds

Yes, absolutely fine to do this, when you're not in a position of trust, not at all okay to do so whilst dispensing medication as part of your job though. OP, please let boots know about this. I'm sure the person will think they're a victim or persecution standard copout but at least this medication will still be accessible.

Nice bit of ... religious discrimination there. Well done!

Whereas blatantly discriminating against a woman by refusing to dispense her the map 'because of religious objections' is okay though?...

Im wondering if this the same pharmacist that did this to another poster a few months ago.