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 ?

The problem is that the Christian religious community have chosen to define pregnancy in a way that is not the medical definition of it. They chose to believe that pregnancy starts when the egg is fertilised instead of when that egg is implanted.
Christians (or some Christians) believe that life starts when an egg is fertilised, because something new has been created, a new dna combination. That is why medication that prevents implantation is abortive.

No one is reading the information states the morning after pill stops an egg being released, therefore it never is fertilised. This is also why your periods are normally different for a little bit afterwards. 3 people so far have either ignored or missed this information.
There is no real difference between the pill and the morning after pill.

For those who say the pharmacist should have to give out the morning after pill, do you think all doctors should have to be willing to profrom abortions?

MsHopey, if the egg has already been released and fertilised it stops it implanting. It can't claw back an egg into the ovaries when it's already out.

Elton, but as you said they pack up and go home, they are not staying in their workplace, when they cannot perform certain duties. They are not staying at the till past 3pm and then tell the customers they can't accept money because it is against their religion.

I remember a very similar thread a while back...
The pharmacist in question should either leave the role or wear a large badge stating they will not dispense these medications. They are dangerous (and hypocritical. The ideology they follow disapproves of condoms and the pill in the same way they disapprove of the MAP).

Neon lights, if the doctor working in an abortion clinic, then yes, they can't refuse an abortion on moral grounds. This pharmacist could choose a different role, but they decided to go for a job where they have to dispense MAP several times a day. It does not make any sense to me.

Christians (or some Christians) believe that life starts when an egg is fertilised, because something new has been created, a new dna combination. That is why medication that prevents implantation is abortive.

Ironic. As when Christianity was born they had no clue about any of this.

You shouldn't be a pharmacist imo with those beliefs.

neon

If course they should.

A Dr doesn't have to like or agree with a patient.

Their job is to treat then and offer services they require based on medical assessments. Medical not personal.

There's been 2 quotes from 2 different sources saying otherwise. That it stops the release if the egg. I did my research before I wrote on the thread. And how close an egg release is completely depends on what day in the woman's cycle she has sex. You can't just assume everyone who takes the morning after pill ovulated that morning.

There is no real difference between the pill and the morning after pill.

Yes there is. The oestrogen pill stops ovulation and sperm will never meet an egg because it won't be there. The progesterone pill stops pregnancy by thickening the cervical mucus so that sperm and egg don't meet.

MAP stops you ovulating if you haven't already. It also prevents fertilisation if it hasn't happened, finally, it stops a fertilised egg implanting.

It's very different. Spreading myths like 'it's the same as the pill' is dangerous. Leads to things like teenage girls taking six pills instead of the MAP because 'it's just the same stuff'. You can get pregnant if you do it standing up too. HTH.

You can't just assume everyone who takes the morning after pill ovulated that morning.

But you can't assume she hasn't either.

I don't think a person that is so influenced by their beliefs should be in a medical profession full stop. If they can't separate their beliefs from science IMHO they should look for another profession. And I am saying it as a religious person myself.

Just because it 'might' work by stopping ovulation doesn't mean that's all it does and 'it's just the same as the pill' when it's clearly not.

The right to religious freedom was probably harder fought and certainly cost more lives than the right to contraception or abortion.

How exactly would you count the number of lives lost before women's rights to contraception or abortion were established? It's a lot more than just (just!) the number of women who die during backstreet or self-induced abortions. In a society where contraception and abortion are unavailable, sexual activity will have a high risk of pregnancy, and all pregnancies must be carried to term. In your mortality rate, you would have to include

a) women who had consensual sex without the intent of becoming pregnant, but who did became pregnant, and then died as a direct result of health complications during pregnancy or childbirth,
b) women who had non-consensual or coerced sex, whether violent rape or 'marital obligation': all of the same mortality risks as before,
c) women who committed suicide as a result of forced pregnancy, forced birth, forced motherhood or giving a child up (whether by choice or being forced) to adoption,
d) women who were killed by families or partners as a result of their pregnancy (usually due to questions of paternity or 'honour')

There's no way of counting all these deaths. And that's only the fatalities: nobody can ever quantify the misery, pain and desperation of forced pregnancy. When modern medical professionals deny you access to contraception or the MAP, even if they assume you will easily get it elsewhere, they join a long, well-established historical tradition of dismissing women's physical and mental health to uphold their own principles. It's not a brave statement of religious freedom. It's being in a position of control, and using it against women, with absolutely no interest in the consequences.

Ironic. As when Christianity was born they had no clue about any of this

Very good point.

It's certainly a bad idea to apply things based on a time when things didn't exist people died befire their 20th birthday and most the babies probably died.

Fast forward 2000 years where people can have babies until their fifties and most survive......

Impact is huge

One PP has quoted a source from NHS website that doesn't state anything about a fertilised egg.
My source is from the website that manufactured the main brand of morning after pill, that also doesn't mention dropping a fertlised egg from implanting.
And trying to make people feel like shit about needing the MAP is also putting people in a dangerous situation.

The "prevents fertilised egg from implanting" theory is widespread but there is absolutely no scientific evidence to support it.

If fertilisation has occurred then the egg may or may not implant, but MAP will not influence it. Failure rate increases the longer after intercourse it is taken for this reason (ie higher chance you've ovulated and sperm has already met egg).

But evangelical christian organisations keep pushing this and some pharmacists keep refusing to prescribe on these spurious grounds.

Thank you @sleepyhead

There was a very long thread on this only a couple of months ago.
MAP can prevent implantation if a fertilised egg which is a step further than preventing conception with the pill or condoms.
The pharmacist politely declined and explained where it could be obtained.
If we do not allow medical professionals to morally object to treatment we would lose thousands if very competent people who perform 99% of their job very well.

I would think the NHS and the pharmaceutical websites would have to explain if a fertilised egg isn't implanting because of the MAP.
And you took my words "it's basically the same as the pill" so out of context. But it shouldn't worry you so much as all pharmacists (that are willing to sell the MAP) ask several questions before allowing you to purchase it, including telling you that you are only allowed to use one per cycle.

That 1 % Is just women though isn't it.

Even though men could have deliberately put them in the position in the first place.

How many times do women have to pay for even unwanted sex

Neonlights, there are many specialisms that a Doctor could have which would mean never having to perform or refer someone for an abortion. Same for a nurse.

I don’t think dispensing is ‘treatment’ is it?

A person who wants to be a doctor but not perform abortions should stay out of obstetrics. A GP should not be allowed to refuse to refer a patient for an abortion on the grounds of woman-hating superstition (and any GP who lies, fannies around or meddles with paperwork in order to delay a woman's access to abortion services should be struck off.)
Women's bodily autonomy should always, always override the imaginary demands of other people's imaginary friends.

I always want to ask these ‘moral’ objectors would they do when their 12 year old daughter comes home just having been raped.