Pharmacist Denies Anti-Bleeding Medication Because Woman Might Have Had an Abortion

[AllieBaba]

Also weird if it was from a nurse practioner.

Nurse practioners are giving abortions these days?

It stinks to high heaven.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, there's no confirmation.

PP said that they had taken corrective action, but no specifics..and again, it's from PP.

Probably the pharmacist is a figment of somebody's imagination. The next press release from PP will probably "affirm" that the pharmacist absconded to Guatemala, or has disappeared, the victim of an unsolved kidnapping, or committed suicide because of extreme guilt, and out of respect for the family, PP will refuse to release the name...

then wouldnt that open up PP to be charged with filing a false report?
and why wouldnt walgreens come out and say this never happened?

Are you trying to hold Planned Parenthood responsible for the actions of a rogue employee?

 

[WorldWatcher]

from the first link in the OP

It is both ridiculous and dangerous to allow women's medical care to be at the whim of the feelings of people like that Walgreen pharmacist. According to Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest, who filed a complaint with Walgreens, the pharmacy in question has taken undisclosed "corrective action" in this case. That is not enough. Ask Walgreens to make sure that their pharmacists are trained on exactly what they do and do not have the right to opt out of and how to properly handle instances where they exercise that option, including providing referrals. It is what anyone with a conscience would do.

Thanks DC, but that is a call to action, not something from Walgreens saying the Pharmacist was fired. If that is the action Walgreens decides on, I would venture to guess that it wouldn't occur until after the Board issues it's findings.

"Corrective Action" could simply mean that counseling/training was held to explain the law and it's application (or actually it's not applicability) to this type of situation.


>>>>

 

[DiveCon]

from the first link in the OP

It is both ridiculous and dangerous to allow women's medical care to be at the whim of the feelings of people like that Walgreen pharmacist. According to Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest, who filed a complaint with Walgreens, the pharmacy in question has taken undisclosed "corrective action" in this case. That is not enough. Ask Walgreens to make sure that their pharmacists are trained on exactly what they do and do not have the right to opt out of and how to properly handle instances where they exercise that option, including providing referrals. It is what anyone with a conscience would do.

Thanks DC, but that is a call to action, not something from Walgreens saying the Pharmacist was fired. If that is the action Walgreens decides on, I would venture to guess that it wouldn't occur until after the Board issues it's findings.

"Corrective Action" could simply mean that counseling/training was held to explain the law and it's application (or actually it's not applicability) to this type of situation.


>>>>

yes, i mistakenly took "corrective action" to mean termination
my bad

 

[WorldWatcher]

yes, i mistakenly took "corrective action" to mean termination
my bad

No sweat, some of the articles I've read have mentioned Walgreens response (at this point) was a non-committal response. Basically they are probably waiting for the Board report.



>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Also weird if it was from a nurse practioner.

Nurse practioners are giving abortions these days?

It stinks to high heaven.

Who said the nurse practitioner performed an abortion? The woman could have had an abortion performed by someone else and saw the nurse practitioner for follow-on bleeding. The woman could have delivered a child and saw the nurse practictioner for follow-on bleeding. The woman could have had other reproductive health issues resulting in bleeding and saw the nurse practitioner for those.



>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Also weird if it was from a nurse practioner.

Nurse practioners are giving abortions these days?

It stinks to high heaven.

Who said the nurse practitioner performed an abortion? The woman could have had an abortion performed by someone else and saw the nurse practitioner for follow-on bleeding. The woman could have delivered a child and saw the nurse practitioner for follow-on bleeding. The woman could have had other reproductive health issues resulting in bleeding and saw the nurse practitioner for those.



>>>>

 

[AllieBaba]

Exactly.

There's no telling what the situation is.

 

[AllieBaba]

I haven't heard that that particular med is used for anything other than post-partum issues (third stage of labor).

 

[WorldWatcher]

Exactly.

There's no telling what the situation is.

Exactly what?


Do you think the Pharmacist did or did not fill the prescription?



>>>>

 

[Gadawg73]

You are supposing that PP is relaying the truth about the how and why of the medication denial...

Are you saying the Pharmacist did fill the prescription?

Or...

Did the Pharmacist not fill the prescription and under what grounds, under Idaho law, could the Pharmacist have refused to fill a valid prescriptions written by a medical professional duly authorized and licensed to do so?



>>>>

How about this one, the pharmacist never had a chance to issue the prescription because the whole thing was fabricated. That makes more sense to me than the story I am reading.

Could be. I will look into it.

 

[AllieBaba]

I have no idea. There's no person attached to this. It's just an allegation made by PP, and an ephemeral one at that.

 

[Gadawg73]

A 2 minute research into this reveals all of the Idaho papers and other media had numerous articles of this incident and all of the information matches everything fact by fact.

True story.

Back to the facts as this is something THAT HAPPENED.

 

[AllieBaba]

What happened?

PP alleged that an unnamed pharmacist refused to fill a scrip to an unnamed person, via an unnamed nurse practioner?

Beautiful. Those are some mighty heavy duty facts.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I have no idea. There's no person attached to this. It's just an allegation made by PP, and an ephemeral one at that.

Well then no problem as the unexisting Idaho Board of Pharmacy didn't actually acknowledge that a complaint had been received and wouldn't be due to issued their findings that don't exist for an investigation that didn't happen.


Glad we could clear that up.



>>>>>

 

[Gadawg73]

Walgreens ADMITTED THEIR PHARMACIST did this.
If it is all made up why would they admit and state that the pharmacist made his statement as to the event to the state pharmaceutical board?

 

[AllieBaba]

No, PP SAID that they admitted it.

They have admitted nothing, and denied nothing.

 

[Gadawg73]

What happened?

PP alleged that an unnamed pharmacist refused to fill a scrip to an unnamed person, via an unnamed nurse practioner?

Beautiful. Those are some mighty heavy duty facts.

The pharmacist that was involved made his statement to the State of Idano Pharmacists Board.

If it never happened then why did this male pharmacist give his side?

WAKE UP DUMBASS AMERICANS.

 

[geauxtohell]

Pharmacist Denies Anti-Bleeding Medication Because Woman Might Have Had an Abortion | Women's Rights | Change.org

A pharmacist at a Nampa, Idaho, Walgreens refused to dispense medication that stops uterine bleeding because she suspected the woman may have had an abortion. The pharmacist invoked the state's new so-called conscience clause that allows pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for emergency contraceptives and abortifacient drugs, among other things, if they have a personal problem with it.

Last November, a woman took her prescription for Methergine, a drug that stops uterine bleeding regardless of cause, to Walgreens. The pharmacist, suspicious that the woman's uncontrolled bleeding may have been the result of an abortion, called the nurse practitioner who wrote the prescription to inquire why the patient needed it. When the nurse refused to answer because to do so would violate the patient's confidentiality, the pharmacist hung up on her and refused to fill the prescription.

Essentially, the pharmacist was saying that, while her conscience was just dandy with letting a woman bleed out, it would have a problem saving her life if it was even a possibility that the blood loss was connected to an abortion. The pharmacist's conscience being so fickle, apparently also prevented her from even referring the woman to a pharmacy who would fill her prescription, leaving her alone, bleeding, and lost. Someone care to explain to me how this qualifies as pro-life?

Original article:

Complaint targets Nampa pharmacist - Idaho Press-Tribune: News





Let's go over a couple things real quick.

1.) She already had the abortion if she wants this medication (if she did have the abortion).

Remember:



So this has nothing to do with saving a fetus or a couple cells. In this case, this is about punishing someone for what the pharmacist considered wrong.

2.) The same law that the Pharmacist used to not fill the prescription may be the same law that the pharmacist broke.

Let's recall, shall we? Original article:

The nurse alleged that the pharmacist hung up when asked for a referral to another pharmacy that would fill the prescription.

The law itself:

http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2010/S1353.pdf

If a health care professional invokes a conscience right in a life-threatening situation where no other health care professional capable of treating the emergency is available, such health care professional shall provide treatment and care until an alternate health care professional capable of treating the emergency is found.

Thoughts USMB?

Egregious. This pharmacist should lose their license, but will likely be protected due to this asinine law. They aren't a doctor or a practitioner, and they don't get to make the call over treatment plans. They fill the scripts and make sure that the medications are safe. Conscious plays no part in that. It's even more asinine considering the pharmacist knows absolutely nothing about the patient's history.

The good news is that absurdities like this will lead to a legal challenge and most likely the law will be tossed.

 

[Gadawg73]

No, PP SAID that they admitted it.

They have admitted nothing, and denied nothing.

Have you done any research or are you just reading that letter?
It is all over the Idaho press AND THE PHARMACIST HAS RESPONDED TO THE PHARMACISTS BOARD PER WALGREENS RELEASE TO THE PRESS.

Do some research.