Dana7360
Diamond Member
- Aug 6, 2014
- 15,147
- 13,596
- 2,405
I'm not assuming that at all. I'm assuming that the pharmacist thought the women didn't need the drug and therefore refused to fill the prescription. That is not the pharmacist's business UNLESS the woman was endangered by the drug. And there is no evidence of that. So why oh why was this woman forced to go elsewhere to fill a legal prescription that was available at this particular pharmacy?You've obviously never driven through the middle of Florida.
Actually, I have, several times. It's one big redneck filled trailer park.
Why SHOULD someone have to go out of their way to get something that was legally prescribed to them, is a legal substance, and is carried by the pharmacy? The only reason I can think of is that the pharmacist thinks the drug will harm the patient and this doesn't seem to be so in this case.
There is no indication that the pharmacist in this story refused filling the prescription due to a moral objection. The article doesn't give a reason why. You're all assuming that's the case.
If Walmart has a Pharmacist who will not fill your prescription they should call in another Paharmacist to fill it and deliver it to your door
I agree. If walmart is going to hire pharmacists who can refuse to fill a prescription they should also have a pharmacist on staff who will.
So they would have to have 2 pharmacists working at all times to make sure that people get the medication they need to save their life.
I happen to believe no one should have any right to deny life saving medication to anyone and force them to die needlessly.