The All-Knowing Pharmacist

How much does your pharmacist know about your medical problems? How about your sense of morality? How much should they know, and how much authority should they have to make medical and moral decisions for you?

Some pharmacists are taking it upon themselves to make decisions implicating both areas of your life. Recently pharmacists have elicited controversy by refusing to fill prescriptions for drugs like Plan B or birth control pills for unmarried women. Now, some pharmacists have even refused to provide customers with vitamins or antibiotics prescribed by doctors who work at women's clinics were abortions are performed.

One customer was asked to explain why she visited the clinic before the pharmacist told her that she didn't need the medication her doctor prescribed and refused to provide it.
One group is arguing on behalf of these pharmacists asserting that "The right of conscience is a fundamental right recognized in the Washington Constitution. No citizen can be forced to yield that right when he or she enters the profession of his choice." This, however, is a fundamental misstatement of the law. A law of general applicability, not intended to regulate one's religious practices, need not allow exception because one asserts that their religious beliefs allow them to behave otherwise.

Further, the article notes that "If a pharmacist denies contraception to women, his or her actions, per state law, are discriminatory and unlawful."

In Washington, a state board of Pharmacy (which regulates the practice of pharmacists) is considering how to deal with the issue. Many fear that if the board decides to allow pharmacists religious based exceptions to performance of their duties "self-righteous pharmacists could prevent a woman from getting birth control pills if she couldn't supply a marriage license; prevent a recovering alcoholic from getting Antabuse; or stop someone from getting an AIDS cocktail."

Clearly, the Board of Pharmacy must decide whose rights are in greater need of protection. Does a patient's right to receive a medication that their doctor has determined is necessary trump a pharmacist's (a person who elected to be in that position) right to exercise their moral perspective regarding your actions?