| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/16 |
| 2004/11/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion, Health/Women] UID:34834 Activity:high |
11/11 Pharmacists in Red States refuse to give out contraceptive
pills because of religion and/or personal belief:
http://tinyurl.com/4tamp
\_ Sounds like quite the opportunity for competition to thrive.
\_ Man, just wait until you get a Jehova's Witness in charge of a
hospital!
\_ how about a Christian Science Emergency Room? HAHAHA
\_ don't insult Christian Science, they really work. Here is
a proof-- they can make infertile women have babies
again: http://tinyurl.com/5wfnf
\_ That's unbelievable. Your personal views have absolutely no
place in your professional practice. I can't believe that
people like that still exist in this country.
\_ apparently 53% of the Americans don't agree with you.
\_ Are you pro-choice or pro-life?
\_ I am pro-choice, but that's irrelevant. A customer
should be free to have ANY prescription filled,
no matter what it is. It's not the pharmacist's job
to decide if it's appropriate, it's the doctor's.
\_ Is it irrelevant? Assisted suicide is legal in Oregon.
Would you be as unsympathetic to a health worker or
pharmacist in Oregon who refuses to participate in an
assisted suicide case?
\_ Congratulations, you just compared birth control pills
to suicide! Stay tuned for the moral equation of
gay marriage with slavery and the halocaust!
\_ Yep. I assume the pharmacist in the original
story believes that birth control == murder. Just
as some Oregon health care provider might belive
assisted suicide == murder. Legality has very
little to do with morality, which is why I asked
if the poster was pro-choice or pro-life. We
are all relatively comfortable with birth control
being morally neutral, and that allows the prof.
practice poster to take such a strong stand. I
would guess that we can mostly accept that it
would be more legitimate to find assisted suicide
not morally neutral, which is why I asked the
poster if he would still be as comfortable with
his uncompromising stance. If he is just as
uncompromising, great, though one might mention that
following orders is not a sufficient excuse in many
situations. If he is more flexible
with refusing to help with legal assisted suicide,
then that raises the pro-life/pro-choice question,
since the original pharmacist presumably believe
that birth control == murder. In any case, it's
easy to condemn someone, but it's probably not
terribly production. It's much more useful to
try to understand someone's behavior.
\_ Birth control pills are not, contrary to common belief,
aborticants (i think that's the word). They act by
preventing ovulation. No egg ever gets fertalized.
\_ Contrary to common belief? Jesus fucking christ, are
people really that ignorant?
\_ What do you think...? -John
\_ ja sind sie
\_ Every time something is done to prevent our Christian
hordes from filling every nook and cranny of the planet
a crime is committed. And every sperm is sacred.
\_ I really don't think that that's common belief.
\_ "abortifacients".
\_ I don't quite get this, I thought anti-birth control was a
Catholic thing, not a prodestant thing.
\_ the supposedly better educated Northern Blue State
Elitists' ability to spell amazes and embarrases me -liberal
\_ We're better at it, at least. I hope. |
| 5/16 |
|
| tinyurl.com/4tamp -> story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=676&ncid=676&e=15&u=/usatoday/20041109/ts_usatoday/druggistsrefusetogiveoutpill com By Charisse Jones, USA TODAY For a year, Julee Lacey stopped in a CVS pharmacy near her home in a Fort Worth suburb to get refills of her birth-control pills. Then one day la st March, the pharmacist refused to fill Lacey's prescription because sh e did not believe in birth control. More USA TODAY Snapshots "I was shocked," says Lacey, 33, who was not able to get her prescription until the next day and missed taking one of her pills. It's just to fill the prescription that was ordered by my physician." Some pharmacists, however, disagree and refuse on moral grounds to fill p rescriptions for contraceptives. And states from Rhode Island to Washing ton have proposed laws that would protect such decisions. Mississippi enacted a sweeping statute that went into effect in July that allows health care providers, including pharmacists, to not participate in procedures that go against their conscience. South Dakota and Arkans as already had laws that protect a pharmacist's right to refuse to dispe nse medicines. The American Pharmacists Association, with 50,000 members, has a policy t hat says druggists can refuse to fill prescriptions if they object on mo ral grounds, but they must make arrangements so a patient can still get the pills. Yet some pharmacists have refused to hand the prescription to another druggist to fill. Some advocates for women's reproductive rights are worried that such acti ons by pharmacists and legislatures are gaining momentum. The US House of Representatives passed a provision in September that wo uld block federal funds from local, state and federal authorities if the y make health care workers perform, pay for or make referrals for aborti ons. "The explosion in the number of legislative initiatives and the number of individuals who are just saying, 'We're not going to fill that prescrip tion for you because we don't believe in it' is astonishing," she said. Pharmacists have moved to the front of the debate because of such drugs a s the "morning-after" pill, which is emergency contraception that can pr event fertilization if taken within 120 hours of unprotected intercourse . While some pharmacists cite religious reasons for opposing birth control, others believe life begins with fertilization and see hormonal contrace ptives, and the morning-after pill in particular, as capable of causing an abortion. "I refuse to dispense a drug with a significant mechanism to stop human l ife," says Karen Brauer, president of the 1,500-member Pharmacists for L ife International. Brauer was fired in 1996 after she refused to refill a prescription for birth-control pills at a Kmart in the Cincinnati subu rb of Delhi Township. Lacey, of North Richland Hills, Texas, filed a complaint with the Texas B oard of Pharmacy after her prescription was refused in March. In Februar y, another Texas pharmacist at an Eckerd drug store in Denton wouldn't g ive contraceptives to a woman who was said to be a rape victim. In the Madison case, pharmacist Neil Noesen, 30, after refusing to refill a birth-control prescription, did not transfer it to another pharmacist or return it to the woman. She was able to get her prescription refille d two days later at the same pharmacy, but she missed a pill because of the delay. She filed a complaint after the incident occurred in the summer of 2002 i n Menomonie, Wis. Christopher Klein, spokesman for Wisconsin's Departmen t of Regulation and Licensing, says the issue is that Noesen didn't tran sfer or return the prescription. The most severe punishment would be revoking Noesen's pharmacist license, but Kl ein says that is unlikely. Susan Winckler, spokeswoman and staff counsel for the American Pharmacist s Association, says it is rare that pharmacists refuse to fill a prescri ption for moral reasons. She says it is even less common for a pharmacis t to refuse to provide a referral. "The reality is every one of those instances is one too many," Winckler s ays. "Our policy supports stepping away but not obstructing." In the 1970s, because of abortion and sterilization, some states adopted refusal clauses to allow certain health care professionals to opt out of providing those services. The issue re-emerged in the 1990s, says Adam Sonfield of the Alan Guttmacher Institute, which researches reproductive issues. Sonfield says medical workers, insurers and employers increasingly want t he right to refuse certain services because of medical developments, suc h as the "morning-after" pill, embryonic stem-cell research and assisted suicide. "The more health care items you have that people feel are controversial, some people are going to object and want to opt out of being a part of t hat," he says. In Wisconsin, a petition drive is underway to revive a proposed law that would protect pharmacists who refuse to prescribe drugs they believe cou ld cause an abortion or be used for assisted suicide. "It just recognizes that pharmacists should not be forced to choose betwe en their consciences and their livelihoods," says Matt Sande of Pro-Life Wisconsin. "They should not be compelled to become parties to abortion. |
| tinyurl.com/5wfnf -> story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=573&ncid=757&e=2&u=/nm/20041111/od_nm/crime_britain_kenya_babies_dc Oddly Enough - Reuter s LONDON (Reuters) - A British High Court judge will rule Friday whether a child born after its mother was prayed over by a self-styled bishop of a n unregulated church is truly a "miracle baby" or a victim of child traf ficking. The case comes after authorities in Kenya accused the London-based church of being part of an international baby-snatching ring, responsible for abducting more than 20 children and passing them off as the miraculous o ffspring of infertile women. Kenyan authorities are seeking the extradition of Gilbert Deya, a Britain -based Kenyan preacher who claims to have used the power of prayer to ma ke infertile women bear "miracle babies." The allegations have exposed what commentators on religion describe as a murky world of money, politics and the occult that at times has hijacked an evangelical revival among Britain's burgeoning African diaspora. Deya, now in Scotland, says he is innocent and insists the "miracles" are bona fide. His lawyers are fighting his extradition, saying he could no t receive a fair trial in Kenya. A statement from the High Court said Friday's judgment is concerned with "whether the claim that a child was a miracle baby is true or whether th e child concerned has been a victim international child trafficking." Republication or r edistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the pri or written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any error s or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon . |