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

[DiveCon]

Quite often they do, but family planning and birth control are their primary reason for existence, hence their name.

so, it is possible this woman needed this med for something like excessive menstral bleeding or fibriods?

It is also possible that she chose that particular pharmacy at random, even though she drove past others before she got there.

so, you believe she picked this pharmacy on purpose?


get out the tin foil

 

[AllieBaba]

Planned Parenthood is very, very political, very secretive, and makes huge amounts of money and garners a LOT of power by killing babies.

I wouldn't put anything past them myself.

 

[Modbert]

Planned Parenthood is very, very political, very secretive, and makes huge amounts of money and garners a LOT of power by killing babies.

I wouldn't put anything past them myself.

Are you going to be the villain in the next Dan Brown novel too?

 

[Modbert]

so, you believe she picked this pharmacy on purpose?


get out the tin foil

I have a feeling this pharmacy is overlooked by a grassy knoll nearby.

 

[AllieBaba]

I have a feeling this complaint will go exactly nowhere.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

so, it is possible this woman needed this med for something like excessive menstral bleeding or fibriods?

It is also possible that she chose that particular pharmacy at random, even though she drove past others before she got there.

so, you believe she picked this pharmacy on purpose?


get out the tin foil

I believe there is a lot more to the story than I have. Funny thing, usually when you chstise me it is because I am not taking the time to get all the facts. Why are you trying to argue we don't need the facts here?

 

[DiveCon]

It is also possible that she chose that particular pharmacy at random, even though she drove past others before she got there.

so, you believe she picked this pharmacy on purpose?


get out the tin foil

I believe there is a lot more to the story than I have. Funny thing, usually when you chstise me it is because I am not taking the time to get all the facts. Why are you trying to argue we don't need the facts here?

well, right now you are jumping to conclusion sans facts to back them up

 

[JohnA]

This pharmacist was wrong and severely overreacted in this situation. Ironically, most of the critics on this board are overreacting as well.

If the woman was in imminent danger of bleeding to death, why was she released without care from the Planned Parenthood location? Logical answer - she was not in imminent danger. If the woman was in imminent danger of bleeding to death, why did she drive over half an hour to this pharmacy passing several other pharmacies along the way? Logical answer - she was not in imminent danger.

Not only was she not likely in imminent danger, there were several pharmacies in the immediate vicinity of that walgreens - including another walgreens that was only seven minutes away. If she had the werewithal to get to a pharmacy over half an hour from the clinic, I'm 99% sure she could get to another pharmacy only seven minutes away.

However, none of this has any impact on the validity of the law. As the OP pointed out, the pharmacist was not acting within the limits of the law. Most everyone agrees that what she did was wrong, and the law says what she did was wrong. I fail to see the problem.

Was the pharmacist's reaction stupid? Yes. Are some of the reactions on this forum equally stupid? Yes.

once more reading into the articule something that isnt there
WHERE DOES IT SAY SHE WAS RELEASED FROM PLANNED PERANTHOOD ..AFTER GETTING A ABORTION


This is what the articule actually says

QUOTE
The prescription was for a Planned Parenthood patient for Methergine, a medicine used to prevent or control bleeding of the uterus following childbirth or an abortion.

“Methergine is not an abortifacient and it serves multiple purposes in postpartum care,” the practitioner wrote in her complaint. “I believe the pharmacist wrongly applied the conscience protections.

UNQUOTE

She MAY have had a abortion OR a birth or niether
either way its NOT the pharmacist business to judge .

 

[Quantum Windbag]

so, you believe she picked this pharmacy on purpose?


get out the tin foil

I believe there is a lot more to the story than I have. Funny thing, usually when you chstise me it is because I am not taking the time to get all the facts. Why are you trying to argue we don't need the facts here?

well, right now you are jumping to conclusion sans facts to back them up

No I am not.

I am insisting that we hear all the facts before we conclude that this pharmacist did anything like what Planned Parenthood claims she did. I am also drawing a resonable conclusiong that an abortion took place because of the involvement of Planned Parenthood. I may, or may not, be wrong about that, but it is actually irrelevant to the larger picture here. Whether or not she had an abortion is irrelevent because if what was alleged by Modbert actually happened, which, I will point out, not even Planned Parenthood is saying, the pharmacist was wrong. I do, however, insist on knowing all the facts before condemning someone, and so far I have zero facts, and ine assumptions.

I am not jumping to any conclusions at all.

 

[High_Gravity]

The irony of this is the anti abortion people seem so much more destructive than the people who are ok with abortions.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

once more reading into the articule something that isnt there
WHERE DOES IT SAY SHE WAS RELEASED FROM PLANNED PERANTHOOD ..AFTER GETTING A ABORTION


This is what the articule actually says

QUOTE
The prescription was for a Planned Parenthood patient for Methergine, a medicine used to prevent or control bleeding of the uterus following childbirth or an abortion.

“Methergine is not an abortifacient and it serves multiple purposes in postpartum care,” the practitioner wrote in her complaint. “I believe the pharmacist wrongly applied the conscience protections.

UNQUOTE

She MAY have had a abortion OR a birth or niether
either way its NOT the pharmacist business to judge .

Where does it say that, if the pharmacist actually did what is alleged, that the meds was denied because of an abortion? The article actually points out that the person who prescribed that wrote the prescription refused to tell the pharmacist why it was prescribed.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I have a feeling this complaint will go exactly nowhere.

Well it is known that it went to the Idaho Board of Pharmacy...

"November 17, 2010

Ms. Jan Atkins
Senior Compliance Officer
Idaho Board of Pharmacy
PO Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0067

Dear Ms. Atkins,

On November 6, 2010 I contacted the Walgreens pharmacy located at 932 Caldwell Blvd., Nampa, Idaho in order to call-in a prescription for Methergine. I am a nurse practitioner at Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest’s Boise heath care center, and the prescription was for one of my patients. As you may know, Methergine is commonly used to prevent bleeding from the uterus following childbirth or an abortion, as treatment for an enlarged uterus, miscarriage management, to help deliver the placenta after childbirth, and as a migraine treatment.

I spoke with the female pharmacist on duty at approximately 2pm (unfortunately I did not get her name). The pharmacist asked for our center phone number and the name of our health center. I provided that information. The pharmacist then asked if the patient had undergone an elective abortion. In keeping with the standards of conduct outlined in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), I refused to breach my patient’s confidentiality by answering her question. The pharmacist then stated that if the patient had an abortion, she would not fill the prescription. I again referenced HIPPA, and I informed her that Methergine is not an abortifacient and it serves multiple purposes in post-partum care. I asked that she refer me to another pharmacist to fill the prescription, and she hung up.

I believe a complaint is in order for three reasons. First, the pharmacist asked that I breach my patient’s confidentiality. Patient privacy is not only a requirement of the law, but it is also the bedrock of patient-provider trust. Lack of trust and privacy can only negatively impact health outcomes and standards of care. Nor is it necessary for a pharmacist to know for what purpose a drug is being prescribed. As a trained practitioner and a licensed nurse, I am fully capable of determining treatment regimens that are appropriate to the medical condition at-hand and ensuring that those regimens do not negatively interact with concurrent prescriptions. The pharmacist’s request was therefore both unlawful and unnecessary.

Secondly, I believe the pharmacist wrongly applied the conscious protections outlined in Idaho Code § 18-611 in refusing to dispense Methergine. Section § 18-611 of Idaho code does allow medical professions to refuse to provide health care services that conflict with their “religious, moral or ethical principles.” However, “health care services” is defined in section § 18-611(f) as “an abortion, dispensation of an abortifacient drug, human embryonic stem cell research, treatment regimens utilizing human embryonic stem cells, human embryo cloning or end of life treatment and care.” Methergine does not fall within that definition. Thus, it would seem the pharmacist had no grounds on which to refuse to dispense the medication.

Lastly, not filling the prescription could have placed my patient in grave danger. The medication was prescribed to prevent a potentially life-threatening situation from taking place. Had I not been able to find a pharmacist to fill the prescription, I would have had to refer my patient to a local hospital for emergency care. Simply filling the prescription would have ensured my patient’s heath and prevented the need for a burdensome and costly trip to the emergency room.

I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter, and please keep me informed as to the outcome of this complaint.

Sincerely,

Nurse Practitioner
Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest
1109 Main St, Ste 500
Boise, ID 83702"​

Walgreens Doesn't Confirm Nor Deny Corrective Action in Prescription Refusal Incident | citydesk



>>>>

 

[Gadawg73]

I don't see as where it was life threatening.

Get used to health care professionals opting out of lots of things government demands they do, as a course of conscience.

"My conscience does not allow me to revive an 88 year old man that has trouble breathing"
Professional?
"My conscience tells me to advise customers to drink lots of fluids with their medication"
Professional?
A very bad UNPROFESSIONAL precedent.

 

[Immanuel]

The irony of this is the anti abortion people seem so much more destructive than the people who are ok with abortions.

How so?

By the way, I am pro-life.

Immie

 

[Gadawg73]

once more reading into the articule something that isnt there
WHERE DOES IT SAY SHE WAS RELEASED FROM PLANNED PERANTHOOD ..AFTER GETTING A ABORTION


This is what the articule actually says

QUOTE
The prescription was for a Planned Parenthood patient for Methergine, a medicine used to prevent or control bleeding of the uterus following childbirth or an abortion.

“Methergine is not an abortifacient and it serves multiple purposes in postpartum care,” the practitioner wrote in her complaint. “I believe the pharmacist wrongly applied the conscience protections.

UNQUOTE

She MAY have had a abortion OR a birth or niether
either way its NOT the pharmacist business to judge .

Where does it say that, if the pharmacist actually did what is alleged, that the meds was denied because of an abortion? The article actually points out that the person who prescribed that wrote the prescription refused to tell the pharmacist why it was prescribed.

It is none of the pharmacists' business.
I would tell them to fuck themselves.

 

[Gadawg73]

I have a feeling this complaint will go exactly nowhere.

Well it is known that it went to the Idaho Board of Pharmacy...

"November 17, 2010

Ms. Jan Atkins
Senior Compliance Officer
Idaho Board of Pharmacy
PO Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0067

Dear Ms. Atkins,

On November 6, 2010 I contacted the Walgreens pharmacy located at 932 Caldwell Blvd., Nampa, Idaho in order to call-in a prescription for Methergine. I am a nurse practitioner at Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest’s Boise heath care center, and the prescription was for one of my patients. As you may know, Methergine is commonly used to prevent bleeding from the uterus following childbirth or an abortion, as treatment for an enlarged uterus, miscarriage management, to help deliver the placenta after childbirth, and as a migraine treatment.

I spoke with the female pharmacist on duty at approximately 2pm (unfortunately I did not get her name). The pharmacist asked for our center phone number and the name of our health center. I provided that information. The pharmacist then asked if the patient had undergone an elective abortion. In keeping with the standards of conduct outlined in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), I refused to breach my patient’s confidentiality by answering her question. The pharmacist then stated that if the patient had an abortion, she would not fill the prescription. I again referenced HIPPA, and I informed her that Methergine is not an abortifacient and it serves multiple purposes in post-partum care. I asked that she refer me to another pharmacist to fill the prescription, and she hung up.

I believe a complaint is in order for three reasons. First, the pharmacist asked that I breach my patient’s confidentiality. Patient privacy is not only a requirement of the law, but it is also the bedrock of patient-provider trust. Lack of trust and privacy can only negatively impact health outcomes and standards of care. Nor is it necessary for a pharmacist to know for what purpose a drug is being prescribed. As a trained practitioner and a licensed nurse, I am fully capable of determining treatment regimens that are appropriate to the medical condition at-hand and ensuring that those regimens do not negatively interact with concurrent prescriptions. The pharmacist’s request was therefore both unlawful and unnecessary.

Secondly, I believe the pharmacist wrongly applied the conscious protections outlined in Idaho Code § 18-611 in refusing to dispense Methergine. Section § 18-611 of Idaho code does allow medical professions to refuse to provide health care services that conflict with their “religious, moral or ethical principles.” However, “health care services” is defined in section § 18-611(f) as “an abortion, dispensation of an abortifacient drug, human embryonic stem cell research, treatment regimens utilizing human embryonic stem cells, human embryo cloning or end of life treatment and care.” Methergine does not fall within that definition. Thus, it would seem the pharmacist had no grounds on which to refuse to dispense the medication.

Lastly, not filling the prescription could have placed my patient in grave danger. The medication was prescribed to prevent a potentially life-threatening situation from taking place. Had I not been able to find a pharmacist to fill the prescription, I would have had to refer my patient to a local hospital for emergency care. Simply filling the prescription would have ensured my patient’s heath and prevented the need for a burdensome and costly trip to the emergency room.

I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter, and please keep me informed as to the outcome of this complaint.

Sincerely,

Nurse Practitioner
Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest
1109 Main St, Ste 500
Boise, ID 83702"​

Walgreens Doesn't Confirm Nor Deny Corrective Action in Prescription Refusal Incident | citydesk



>>>>

They don't care about THE LAW.
God tells them what to do.

 

[DiveCon]

I have a feeling this complaint will go exactly nowhere.

Well it is known that it went to the Idaho Board of Pharmacy...

"November 17, 2010

Ms. Jan Atkins
Senior Compliance Officer
Idaho Board of Pharmacy
PO Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0067

Dear Ms. Atkins,

On November 6, 2010 I contacted the Walgreens pharmacy located at 932 Caldwell Blvd., Nampa, Idaho in order to call-in a prescription for Methergine. I am a nurse practitioner at Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest’s Boise heath care center, and the prescription was for one of my patients. As you may know, Methergine is commonly used to prevent bleeding from the uterus following childbirth or an abortion, as treatment for an enlarged uterus, miscarriage management, to help deliver the placenta after childbirth, and as a migraine treatment.

I spoke with the female pharmacist on duty at approximately 2pm (unfortunately I did not get her name). The pharmacist asked for our center phone number and the name of our health center. I provided that information. The pharmacist then asked if the patient had undergone an elective abortion. In keeping with the standards of conduct outlined in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), I refused to breach my patient’s confidentiality by answering her question. The pharmacist then stated that if the patient had an abortion, she would not fill the prescription. I again referenced HIPPA, and I informed her that Methergine is not an abortifacient and it serves multiple purposes in post-partum care. I asked that she refer me to another pharmacist to fill the prescription, and she hung up.

I believe a complaint is in order for three reasons. First, the pharmacist asked that I breach my patient’s confidentiality. Patient privacy is not only a requirement of the law, but it is also the bedrock of patient-provider trust. Lack of trust and privacy can only negatively impact health outcomes and standards of care. Nor is it necessary for a pharmacist to know for what purpose a drug is being prescribed. As a trained practitioner and a licensed nurse, I am fully capable of determining treatment regimens that are appropriate to the medical condition at-hand and ensuring that those regimens do not negatively interact with concurrent prescriptions. The pharmacist’s request was therefore both unlawful and unnecessary.

Secondly, I believe the pharmacist wrongly applied the conscious protections outlined in Idaho Code § 18-611 in refusing to dispense Methergine. Section § 18-611 of Idaho code does allow medical professions to refuse to provide health care services that conflict with their “religious, moral or ethical principles.” However, “health care services” is defined in section § 18-611(f) as “an abortion, dispensation of an abortifacient drug, human embryonic stem cell research, treatment regimens utilizing human embryonic stem cells, human embryo cloning or end of life treatment and care.” Methergine does not fall within that definition. Thus, it would seem the pharmacist had no grounds on which to refuse to dispense the medication.

Lastly, not filling the prescription could have placed my patient in grave danger. The medication was prescribed to prevent a potentially life-threatening situation from taking place. Had I not been able to find a pharmacist to fill the prescription, I would have had to refer my patient to a local hospital for emergency care. Simply filling the prescription would have ensured my patient’s heath and prevented the need for a burdensome and costly trip to the emergency room.

I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter, and please keep me informed as to the outcome of this complaint.

Sincerely,

Nurse Practitioner
Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest
1109 Main St, Ste 500
Boise, ID 83702"​

Walgreens Doesn't Confirm Nor Deny Corrective Action in Prescription Refusal Incident | citydesk



>>>>

They don't care about THE LAW.
God tells them what to do.

put away the broad brush

 

[WorldWatcher]

They don't care about THE LAW.
God tells them what to do.

Not a big supporter of public accommodation laws in general, but I can separate what I think the law should be and what the law is as part of a discussion.


The Idaho Conscience Law provides for not having, under routine medical care, to provide abortions - or in the case of a pharmacist, drugs that cause abortions. Methergine is not used to chemically induce and abortion, it is used to control uterine bleeding. If the woman had an abortion, then the medicine would not cause another one. If the woman had given birth, then the medicine would not have caused another delivery. If the woman had another problem, not related to pregnancy, which caused the bleeding it would be used to cause an abortion.

From my reading of the Conscience Law, it does not provide an exemption to the Pharmacist for refusing medication.



>>>>

 

[AllieBaba]

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

 

[Quantum Windbag]

once more reading into the articule something that isnt there
WHERE DOES IT SAY SHE WAS RELEASED FROM PLANNED PERANTHOOD ..AFTER GETTING A ABORTION


This is what the articule actually says

QUOTE
The prescription was for a Planned Parenthood patient for Methergine, a medicine used to prevent or control bleeding of the uterus following childbirth or an abortion.

“Methergine is not an abortifacient and it serves multiple purposes in postpartum care,” the practitioner wrote in her complaint. “I believe the pharmacist wrongly applied the conscience protections.

UNQUOTE

She MAY have had a abortion OR a birth or niether
either way its NOT the pharmacist business to judge .

Where does it say that, if the pharmacist actually did what is alleged, that the meds was denied because of an abortion? The article actually points out that the person who prescribed that wrote the prescription refused to tell the pharmacist why it was prescribed.

It is none of the pharmacists' business.
I would tell them to fuck themselves.

It is wonderful how you know what happened there with only one side of the story. I didn't point out that the pharmacist asked to excuse that happened, I pointed out what Planned Parenthood said to emphasize that this entire discussion is based on a lie.