Kerry and Santorum Propose Compromise on Religion and Pharmacies
John Kerry and Rick Santorum, not a pair we'd expect to be working together, may have reached a fair compromise over the issue of pharmacists refusing to dispense certain medications based upon religious objections. The following letter appeared in today's New York Times:
April 12, 2005
Religion in the Pharmacy
To the Editor:
"Moralists at the Pharmacy" (editorial, April 3) addressed "scattered reports" of pharmacists refusing to dispense certain medications that conflict with their personal moral or religious beliefs and women seeking to have these prescriptions filled. We believe that there is a solution that accommodates the needs of both parties.
Recently, we introduced the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, which clarifies current law to say a person's religious beliefs should be recognized and accommodated in the workplace as long as this does not adversely affect the employer's business or customers.
The bill is supported by a diverse coalition of more than 45 religious and civil rights groups as well as a bipartisan group of senators and representatives.
If the bill becomes law, a pharmacist who does not wish to dispense certain medications would not have to do so long as another pharmacist is on duty and would dispense the medications.
The Workplace Religious Freedom Act provides a sensible solution to the potential conflict between an employee's religious conviction and the needs of pharmacy customers.
(Senator) Rick Santorum
(Senator) John Kerry Washington, April 7, 2005
The writers are, respectively, Republican of Pennsylvania and Democrat of Massachusetts.
It is unfortunate that pharmacists would refuse to dispense medications and that Congress would need to intervene, but under the present circumstances this may be a fair compromise. The key line is the requirement that " pharmacist is on duty and would dispense the medications." This provides more protection than we currently have that a patient can receive a prescribe prescription without having to go elsewhere. As long as there is a pharmacist on duty who will dispense the prescribed medication, I can see no harm in an individual pharmacist refusing to dispense a prescribed medication. This would also place a legal obligation on the pharmacist to dispense the medication should there not be someone else available to fill the prescription instead.
One fear I've had is the possibility that if nothing is done the religious right might use boycotts, or possibly violence as has occurred with physicians who perform abortions and family planning clinics, to encourage more pharmacists to express objections to dispensing such medications, if out of fear if not true conviction. An act such as this would clearly place the law on the side of ensuring that all pharmacies dispense medications such as oral contraceptives as prescribed.
April 12, 2005
Religion in the Pharmacy
To the Editor:
"Moralists at the Pharmacy" (editorial, April 3) addressed "scattered reports" of pharmacists refusing to dispense certain medications that conflict with their personal moral or religious beliefs and women seeking to have these prescriptions filled. We believe that there is a solution that accommodates the needs of both parties.
Recently, we introduced the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, which clarifies current law to say a person's religious beliefs should be recognized and accommodated in the workplace as long as this does not adversely affect the employer's business or customers.
The bill is supported by a diverse coalition of more than 45 religious and civil rights groups as well as a bipartisan group of senators and representatives.
If the bill becomes law, a pharmacist who does not wish to dispense certain medications would not have to do so long as another pharmacist is on duty and would dispense the medications.
The Workplace Religious Freedom Act provides a sensible solution to the potential conflict between an employee's religious conviction and the needs of pharmacy customers.
(Senator) Rick Santorum
(Senator) John Kerry Washington, April 7, 2005
The writers are, respectively, Republican of Pennsylvania and Democrat of Massachusetts.
It is unfortunate that pharmacists would refuse to dispense medications and that Congress would need to intervene, but under the present circumstances this may be a fair compromise. The key line is the requirement that " pharmacist is on duty and would dispense the medications." This provides more protection than we currently have that a patient can receive a prescribe prescription without having to go elsewhere. As long as there is a pharmacist on duty who will dispense the prescribed medication, I can see no harm in an individual pharmacist refusing to dispense a prescribed medication. This would also place a legal obligation on the pharmacist to dispense the medication should there not be someone else available to fill the prescription instead.
One fear I've had is the possibility that if nothing is done the religious right might use boycotts, or possibly violence as has occurred with physicians who perform abortions and family planning clinics, to encourage more pharmacists to express objections to dispensing such medications, if out of fear if not true conviction. An act such as this would clearly place the law on the side of ensuring that all pharmacies dispense medications such as oral contraceptives as prescribed.
posted by Ron Chusid at 9:39 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home