- Joined
- Jan 11, 2006
- Messages
- 292
- Reaction score
- 0
Article regarding pharms refusing to fill
- Thread starter Glowwyrm
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Messages
- 1,615
- Reaction score
- 3
What? Pharmacists aren't drones? GOOD!
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12
- Reaction score
- 0
A pharmacist should always have the right to refuse to do anything based on scientific research and their own opinion. If a pharmacist thinks that it's in the patient's best interest to not fill or that by filling a rx the patient could be harmed then they should not fill it. Obviously that is going to leave room for opinion. For example my opinion is that Aricept 20mg/day should not be used because it hasn't been well studied, but that doesn't mean that some pharmacist somewhere won't fill it because he/she has seen good results filling an rx from a doctor for that dose even though it's above maximum recommended dose by the manufacturer.
The point of the originial article - which was published in the ASHP journal in Feb was four-fold:
1. Know your own belief on the subject first (be sure you include generalities as well as specifics since the future is hard to predict).
2. Know your state's laws. These change quickly - so keep up!
3. Know your employer's expectations & express them BEFORE you accept the job. This might include dispensing a certain medication, counseling a particular patient & or group of pts, or even working on a particular day. The employer can set any rules they want, if they fall within the state's guidelines. If you choose to ignore or go against those rules, you set yourself up for dismissal.
4. If you don't like what your state laws allow - become a voice for change. Join your local, state & national organizations to become a voice the within your state's legislature.
I've found all these things workable over many, many controversial topics within the profession. I don't have much respect, actually, for those who choose to take a stand on a topic like this to the point of case law - since an unfortunate patient gets pulled along with the alleged offending pharmacist. There are other ways to make your beliefs known & workable within the framework of being an employee.
Given that - however, I will say...there was one case many years ago in which a female pharmacist sued her employer for not having contraceptives a covered prescription item. She sued because ED drugs were covered on the plan (under the guise they were for a medical condition secondary to a chronic illness). She won! Case law now states that for insurers - if they covere ED drugs, they must also cover contraceptives - the reverse is not always true, however. I believe if it were taken to court again...it might be held the insurers would have to cover both - this case did not test the reverse.
1. Know your own belief on the subject first (be sure you include generalities as well as specifics since the future is hard to predict).
2. Know your state's laws. These change quickly - so keep up!
3. Know your employer's expectations & express them BEFORE you accept the job. This might include dispensing a certain medication, counseling a particular patient & or group of pts, or even working on a particular day. The employer can set any rules they want, if they fall within the state's guidelines. If you choose to ignore or go against those rules, you set yourself up for dismissal.
4. If you don't like what your state laws allow - become a voice for change. Join your local, state & national organizations to become a voice the within your state's legislature.
I've found all these things workable over many, many controversial topics within the profession. I don't have much respect, actually, for those who choose to take a stand on a topic like this to the point of case law - since an unfortunate patient gets pulled along with the alleged offending pharmacist. There are other ways to make your beliefs known & workable within the framework of being an employee.
Given that - however, I will say...there was one case many years ago in which a female pharmacist sued her employer for not having contraceptives a covered prescription item. She sued because ED drugs were covered on the plan (under the guise they were for a medical condition secondary to a chronic illness). She won! Case law now states that for insurers - if they covere ED drugs, they must also cover contraceptives - the reverse is not always true, however. I believe if it were taken to court again...it might be held the insurers would have to cover both - this case did not test the reverse.
