Jesuit and Christian University and Colleges

[PharmD321]

Some pharmacists DO prescribe and if you read my post, it had nothing to do with religious convictions. It is EVERY healthcare provider's responsibility to do what they feel is best for the patient and if the patient's healthcare goals are different from that of a healthcare provider, he/she should find someone who is more in sync with their goals. It really is that simple. This applies to healthcare in general, not just to birth control.

And, as much as everyone wants to deny this, it doesn't necessarily make you a better healthcare provider by ignoring your moral convictions and becoming detached "for the sake of the patient." This mentality doesn't always benefit the patient or society as a whole. A lot of the problems in this country (and around the world) have stemmed from the belief that we can maintain our own religious freedoms as long as such freedoms are exercised in the privacy of our own homes. Anybody ever been to China?? You have to close your curtains to pray. It is a slippery slope we're dealing with in regards to this issue and I'm suspiscious of anything that so freely gives away a right so many people around the world die for everyday.

Can you please give more proof to back up your idea that pharmacist do prescribe drugs?

When I took classes to prepare the PTCE, I don't remember the pharmacist ever prescribing anything, I remember that the doctor prescribes the drug and if the pharmacist finds out that the patient is allergic to a drug, then the pharmacist calls the doctor and tells him the other drug alternatives. Then the doctor tells him which alternatives are the best for the patient. Am I correct on this?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Jdario86]

The fact is that what one person believes to be best for their patient may be different than what another person believes to be best for the patient (religion aside). This is why patients have the right and duty to find a practitioner that best suits them and their healthcare related goals. During my interview in Minnesota, the dean of the college of pharmacy explained that prescription medications must be looked at as inherently dangerous, and this is why they are prescribed. My anatomy & physiology professor would NOT take birth control pills due to her research involving these drugs. She is an atheist and practiced natural family planning to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. Some people follow the philosophy that medications and anything considered "unnatural" should be used sparingly and I happen to be one of those people. Cost-benefit analysis must be used even if you take religion out of the equation. Every healthcare provider has a right and duty to do what they think is best regarding the health and well being of the patient. If the patient's healthcare goals are not in sync with one particular healthcare provider, they have every right to find someone who better fits their needs.

This reasoning does not justify denying a patient medication because they are homosexual.

Most of the research on birth control shows no hazardous side effects. Only small isolated research studies showed bad effects with B.C. A pharmacist refusing to dispense it because they saw only 1 research study that makes it bad, is poor judgement and not scientifically logical. I would only deny a patient birth control if she has had a bad history with it or if she's allergic to it. This is a highly unlikely case.

Ultimately, the best form of treatment should be a compromise between the healthcare provider and the patient. If you deny dispensing a drug to a patient because you think it's potentially unsafe, I wouldn't send them to another pharmacy. Instead, I would suggest alternative therapies that they can bring back to their prescriber for approval.

Can you please give more proof to back up your idea that pharmacist do prescribe drugs?

When I took classes to prepare the PTCE, I don't remember the pharmacist ever prescribing anything, I remember that the doctor prescribes the drug and if the pharmacist finds out that the patient is allergic to a drug, then the pharmacist calls the doctor and tells him the other drug alternatives. Then the doctor tells him which alternatives are the best for the patient. Am I correct on this?

Yes, you are correct.

 

[Jdario86]

Some pharmacists DO prescribe and if you read my post, it had nothing to do with religious convictions. It is EVERY healthcare provider's responsibility to do what they feel is best for the patient and if the patient's healthcare goals are different from that of a healthcare provider, he/she should find someone who is more in sync with their goals. It really is that simple. This applies to healthcare in general, not just to birth control.

And, as much as everyone wants to deny this, it doesn't necessarily make you a better healthcare provider by ignoring your moral convictions and becoming detached "for the sake of the patient." This mentality doesn't always benefit the patient or society as a whole. A lot of the problems in this country (and around the world) have stemmed from the belief that we can maintain our own religious freedoms as long as such freedoms are exercised in the privacy of our own homes. Anybody ever been to China?? You have to close your curtains to pray. It is a slippery slope we're dealing with in regards to this issue and I'm suspiscious of anything that so freely gives away a right so many people around the world die for everyday.

I think everyone has the right to believe what they want. Exercising those religious rights is an entirely different story. Personally, I think exercising religious rights is a privilege and people abuse this privilege. That's why standard measures are taken to regulate people exercising religious rights to prevent them from doing things like murder or discrimination.

I don't think religion is bad- it's people that make religion bad. Since there are some bad people who are willing to do things like murder on behalf of their religion, exercising religious rights should be carefully regulated.

 

[evilolive]

Can you please give more proof to back up your idea that pharmacist do prescribe drugs?

When I took classes to prepare the PTCE, I don't remember the pharmacist ever prescribing anything, I remember that the doctor prescribes the drug and if the pharmacist finds out that the patient is allergic to a drug, then the pharmacist calls the doctor and tells him the other drug alternatives. Then the doctor tells him which alternatives are the best for the patient. Am I correct on this?

Pharmacists can prescribe under physician practice agreements and supervision. This can be done in autonomous ambulatory/diabetes/anticoagulant clinics.

 

[YellowLemons143]

Hope this topic doesn't offend anyone...

So, even after I have already submitted my Pharmcas Application I am still wondering whether or not I should have applied to schools such as Palm Beach Atlantic and/or Creighton University. They were originally at the top of my list, Creighton more so because it is known for its clinical curriculum. However, when I realized PBA was a nondenominational christian school and Creighton was Jesuit I began to panic and ultimately decided not to apply there. Why? To be honest I am a baptist and quite spiratual, but this of course is not the problem...

I remembered a couple years back I ran into an article that baffled me. A male student was ejected from a university in the states after his Myspace profile read that he was gay. Being a gay male, this actually scares me. The worse part about it is that the state had an antidiscrimination policy but the school had an anti-gay policy as well. I really don't want to apply to a school that isn't accepting of my orientation, especially when it has nothing to do with my ability to perform as a student or professional. Half the time people don't even know until I exchange with them the information. 99% of the time I get a "Wow, didn't see that one coming. I don't care". Either way it's very discomforting to know that even if I get into one of the colleges above that I could be expelled just because of who I like. If the school doesn't want me, then so be it, I don't want to go there anyway. However, I was wondering if anyone knew any information about the christian and Jesuit pharmacy schools and their policies on homosexual men and women.

My ex has told me that it shouldn't matter, and that it should be treated as "Don't ask don't tell," but I really do not want to attend a school that wouldnt want "my kind" there in the first place. I would just like to know if it's even worth the money because I do not want to end up like that pharmacy student. Thanks guys for taking the time out to read this post, any and all information is accepted.

I know that Lipscomb University.. Which is a private Christian university in Nashville has policies where you can be kicked out if you... are gay or drink (no matter what your age is). Also, they can only higher Church of Christ professors. I currently go to the undergraduate school and have seen many expelled for these reasons. They can do whatever they want because it is a private school. They are able to by-pass the equal opportunity laws because they are a private school.

 

[ajh88]

This reasoning does not justify denying a patient medication because they are homosexual.

Is this something that has actually happened or just something that has theoretically happened or could possibly happen? I searched around a little bit, but didn't find any examples.

I honestly had no clue of the sexual persuasion of our customers when I was in a retail pharmacy and it wasn't a question I would have asked - not my business for sure.

I wonder if some pharmacists feel OK declining to fill B.C. or Viagra prescriptions because they are medicines that don't necessarily (always) treat a disease state or medical condition, KWIM? I may not be articulating that exactly as I'm thinking it, but hopefully it comes across clearly.

Personally, if I were a pharmacist in a community setting, I wouldn't feel it appropriate to deny filling an Rx for a patient based on my own set of beliefs.

 

[drugdoc]

Pharmacists can prescribe under physician practice agreements and supervision. This can be done in autonomous ambulatory/diabetes/anticoagulant clinics.

True, from what I was taught, also. If I remember it also varies by state??

 

[Pharmdapp87]

I know that Lipscomb University.. Which is a private Christian university in Nashville has policies where you can be kicked out if you... are gay or drink (no matter what your age is). Also, they can only higher Church of Christ professors. I currently go to the undergraduate school and have seen many expelled for these reasons. They can do whatever they want because it is a private school. They are able to by-pass the equal opportunity laws because they are a private school.

Hmm... well, good thing I didn't listen to my friends about applying there. Kinda rattles me at first because I sincerely don't think it's fair. Yes yes, I know this world isn't a fair place and will probably never be but it doesn't make it right. I wonder, what are their policies on finding out about premarital sex, smoking and the other 10 commandments? Either way, I'm sure they believe that next to killing, Homosexuality is the next worst sin. Its people like that that caused me to believe that my very existence on this planet was futile so many years ago; so many nights a blunder. Don't want to ever experience that AGAIN.... I wonder what the deal is with PBA then. I'm gonna add Creighton to my list, this being the main reason why:http://press.creighton.edu/022307/extended1.html

 

[Carboxide]

Some pharmacists DO prescribe and if you read my post, it had nothing to do with religious convictions. It is EVERY healthcare provider's responsibility to do what they feel is best for the patient and if the patient's healthcare goals are different from that of a healthcare provider, he/she should find someone who is more in sync with their goals. It really is that simple. This applies to healthcare in general, not just to birth control.

Yes and no. Obviously if you note that it will interfere with a current medication or you have a good reason for believing it will be harmful to them besides the known and discussed side effects and risks, then you are well within your rights to call the doctor and discuss the medication. However, if their 'goals' are to keep from getting pregnant, then no - you are NOT within your right to refuse the birth control. Your religion is not a good reason to deny anyone any medication. Besides which...if your refusal to dispense really IS about a medical reason, then why are you posting this in a religious thread?

And, as much as everyone wants to deny this, it doesn't necessarily make you a better healthcare provider by ignoring your moral convictions and becoming detached "for the sake of the patient." This mentality doesn't always benefit the patient or society as a whole. A lot of the problems in this country (and around the world) have stemmed from the belief that we can maintain our own religious freedoms as long as such freedoms are exercised in the privacy of our own homes. Anybody ever been to China?? You have to close your curtains to pray. It is a slippery slope we're dealing with in regards to this issue and I'm suspiscious of anything that so freely gives away a right so many people around the world die for everyday.

Untrue. No one cares if you practice your religion as long as it does not affect MY right to NOT practice religion. To remake a famous statement...your right to be religiously free stops at my right to be not religious, or practice my religion differently. You can wear a headscarf to work if you're a Muslim or woman. You can wear a cross necklace to work. You can pray on your break. You can wear skirts if your religion doesn't allow you to wear pants as a woman. But you CANNOT make other people follow YOUR beliefs.

 

[ajh88]

I'm gonna add Creighton to my list, this being the main reason why:http://press.creighton.edu/022307/extended1.html

Yay Creighton! I'm glad you found that article - it just makes me even a little bit prouder to be associated with them.

 

[ThatPerson]

Hmm... well, good thing I didn't listen to my friends about applying there. Kinda rattles me at first because I sincerely don't think it's fair. Yes yes, I know this world isn't a fair place and will probably never be but it doesn't make it right. I wonder, what are their policies on finding out about premarital sex, smoking and the other 10 commandments? Either way, I'm sure they believe that next to killing, Homosexuality is the next worst sin. Its people like that that caused me to believe that my very existence on this planet was futile so many years ago; so many nights a blunder. Don't want to ever experience that AGAIN.... I wonder what the deal is with PBA then. I'm gonna add Creighton to my list, this being the main reason why:http://press.creighton.edu/022307/extended1.html

There was 80 Creighton students, administrators, high school students and Omaha residents. So there could have only been 1 Creighton student for them to say that. Creighton University was not even involved in the protest. I go to a school of about 30k undergraduates. If one of them is part of a protest group, it does not imply my university supports that stance.

“The Laramie Project” was a play presented by Creighton students that "simply addresses the negative repercussions of hate". The church group that protested this goes around everywhere protesting things. So they are not Omaha natives to start with.

 

[fenixtnlfan]

So I decided to do a little research on a pharmacist's right to refuse to see what the actual rules on this are.
"Typically, individual state pharmacy practice acts, found in pharmacy regulations, allow pharmacists to refuse to fill a prescription if in their professional judgment it would be harmful to the recipient or if the validity of the prescription is in question. However, five states have a conscience clause that allows pharmacists to refuse to fill or refill certain prescriptions which they find morally objectionable: Arkansas (contraceptives only), California, Georgia, Mississippi, and South Dakota (abortifacients and assisted suicide only). In contrast, four states; Illinois, Massachusetts, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, have an emergency rule or regulation that states or implies that all legal and binding prescriptions must be dispensed or transferred."
Link where I got this excerpt

APhA's official stance is that pharmacists can refuse to dispense if they morally object, but they should offer an alternative. There are also company policies about whether a pharmacists can refuse.

A final interesting story is that Bush is trying to put through some last minute regulations that would not allow employers to discriminate against health care providers who refuse to provide a service based on moral objections, but only if they are receiving federal money. New York Times

 

[Jdario86]

I know that Lipscomb University.. Which is a private Christian university in Nashville has policies where you can be kicked out if you... are gay or drink (no matter what your age is). Also, they can only higher Church of Christ professors. I currently go to the undergraduate school and have seen many expelled for these reasons. They can do whatever they want because it is a private school. They are able to by-pass the equal opportunity laws because they are a private school.

I'm not really sure how this backward thinking is suppose to help advance clinical practice. This is not something I would brag about. That's really disconcerting and perpetuates a negative impression around the world. This is a good example of how someone can abuse this privilege and ruin it for everyone else.

So I decided to do a little research on a pharmacist's right to refuse to see what the actual rules on this are.
"Typically, individual state pharmacy practice acts, found in pharmacy regulations, allow pharmacists to refuse to fill a prescription if in their professional judgment it would be harmful to the recipient or if the validity of the prescription is in question. However, five states have a conscience clause that allows pharmacists to refuse to fill or refill certain prescriptions which they find morally objectionable: Arkansas (contraceptives only), California, Georgia, Mississippi, and South Dakota (abortifacients and assisted suicide only). In contrast, four states; Illinois, Massachusetts, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, have an emergency rule or regulation that states or implies that all legal and binding prescriptions must be dispensed or transferred."
Link where I got this excerpt

APhA's official stance is that pharmacists can refuse to dispense if they morally object, but they should offer an alternative. There are also company policies about whether a pharmacists can refuse.

A final interesting story is that Bush is trying to put through some last minute regulations that would not allow employers to discriminate against health care providers who refuse to provide a service based on moral objections, but only if they are receiving federal money. New York Times

I think with Bush's current popularity rating at it's all time low, such regulations will never be approved by congress.

It's really sad how our society has progressed so much but there are still some ignorant people out there. I really do think people just use religion as their basis to discriminate against people they don't understand. I think this is unfair for people who use religion to do good things. I think if someone wants to discriminate against someone who's different, I think they should at least have the audacity to say it's because of ignorance and not religion.

 

[Pharmdapp87]

There was 80 Creighton students, administrators, high school students and Omaha residents. So there could have only been 1 Creighton student for them to say that. Creighton University was not even involved in the protest. I go to a school of about 30k undergraduates. If one of them is part of a protest group, it does not imply my university supports that stance.

“The Laramie Project” was a play presented by Creighton students that "simply addresses the negative repercussions of hate". The church group that protested this goes around everywhere protesting things. So they are not Omaha natives to start with.

Well, I'm glad they presented the Laramie Project. It shows that the student body and administrative faculty is concerned about discrimination and its inevitable consequences. It makes people like me feel more welcomed because they could have easily put on a play condemning Matthew Shepard, or the administrators could have had the play shut down. It's no surprise that church members protested it, especially one who does it continuously. Bottom Line: I feel less discriminated against if I went to a more tolerable school like Creighton, than if I tried to hide my homosexuality (which isn't really hiding, more like not confiding in anyone I become friends with anyone about the subject) at Lipscomb.

 

[PrePharmD]

I'm not really sure how this backward thinking is suppose to help advance clinical practice. This is not something I would brag about. That's really disconcerting and perpetuates a negative impression around the world. This is a good example of how someone can abuse this privilege and ruin it for everyone else.



I think with Bush's current popularity rating at it's all time low, such regulations will never be approved by congress.

It's really sad how our society has progressed so much but there are still some ignorant people out there. I really do think people just use religion as their basis to discriminate against people they don't understand. I think this is unfair for people who use religion to do good things. I think if someone wants to discriminate against someone who's different, I think they should at least have the audacity to say it's because of ignorance and not religion.

I'm not sure where that homosexual comment a few posts back came in?? Maybe you could clarify. I honestly don't think it helps your case to call the other side of a debate "ignorant" because they don't agree with you. This is how wars are started. There are SO MANY things in this world that I don't agree with, but to assume the other side is ignorant and you are the enlightened party isn't necessarily the best solution. Think about September 11th for a minute. Do you think those people would give their life if they didn't feel they were right? To them, we were also ignorant and they were the enlightened party who knew better. Where human beings are concerned, there isn't always a right and a wrong answer to everything. If there was, controversial topics wouldn't exist. Maybe I see this a little more clearly as the product of two very different cultures. My dad is Vietnamese and my mother grew up in a small town in the U.S. There have been many cultural differences and disagreements, but in a diverse population, you cannot assume that you are right no matter how right you think you are- you are right from your own point of view and culture you were raised in which isn't "right" at all when you consider how many other opinions are out there. What this world needs is a little more empathy and respect. It isn't the end of the world if a pharmacist exercises their religious freedoms to not participate in something they feel is wrong. This doesn't mean they are judging anyone or infringing on anyone else's rights-almost all pharmacists out there would fill this prescription. They personally just don't want to be a part of it and for not just a business but a whole industry to discriminate against a certain religion I feel is wrong. To make a big deal out of such a rare occurrence is really just more of a political argument. We could go on and on and on on this and many other controversial topics but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Thanks for you insight on the other side of the argument though!

 

[PrePharmD]

Well, I'm glad they presented the Laramie Project. It shows that the student body and administrative faculty is concerned about discrimination and its inevitable consequences. It makes people like me feel more welcomed because they could have easily put on a play condemning Matthew Shepard, or the administrators could have had the play shut down. It's no surprise that church members protested it, especially one who does it continuously. Bottom Line: I feel less discriminated against if I went to a more tolerable school like Creighton, than if I tried to hide my homosexuality (which isn't really hiding, more like not confiding in anyone I become friends with anyone about the subject) at Lipscomb.

That particular group of baptist people may put a sour taste in your mouth but trust me, not all religious people are judgemental like that (I'm not Baptist by the way). Those signs were horrendous. Sounds like that particular group sort of had a reputation for doing things like that anyway. Truly religious people know better than to condemn someone here on this earth as if to assume that he or she had that authority. It is just arrogance- there are a lot of people like that.

 

[Pharmdapp87]

That particular group of baptist people may put a sour taste in your mouth but trust me, not all religious people are judgemental like that (I'm not Baptist by the way). Those signs were horrendous. Sounds like that particular group sort of had a reputation for doing things like that anyway. Truly religious people know better than to condemn someone here on this earth as if to assume that he or she had that authority. It is just arrogance- there are a lot of people like that.

Yeah, I'm fully aware of the various people that make up a church. Iw as raised as a southern baptist but I've met some people who are not like that. My dad, a preacher, was at one point one of those people, but i guess after knowing his only son is gay and going through things together I think he became less hateful. He still doesnt approve but at least i know my own father doesn't hate me. I have a few baptist friends who could care less about my orientation, but this is the younger generation of course. But I agree, it is a lot of arrogance and unfortunately it's being taught to today's youth.

 

[Jdario86]

I'm not sure where that homosexual comment a few posts back came in?? Maybe you could clarify. I honestly don't think it helps your case to call the other side of a debate "ignorant" because they don't agree with you. This is how wars are started. There are SO MANY things in this world that I don't agree with, but to assume the other side is ignorant and you are the enlightened party isn't necessarily the best solution. Think about September 11th for a minute. Do you think those people would give their life if they didn't feel they were right? To them, we were also ignorant and they were the enlightened party who knew better. Where human beings are concerned, there isn't always a right and a wrong answer to everything. If there was, controversial topics wouldn't exist. Maybe I see this a little more clearly as the product of two very different cultures. My dad is Vietnamese and my mother grew up in a small town in the U.S. There have been many cultural differences and disagreements, but in a diverse population, you cannot assume that you are right no matter how right you think you are- you are right from your own point of view and culture you were raised in which isn't "right" at all when you consider how many other opinions are out there. What this world needs is a little more empathy and respect. It isn't the end of the world if a pharmacist exercises their religious freedoms to not participate in something they feel is wrong. This doesn't mean they are judging anyone or infringing on anyone else's rights-almost all pharmacists out there would fill this prescription. They personally just don't want to be a part of it and for not just a business but a whole industry to discriminate against a certain religion I feel is wrong. To make a big deal out of such a rare occurrence is really just more of a political argument. We could go on and on and on on this and many other controversial topics but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Thanks for you insight on the other side of the argument though!

To clarify where I stand on these issues, I came from a pretty cultured upbringing and background. I went to both private and public schools within the new york city area. I went to schools with people of different classes and where people learned about other people's cultures, religions, and differences. I come from an asian family and grew up practicing catholicism. As for my parents, one was republican and the other was democrat, so I have a solid understanding on both sides of the political spectrum. I am also homosexual. I've experienced the horrors of being discriminated against for being the way I am and stood up for myself. Therefore, I think it's safe to say that my arguments are based on informative and valid experiential reasoning. I can go on & on about the challenges I've overcome and the places i've been to, but i am not here to argue with anyone about who's more cultured.

I am here to encourage people to see the serious ramifications that can result from exercising religion in a professional setting. I also agree that this a very healthy conversation and it is a type that every aspiring clinician should engage in or at least understand. I have strong opinions against cases, like the one in Lipscomb and others similar to it, because such cases usually go unheard - individuals who end up getting hurt in these situations are usually silent because they fear of further persecution. I think these cases continue to go under people's radar, until it is brought up on the media some time later or on a forum like this. For example (and I think I can speak for those who also agree) I had no idea that Lipscomb has expelled students for being homosexual until someone brought it up on SDN. I think progression within the health-field or society in general will not occur without people fostering the confidence to stand up for change. I think part of being a good pharmacist is trying to help the progression of pharmacy practice through change and forward thinking. However - I also agree - we can agree, to disagree .

As for the 9/11 issue, I was raised to believe it's okay to have morals and having different beliefs is a good thing. It's the subsequent actions that determine whether we are right or wrong. I don't condemn those people who catalyzed the 9/11 tragedy for having such radical beliefs. I do - however - condemn them for acting upon those radical beliefs and murdering innocent people.

 

[Jdario86]

For those who are curious, here's one of many examples of where doctors try to deny healthcare to homosexuals for religious reasons. Fortunately, the state of california ruling disagreed with the doctors exercising their religious rights to discriminate against homosexuals. And it's unfortunate that such an incident which started in 2001, did not gain any immediate attention from the media and wasn't resolved until 7 years later in 2008

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080819/news_1n19insem.html

 

[inquirer89]

To clarify where I stand on these issues, I came from a pretty cultured upbringing and background. I went to both private and public schools within the new york city area. I went to schools with people of different classes and where people learned about other people's cultures, religions, and differences. I come from an asian family and grew up practicing catholicism. As for my parents, one was republican and the other was democrat, so I have a solid understanding on both sides of the political spectrum. I am also homosexual. I've experienced the horrors of being discriminated against for being the way I am and stood up for myself. Therefore, I think it's safe to say that my arguments are based on informative and valid experiential reasoning. I can go on & on about the challenges I've overcome and the places i've been to, but i am not here to argue with anyone about who's more cultured.

I am here to encourage people to see the serious ramifications that can result from exercising religion in a professional setting. I also agree that this a very healthy conversation and it is a type that every aspiring clinician should engage in or at least understand. I have strong opinions against cases, like the one in Lipscomb and others similar to it, because such cases usually go unheard - individuals who end up getting hurt in these situations are usually silent because they fear of further persecution. I think these cases continue to go under people's radar, until it is brought up on the media some time later or on a forum like this. For example (and I think I can speak for those who also agree) I had no idea that Lipscomb has expelled students for being homosexual until someone brought it up on SDN. I think progression within the health-field or society in general will not occur without people fostering the confidence to stand up for change. I think part of being a good pharmacist is trying to help the progression of pharmacy practice through change and forward thinking. However - I also agree - we can agree, to disagree .

As for the 9/11 issue, I was raised to believe it's okay to have morals and having different beliefs is a good thing. It's the subsequent actions that determine whether we are right or wrong. I don't condemn those people who catalyzed the 9/11 tragedy for having such radical beliefs. I do - however - condemn them for acting upon those radical beliefs and murdering innocent people.

That's crazy. I'd sue or something.

 

[PrePharmD]

I can go on & on about the challenges I've overcome and the places i've been to, but i am not here to argue with anyone about who's more cultured.

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I don't know you so I wouldn't try argue that I am more cultured-that would just be silly. I was just saying that this has helped me to be a more empathetic person, I'm sure your background has helped you out a bit as well. The healthcare profession could use a little more of that these days. Nothing to do with this topic but my dad has had a heart condition since I was in the fourth grade. One of his doctors told him way back then to make out his will and that he would die within two months. Right after telling my dad this, he proceeds to tell him, "Don't think you're going to beat this because you won't. Your heart is too bad." Who says that? This one doctor affected my entire family for years, and to this day (I'm 26 yrs old), the tears well up when I think about it. That asian man with an accent was someone's father, someone's husband, and someone's son. I think we might forget how sick some of these people are that come in for their prescriptions and these prescriptions are a lot of people's lifelines (including my dad). I really am not trying to teach anybody anything and I hope this post isn't coming across wrong. I just really hope for the sake of people like my dad (who has been terminally ill for the last seventeen years) that we are all going into this profession for the right reasons. No matter what background we have and what beliefs we may carry, I'm sure we can all agree on that.

 

[Jdario86]

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I don't know you so I wouldn't try argue that I am more cultured-that would just be silly. I was just saying that this has helped me to be a more empathetic person, I'm sure your background has helped you out a bit as well. The healthcare profession could use a little more of that these days. Nothing to do with this topic but my dad has had a heart condition since I was in the fourth grade. One of his doctors told him way back then to make out his will and that he would die within two months. Right after telling my dad this, he proceeds to tell him, "Don't think you're going to beat this because you won't. Your heart is too bad." Who says that? This one doctor affected my entire family for years, and to this day (I'm 26 yrs old), the tears well up when I think about it. That asian man with an accent was someone's father, someone's husband, and someone's son. I think we might forget how sick some of these people are that come in for their prescriptions and these prescriptions are a lot of people's lifelines (including my dad). I really am not trying to teach anybody anything and I hope this post isn't coming across wrong. I just really hope for the sake of people like my dad (who has been terminally ill for the last seventeen years) that we are all going into this profession for the right reasons. No matter what background we have and what beliefs we may carry, I'm sure we can all agree on that.

Ok. Now imagine yourself in the shoes of a son who's also in a similar scenario. You have a dad who is also terminally ill with a bad heart condition and tries to seek help from a doctor. The doctor refuses to diagnose and treat his pending illness because your dad happens to be gay and the doctor has the religious right to deny a patient treatment. Since your dad was denied help from a doctor because he was gay, your dad has no will to write out because he doesn't even know how much time he has to live and the extent of his illness.

How would you feel as his son?

Your dad's really fortunate to have a doctor who's even willing to treat him to begin with. I can only say so much about the couple in this story:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...1n19insem.html

...or the other families and people whose stories go unheard.

...Anybody ever been to China?? You have to close your curtains to pray. It is a slippery slope we're dealing with in regards to this issue and I'm suspiscious of anything that so freely gives away a right so many people around the world die for everyday.

I went to China on an International Public Health-care Seminar for a collegiate study abroad program and I've never seen this or heard of such censorship. After spending a month there, I felt I had more freedom to do what I want in China than I did during my entire life in the U.S. Where in China have you seen this?

 

[ThatPerson]

Ok. Now imagine yourself in the shoes of a son who's also in a similar scenario. You have a dad who is also terminally ill with a bad heart condition and tries to seek help from a doctor. The doctor refuses to diagnose and treat his pending illness because your dad happens to be gay and the doctor has the religious right to deny a patient treatment. Since your dad was denied help from a doctor because he was gay, your dad has no will to write out because he doesn't even know how much time he has to live and the extent of his illness.

How would you feel as his son?

Your dad's really fortunate to have a doctor who's even willing to treat him to begin with. I can only say so much about the couple in this story:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...1n19insem.html

...or the other families and people whose stories go unheard.



I think most doctors would help someone if he/she was a homosexual with a wound of some sort. Artificial insemination cannot be compared as far as life threatening to a heart disease.

 

[PrePharmD]

Ok. Now imagine yourself in the shoes of a son who's also in a similar scenario. You have a dad who is also terminally ill with a bad heart condition and tries to seek help from a doctor. The doctor refuses to diagnose and treat his pending illness because your dad happens to be gay and the doctor has the religious right to deny a patient treatment. Since your dad was denied help from a doctor because he was gay, your dad has no will to write out because he doesn't even know how much time he has to live and the extent of his illness.

How would you feel as his son?

Your dad's really fortunate to have a doctor who's even willing to treat him to begin with. I can only say so much about the couple in this story:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...1n19insem.html

...or the other families and people whose stories go unheard.



I went to China on an International Public Health-care Seminar for a collegiate study abroad program and I've never seen this or heard of such censorship. After spending a month there, I felt I had more freedom to do what I want in China than I did during my entire life in the U.S. Where in China have you seen this?

You know as well as I do that this son would be treated for his heart condition. I guess I'm not sure what about my post offended you since I was trying to find common ground but since you don't agree that there is any to be found, I guess there's really nothing to add. (FYI: To some people, you are not gay or straight-you are just a person and most people really do not hate you at all like you think they do.)

 

[Jdario86]

You know as well as I do that this son would be treated for his heart condition. I guess I'm not sure what about my post offended you since I was trying to find common ground but since you don't agree that there is any to be found, I guess there's really nothing to add. (FYI: To some people, you are not gay or straight-you are just a person and most people really do not hate you at all like you think they do.)

I did not expect you to think that the son's father was not going to be treated for his heart condition. The point of that post was to take something that was off topic and put it back into the context of this thread. The other point I'm trying to make is that - yes - most people would not exercise their religious rights in this particular situation. But, you would be surprise, there are some people who would. I've had disconcerting conversations with people who strongly believe in exercising religious rights as a clinician. And just because someone's passionate about speaking out, doesn't necessarily mean they're angst, it just means they're being proactive.

As for being proactive, I really do think think this Unequal Opportunity at Lipscomb should be addressed. I'm going to address this concern to the ACPE because I really don't understand how they are accredited and are able to bypass the equal opportunity laws.

 

[ajh88]

As for being proactive, I really do think think this Unequal Opportunity at Lipscomb should be addressed. I'm going to address this concern to the ACPE because I really don't understand how they are accredited and are able to bypass the equal opportunity laws.

I think it is wonderful for you to stand up for a possibly disenfranchised group of people - but I don't think the equal educational opportunity act applies to Lipscomb since they are a private institution affiliated with the Church of Christ. They don't bypass the laws per se, but the laws don't apply to them, just as they don't apply to most (if not all) privately funded institutions. I'm also not sure if there are any documented issues with the pharmacy school - I think that other poster is an undergrad.

We are just different I guess - I can see that the people who attend Lipscomb and run the school are entitled to have their beliefs and practices - ones that are clearly stated in their mission and that you agree to abide by if you attend school there, and if someone does not believe in their mission, then perhaps that school isn't the right place for them.

I guess I have a difficult time understanding why someone would want to go somewhere that made them feel uncomfortable, self-concious, guilty, inferior (whatever word you would want to use) - and I guess I just don't believe that every institution must be made to suit every person.

I personally don't agree with the fundamental mission and beliefs of the school and therefore, I would not want to go there - but who am I to tell them they are wrong? They could just easily turn around and say that I am the one who is mistaken.