Pharmacist refuses to give mother, 38, contraceptive pills for period pain 'because of her religion'

I agree with this completely. Also, it should be noted that as a pharmacist she could work in areas where she would not be in a position of making such a decision. The physician and patient should decide what the patient is prescribed; the pharmacist’s duty is not that of a moralistic gatekeeper.

The issue isn’t the pharmacist wanting to be a “moralistic gatekeeper”. The issue is that the pharmacist does not want to have any part in enabling someone to end another human life. From their view, it would make them an accessory to murder. They are trying to follow their own consciences, not concerned with forcing the dictates of their own consciences on others. The pharmacist doesn’t say “I don’t want to give you this drug because I think you shouldn’t have it,” but instead says “I cannot give you this drug because I believe it is harmful to developing human life; you’ll have to find someone else who will.”

In general, the job of a pharmacist is not, and has not historically been, to dispense drugs whose intended purpose (or one of the intended purposes) is to end human life. Overwhelmingly, it is a life-affirming profession in which the pharmacist gets to help people who are sick to become well. Like I said earlier, a pharmacist isn’t a robotic pill-dispenser, and it’s a mistake to think of them as one. Because it is life-affirming, it is a worthy profession for any Catholic.

No one should be forced to dispense drugs that they believe to be harmful to other human beings, as that would force them to be complicit in the destruction of human life. No one is forced to hire these same pharmacists, either, I suppose.

In this case the medicine is being used to control pain not to prevent conception. I don't see why the pharmacist would object to dispensing the medicine the doctor prescribed. Catholics are allowed to use the pill in the circumstances that are described in the story after all.

[quote="Rach620, post:38, topic:189982"]
So, in other words, medical professionals do not have conscience protections. Where did they give that up? And why is it that we want physicians to be "ethical"--but only if they are the "right," socially-approved ethics? So much for authenticity. So much for doing what one believes is right. This whole outlook treats medical professionals not as highly-trained ethical decision-makers who we ask to use their best judgment to provide the best treatment, but as robots from whom we receive necessary medical care.


:thumbsup: You nailed the kind of thinking that motivates people who would impose big government and nationalized healthcare on all of us. These are the ultimate destroyers of human freedom, hypocrites who really want to enslave all of us and turn us into mindless lemmings or worker ants in their giant colony, RULED BY THEM, marching to their orders, marching down the road to fulfill some insane, godless utopy, a road littered with the bodies of MURDERED HUMAN BEINGS, the bodies of aborted babies, newborn babies killed, elderly and disabled people killed, all those killed whom our new slaveholders deemed to be undesirable.

I attended the school of pharmacy, have a master's degree in pharmacy, and I spent my whole career trying to help people, although mostly not by working in a pharmacy (I did work in a pharmacy occasionally) but as a scientist and educator. NEVER did I sign up to be the slave of anyone, or put my moral compass on the shelf for anyone's sake, be that person a patient, a manager, or some bureaucrat in Washington DC. What several other posters said in this thread, that I should leave my profession, or should have never chosen this particular profession, or else I should just shut up and do what I understand to be an abomination to God in the Heavens, is patently ridiculous and insulting to me on a personal level. We are not in China, where the govt will force parents to abort their babies and get sterilized themselves, and we healthcare professionals did not drink the Cool Aid to do what someone else expects from us, mindlessly and without applying our own professional and moral judgment.

What about in other situations, apart from the contraception/abortion debate? End-of-life decisions, assisted suicide, euthanasia. Euthanasia is legal in the Netherlands, for example, and there is a protocol in place whereby the circumstances in which a newborn may be euthanized is legally acceptable. Does a doctor in those circumstances have any right to refuse to euthanize an infant, even if the parents request it?

Apparently, the doctor should just shut up and euthanize the infant, or else choose another profession, according to the logic of some of the posters here. :rolleyes: And next, when the almighty government in Wash DC decides that giving healthcare to grandma costs too much and we should pull the plug on grandma, we should all applaud and obey like mindless little soldiers, right? :mad:

That's why we need to decide and fight now:


Let's think about it. The govt wants to enslave us, tax the heck out of us, and then they will decide who will and who will not receive the favor of healthcare, using MY MONEY, the money they took from me, by way of increased taxes? If there are any people who are mindless lemmings, they are the ones who believe the lie that govt can give you something, anything. Govt will only rob us of our own money and belongings we rightfully earned with our own work, and then redistribute that wealth, deciding who should get the goodies and who should be let to die. But those who want to enslave us, love these schemes, love the power play. They love the power and they love playing God.

If you want a look into the future of govt-run medicine, take a look at govt-run public schools in the USA. First, the govt will rob anyone indiscriminately through taxes, including the parents who choose to homeschool or send their children to private schools instead. Then, what does the govt offer in return? Unpalatable dogfood, failing public schools that do a poor job at a cost much higher than better performing private schools.


And if you don't want to feed your children with this govt dogfood, too bad for you. You can send them to private school instead - if you can afford it -, but the govt will keep the money it took from you through compulsory taxation. Look at the Obamas. President Obama killed the school voucher program in Wash DC, the only way poor parents could afford to send their kids to good private schools, and yet he enrolled his own two daughters in an elite private school. He wouldn't enroll his own kids into public school, but he refuses to return by way of school vouchers the money his govt took away from poor parents, by way of taxation, and thus he effectively forces his less wealthy "subjects" into the public school system. Gotta love the double standard.

Now if anyone wants to understand how govt takeover of healthcare would work, extrapolate it from the public schools situation. Forced taxation, and a poor quality product in return. That would be govt healthcare. Obviously, the Obamas will not wait in line with the rest of us to get their healthcare at the govt-run clinics, just as they don't send their children to the schools they force on the rest of us. But on the front of trampling the moral and professional consciences of healthcare providers, in terms of Wash DC being in charge and running the pony show, it would surely represent every power-hungry bureaucrat's dream come true.

When Catholic hospitals are forced out of business because their right to refuse to provide treatments antithetical to their moral beliefs is taken away, every American will be negatively affected.

I agree.

RC Hospitals are supporting health care reform as are the nuns and orders that may own them.

Physician assisted dying is legal in Holland only for those over 16 (legal with parental consent for those under 16 and over 12).

[quote="lentadv, post:45, topic:189982"]
RC Hospitals are supporting health care reform as are the nuns and orders that may own them.


The Catholic Health Association has written in support of the current bill. A group of some nuns has as well. Others have disagreed. Besides, my post wasn't speaking of health care reform--I was talking about conscience protections. And what I said about that stands--if conscience protections are taken away and Catholic hospitals are forced to provide abortions, sterilizations, or the morning after pill, many Catholic hospitals will have to close their doors. Bishops have said as much.

[quote="lentadv, post:45, topic:189982"]
Physician assisted dying is legal in Holland only for those over 16 (legal with parental consent for those under 16 and over 12).


Euthanasia IS NOT physician assisted suicide. The two are different, albeit related. Euthanasia is when some other person decides to kill a sick or disabled person under certain circumstances. Their consent is not necessary (due to age, dementia, etc.). Physician-assisted suicide is when a terminal patient seeks the assistance of a physician in administering to themselves a lethal dose of drugs. Both, I believe, are legal in Holland.

And what I was talking about earlier, re: the euthanization of infants, also stands. It's called the Groningen Protocol. Look it up.

The protocol, made up after extensive consultation between physicians, lawyers, parents and the Prosecution Office, offers procedures and guidelines how to achieve the correct the decision and performance. The final decision about "active ending of life on infants" is not in the hands of the physicians but with the parents, with physicians and social workers agreeing to it. Criteria are amongst others "unbearable suffering" and "expected quality of life". Only the parents can start the procedure. The procedure is reported to be working well.[4]

For the Dutch public prosecutor, the termination of a child's life (under age 12) is acceptable if 4 requirements were properly fulfilled:
The presence of hopeless and unbearable suffering
The consent of the parents to termination of life
Medical consultation having taken place
Careful execution of the termination[4]

No one assailing pharmacists and Catholic doctors who are conscientious objectors to certain procedures has yet answered my question--what about a doctor in those circumstances? Are they duty-bound to perform euthanasia when requested by parents? Should Catholics in Holland "find a different line of work" besides medicine?

It seems that we're falling--dare I say it--down a very slippery slope.

Killing Jews was also legal in Hitler’s Germany, without age limits. Deporting Jews from Holland (Anna Frank), and Christians (Corrie Ten Boom and her older sister) who were caught hiding the Jews in Holland were also legal, during the Nazi occupation.

So much for human law.

We Christians obey the laws of God, not of human beings, and the murder of the unborn (abortion), infanticide, and euthanasia/assisted suicide are grave sins in the eyes of God. So is artificial birth control. Whenever the laws of God and the laws of men will collide, we will choose to obey the laws of God and disobey the laws of men. That’s why a coalition of Christian leaders (Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox) issued the Manhattan Declaration, to put the secular authorities on notice. All Catholics and other Christians as well as non-Christians who agree with the Manhattan Declaration, can sign it online here:

A pharmacist should not have that option anywhere!

[quote="emilyt67, post:48, topic:189982"]
A pharmacist should not have that option anywhere!


Why? Nurses have the option not to partake in abortions or procedures of a similar nature that are contradictory to their religious principles. My late mother's nurses were mainly fellow Irishwomen or if not they tend to be Filipino or from the West Indies and many of them had chosen to apply to work in the Catholic hospice she worked in as abortions or similar procedures would never be carried out there given the nature of the hospice and it's Catholic ethos.

My mother worked as a nurse for a time in general hospitals here and found that on several occassions refusing to partake in abortions tended to cause stressful arguments. My aunt who is also a nun (and was originally a nurse and later a doctor) found that she ran into many heated rows during the years she spent in Africa as she simply would not dispense contraception under any circumstances.

[quote="buffalo, post:13, topic:189982"]
How bout if she was told she had to dispense arsenic pills? Does she have a right to refuse?


She is a pharmacist and not a medical Doctor. If my Doctor, after going through my entire medical history, prescribes a medication, then the pharmacist should simply get on with doing the job which he/she has been hired for: dispensing medication on the orders of a medical Doctor


My GP is a Catholic; she has a religious objection to prescribing any type of contraception or providing any advice on abortion. I respect her view (not that I require either of those services) because she makes her stance absolutely clear as you enter the Surgery. She has a notice which even the blind can’t miss stating exactly that

Any patient, who wants to consult with her, knows the score and those who require these services do not make appointments and then waste their time listening to her position on such matters

If some pharmacists have similar objections then they should do what my Doctor does; plaster a list of their objection in the store window. That way, people don’t end up wasting their time when two days later, they come to collect their prescription

They then might end up loosing some business from people who think that their religious objections are daft, but if you really believe in something, then stand up for it despite the economic loss; just don’t be a hypocrite; that is nasty

However the law in Britain allows a pharmacist to decline in supplying the pill or contraceptives to anyone and Muslims, Catholics, Protestants and Hindus pharamacists have all at points declined to do so. So long as they provide details of where another pharmacist who will supply such items can be found they are well within the law.

[quote="Alexia2000, post:50, topic:189982"]
She is a pharmacist and not a medical Doctor. If my Doctor, after going through my entire medical history, prescribes a medication, then the pharmacist should simply get on with doing the job which he/she has been hired for: dispensing medication on the orders of a medical Doctor


Just to be clear, a pharmacist has not been hired simply to dispense medication orders of a physician. Just like a physician,a pharmacist goes through 4 years of professional school and receives a doctorate degree at the end.

Every day, pharmacists catch many, many presciption errors from physicians (wrong dose, wrong drug, duplicate therapy, unsafe combinations, etc...) and keep their patients safe by carefully filling each prescription and thoroughly analyzing it before dispensing.

Pharmacists are valuable members of the health care team and should be respected for all the behind-the-scenes work they do in keeping patients safe.

Yes, so true. Maybe what all these people need, so outraged that a pharmacist will not serve them, is some sort of internet superstore with no professional or ethical guarantees included as a part of the service. I mean, today you can order anything online, from computer parts to airline tickets, so I could see someone with no professional or ethical scrupules opening some kind of online “drug depot”, where anyone could get anything they wanted, no questions asked, and no guarantees given. Do you want the morning after pill? RU-486 for chemical abortion? A drug for euthanasia or assisted suicide? No problem. Just fill out the online order form, and your drug will be delivered right to your door, with express mail if you wish. Hey, dear posters who think that you should always get what you want, here’s a business opportunity just for you! :wink:

Hopefully you will be doing a great service to the rest of us as well, pharmacists and other healthcare professionals who live by professional and ethical standards, because people who want their “stuff” will just go to you to get it, and stop bugging us with such demands. :stuck_out_tongue:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit