(no subject)

[rivka]

The blog Smrt Lernins made me aware of a recent event in which an Idaho pharmacist refused to fill a prescription for methergine, a drug which stops uterine bleeding, because she suspected that the patient might have had an abortion.

I've taken methergine. Nearly three years ago I had a traumatic emergency D&C (dilation and curettage), a procedure which is medically identical to an induced abortion. I needed the D&C because I miscarried a dearly wanted pregnancy at 14 weeks. Following the procedure I was discharged at 3:15am with instructions to take methergine every four hours to prevent hemorrhage.

Michael and I arrived home at 3:30am, exhausted. Michael had been up for almost 24 hours at that point; I had slept at the hospital but was weak and drained. wcg, who had been sleeping on our couch to guard over Alex, walked my methergine prescription to the drugstore and had it filled. Remarkably, apparently, the pharmacist filled the prescription without any nosy questions or scolding.

I took the pills. I bled very little.

At that point in my recovery I was in so much emotional pain that, although I wrote about it extensively online, I couldn't bring myself to say the word "miscarriage" out loud. I wasn't even able to call my minister to ask for spiritual support, because I didn't think I could say what had happened. My hospital experience was deeply frightening. I bled much more than I expected before the procedure and was terrified that I would bleed more.

How much worse would my ordeal have been if I'd been cross-examined about why I needed methergine, treated like I was a bad, dirty, suspicious person? What would we have done at 3:30am if the pharmacist had refused to fill my prescription?

It doesn't matter why that Idaho woman needed methergine. Maybe she had a miscarriage, like me. Maybe she did have an abortion. That wouldn't make her any more deserving of hemorrhage than I was. What matters is that pharmacists should not be allowed to be gatekeepers who decide whether women will be allowed to receive legal and medically necessary health care. Eleven states give them that right. Those laws are wrong.

What also matters is that the pharmacist in question appears to have no true understanding of the Bible or of the essentials of Christian faith. Matthew 25:34-46 is pretty damn clear:

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

It doesn't say anything there about "I was sick, and you took care of me after first making sure that I hadn't gotten sick by doing something you disapproved of." The "I was in prison" clause doesn't even specify "I was unjustly imprisoned and hadn't really done anything wrong." WWJD? Jesus would not have left a woman in danger of bleeding to death. That doesn't seem like a particularly difficult judgment call to make.

Comments

[chipuni.livejournal.com]

*hugs you*

I'm sorry that you had to go through an emergency D&C....

...and I am furious that a pharmacist decided to put himself (I doubt that it was herself) between a patient and her doctor.

[eeyore-grrl.livejournal.com]

Unexpectedly... The pharmacist seems to be a woman.

[mizchalmers.livejournal.com]

Luke 8:43-44: And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any, Came behind [him], and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched.

...like, in case pharmacist lady needed more direct scriptural guidance.

[nex0s.livejournal.com]

That's pretty straightforward. I kind of want to make business cards of this and pass them out to douchebag pharmacists.

N.

[ratphooey.livejournal.com]

She sounds too stupid to be a pharmacist.

[juliansinger.livejournal.com]

The problem is, this can't be sourced solely to stupidity. And regardless of her intelligence, it's still a rights issue.

[ratphooey.livejournal.com]

I don't know. I think stupidity is to blame for a lot of problems.

That level of hypocrisy takes a whole lot of stupid.

[thatwordgrrl.livejournal.com]

If the pharmacist has an ethical objection, they need to hand the scrip to another pharmacist willing to fill it and step off.

Anything else warrants a call to the state licensing board.

Why yes, I have no mercy when it comes to these matters.

[drelmo.livejournal.com]

There usually isn't another pharmacist -- I'd expect it to be extremely rare to have more than one pharmacist on shift at a location at any given time.

[naomikritzer]

You know, the bottom line here is that the pharmacist needs to do his or her job. Period. Yes, you have the right to reasonable accommodation of your religious beliefs at your job. This means that if you need to take religious holidays off, the company needs to make this possible. If you need breaks for prayer at certain times, the company needs to work with you. You do not get to opt out of the core function of your job -- if you have ethical issues with meat, you don't go to work at a restaurant and refuse to touch any meat dish. If you have ethical issues involving asking nosy questions, you don't go to work as a journalist. If you have ethical issues surrounding prescriptions you don't get a job as a pharmacist.

GAH.

[juliansinger.livejournal.com]

This sort of thing is /way/ too common, and thank you for a) linking to it, and b) talking about it.

[wcg.livejournal.com]

What would we have done at 3:30am if the pharmacist had refused to fill my prescription?

I'd have taken it to another 24 hour pharmacy, after sternly resisting the impulse to smack a pharmacist. Fortunately, there are other 24 hour pharmacies within driving distance of your home. Not everybody has that option.

[electricland.livejournal.com]

That's awful! (And I speak as someone who has also had uncontrolled uterine bleeding -- fibroid tumour got out of hand, in my case.) As you say, it doesn't matter WHY she needed the medication! You can die from hemorrhaging!

I strongly disapprove.

[mjlayman.livejournal.com]

Did you notice that Maryland is allowing Holy Cross Hospital to build a new hospital in Montgomery? Holy Cross will block a lot of reproductive health care (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/20/AR2011012002442.html). I don't know why Adventist didn't get the new hospital -- they would take care of all that.

[nex0s.livejournal.com]

I heard about this and was horrified. I also was perscribed that exact same medicine following Jaeger's birth to stem the bleeding after my D&C to remove retained blood clots & placenta.

There are SO many reasons for that medication. It's not the pharmacist's business. I understand not fufilling a perscription when someone comes in with 6 scripts all for narcotics or what have you.... but this is fucking ridiculous. That pharmaicist could have killed someone with their negligence!

N.

[ailbhe]

I had almost forgotten that episode in your life. But not quite.

I continue to be appalled that the law allows pharmacists to deny people life-saving medications. Or, you know, any legally prescribed medications.