(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

[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.