
The Nevada Board of Pharmacy on Thursday began hearings on a controversial proposal that would permit pharmacists in the state to refuse to fill a prescription that violated their moral or religious beliefs. Under the proposed regulation, pharmacists could refuse a prescription if they notify their employer in writing in advance, arrange "without delay" for another pharmacist to fill the prescription, and decline to discuss the reason for refusing the prescription. An attempt earlier this year in the legislature to pass the regulation was defeated.
Supporters say pharmacists should not be compelled to dispense drugs that conflict with their moral beliefs. "Nobody tells a physician he has to perform an abortion," said Louis Ling, board general counsel. "No other health care professional is forced to do something over her beliefs."
But opponents say pharmacists should not be able to deny patients medicines that are prescribed by their doctors. They question how patients in isolated rural towns with only one pharmacy would be protected if the measure passed. Pat Elzy, spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood in Reno, said her group wants assurances that patients will not have to travel to another town to get medicine.
Lisa Lynn Chapman, 37, opposes the regulation. When she was 18 a Las Vegas pharmacist refused to fill the birth-control prescription Chapman needed for a health problem that resulted in a hysterectomy. "It would be very easy for somebody to make a moral assertion about AIDS drugs and, using that same moral assertion, to discriminate against somebody because they needed AIDS drugs," said Chapman.
Eleven states are considering bills that would protect pharmacists who refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions. Four states currently have such laws in place. (AP)
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
Be the first to comment on this story.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.