|
|
|
So the idea that killing is wrong is a subjective belief and the desire to have an abortion is an objective medical decision.
I could see a law like this making sense id the situation was changed. If, for example, somebody was refusing to give someone a blood transfusion because they were a Jehovah's Witness. If you are talking about a life saving help that the medical person could provide.
But contraceptives and abortificants are hardly the same thing. You are talking about a healthy person. I can't see how the state has any compelling interest that would justify violating somebody's freedom of religion.
Randy |
Homepage |
11.06.07 - 10:01 am | #
|
|
I like how apparently if you are a pharmacist, you don't get a voice. At this point, just make the prescribing doctor fill out the prescription if the pharmacist is merely a dispenser of "objective medical decision."
scar3crow |
11.06.07 - 8:08 pm | #
|
|
As a Catholic pharmacy student I'm fairly up to date on these issues. I was going to comment how a careful reading of the law is required before any reaction. Several media websites are actually reporting this as "dispense or help locate," which is the kind of bill I don't like, but can live with. Professionally, I feel that if I can't provide a patient with their treatment because of my beliefs, I certainly would be obliged to return their prescription to them and point them towards another pharmacy.
Looking at the actual text the governor signed, this is worst-case. In short, a pharmacist MUST dispense a drug that is in stock regardless of moral, religious, or philosophical beliefs. In addition, if it's not in stock, the pharmacist must either do all the calling around to find it for the patient, or order it so it will be in stock. Who gets to choose which option to do? The patient. The patient can force the pharmacy to stock their drug now.
This needs to be noted because I am aware of many Catholic pharmacies simply refuse to stock medications they can't morally dispense, and that gets them out of any legal requirement. Not anymore. Now the patient has the ability to require the pharmacy to stock whatever they have a prescription for.
Press release naming bills signed:
http://www.nj.gov/governor/news/...d/
20071102.html
Fulltext of Bills:
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/200...500/
1195_R1.HTM
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/200...1000/
992_U1.HTM
Andrew |
11.06.07 - 10:31 pm | #
|
|
What about giving the woman the facts about the deadly health risks and how she is being exploited, in addition to denying her request? Give this to the legislators and explain how it makes a healthy woman sick and it can starve a pre-born baby.
This calls for some legal action! A class action law suit or something. But compromise is out of the question! No burning incense to the Emperor!
LvB |
11.07.07 - 10:28 am | #
|
4 Visitors Online
|
Commenting by HaloScan
|