Pharmacist Sue over Morning After Pill

Remove all ads!

drew, we are looking at it from 2 different directions. you are looking at it from a view point of someone who has provided the service to some but not others. i'm talking about those doctors who don't offer the service at ALL.
so, if you prescribe drug X for patient A but won't for patient B because of something you don't like about them then yes thats wrong

if however, you never prescribe drug X or do procedure Z for anybody then there is no descrimination no matter how many you turn down

 

Fair enough, Martaug. I see your point, but if these pharmacists are willing to prescribe birth control and not the morning after pill, there's still a problem. The morning after pill, the birth control pill, Norplant, Depo-Provera, and other such chemicals all work by stopping fertilized embryos from implanting. In other words, they all do the exact same thing the exact same way.

 

Ah, but can the other drugs be so easily used to abort a fertilized embryo? It's like the difference between selling someone a pick axe and selling them dynamite. Both are used for mining, but it's a lot easier to blow up a building with dynamite then with a pick axe.

 

This is part of the problem with issues related to birth control: misinformation, or at least fundemental misunderstanding of the subject matter. Unfortunatly it seems far more common among many in the pro-life camp (of which I belong, incidentally) that it does the pro-choice side.

The morning after pill does not abort anything. It merely prevents fertilization. Once the man ejaculates it takes anywhere from 8 hours to 3 days for fertilization to take place, if at all. Hence, to prevent pregnancy, you take it "the morning after" the sex. In most cases, taking the MAP would prevent conception altogether long before there was any danger. Fertilization is not instantaneous, even if you have super sperm. While the MAP is not 100% effective at preventing pregnancy, doing nothing is 100% effective in ensuring pregnancy.

It's the "morning" after pill, not the "month" after pill. There is no embryo at this point, and hence, is not even "theoretically" an abortion.

A better illustration than your "pickaxe for dynamite" analogy would be an airbag vs. a driver's safety course. Both are intended to prevent vehicular death, but one is certainly better suited to address an urgent need than the other, more passive method.

[ August 14, 2007, 18:09: Message edited by: Death Rabbit ]

 

qoute:
Once the man ejaculates it takes anywhere from 8 hours to 3 days for fertilization to take place.

jeez even as a sperm we wont ask for directions!!

 

Ain't it the truth.

 

Actually, The morning-after pill has three possible ways in which it can work (as does the regular birth control pill):

1. Ovulation is inhibited, meaning the egg will not be released;
2. The normal menstrual cycle is altered, delaying ovulation; or
3. It can irritate the lining of the uterus so that if the first and second actions fail, the fertilized embryo will be unable to attach to the lining of the uterus.

It isn't considered an abortion because, medically, abortion can't happen until after implantation, but fertilization can still happen.

 

Technically, that is correct. From what I understand of the process however, the instance of the first and second actions failing is so minimal as to be virtually negligable (hence the "can irritate" caveat, not "will" or "is designed to" irritate). Even then, it is a zygote, not an embryo. A pre-embryo, if you will. I can see your point, though I generally consider fertilization and implantation essentially linked. You can pour water on a seed but it doesn't germinate until you put it into soil.

 

Point acknowledged. The main reason I brought it up, DR, is because I wanted to show that the pro-lifers opposing the morning after pill are either being disingenuous or ignorant about what it does....or that they are also opposed to birth control pills, shots, etc. A pharmacist who is willing to prescribe birth control pills but not the morning after pill clearly doesn't understand how birth control actually works (which would be kind of scary, if you ask me).

 

Ok, but for those of us that believe that life begins at fertilization, the MAP can kill a living human being. How common is that? How common if the drug is used improperly (say 2-6 days after the fact)? Can the drug have any negative effect on an implanted embryo?

Also, Drew, you're assuming that they are willing to sell birth control, which I haven't heard anything about one way or another.

Lastly, while the root issue may well be misinformation, the face-value issue is something else entirely: can the government force a pharmacist/store owner to stock and sell a non-critical medication they object to? And, more to the point, should they?

 

NOG, I can pretty much guarantee you that a pharmacist who refuses to fill a birth control prescription is going to generate a lot more press than a pharmacist that won't give someone a morning after pill. If the pharmacists in question were also refusing to fill birth control prescriptions, we'd know.