rumitoid

A woman in Arizona made the brave choice this week, to make a very private loss — a miscarriage — into a public discussion, in the hopes that her story can save other women from what she went through at her local Walgreens. The pharmacist there refused to fill the prescription required to help her end her pregnancy, citing moral objections, even though her fetus no longer had a heartbeat.

Because of a previous miscarriage, her doctor was closely monitoring her, Nicole Arteaga explained on Facebook. But on Tuesday, two months into her pregnancy, he discovered there was no fetal development or heartbeat and said she could either have a surgical D&C (dilation and curettage) procedure at the hospital or take prescription medication at home to induce contractions. When she went to pick up her medication, the pharmacist refused to give it to her.

“I stood at the mercy of this pharmacist explaining my situation in front of my 7-year-old, and five customers standing behind only to be denied because of his ethical beliefs,” Arteaga wrote. “I get it we all have our beliefs. But what he failed to understand is this isn’t the situation I had hoped for, this isn’t something I wanted. This is something I have zero control over. He has no idea what it’s like to want nothing more than to carry a child to full term and be unable to do so. If you have gone thru a miscarriage you know the pain and emotional roller it can be.”

The prescription Arteaga was trying to fill was for Misoprostol, which is commonly used to terminate pregnancies, prepare the cervix for insertion of an IUD, or treat stomach ulcers. Pharmacists have been known to refuse to give women this medication, as well as prescriptions for over-the-counter emergency contraception pills, because of their anti-a******n beliefs.

Cosmopolitan writer Haley Potiker described the humiliating experience she had when trying to fill her Misoprostol prescription at a CVS in 2015. Her doctor had already administered a shot to terminate her pregnancy, and the medication was the next step she needed. Instead of refusing outright, the pharmacist said she needed to hear directly from her doctor.

“I started demanding my prescription back, which took a minute and eventually ended in tears,” Potiker recounted. “She finally tossed the slip of paper onto the counter and walked away without a word.”
Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, and South Dakota all have laws specifically allowing pharmacists the right to refuse to fill prescriptions, according to the National Women’s Law Center. Other states have broader laws that allow health care providers to refuse certain types of services but prohibit them from preventing customers from accessing it elsewhere. And in California, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, Washington, and Wisconsin, pharmacies are required to provide patients with their prescribed medication.

At a Walgreens in New Mexico last year, a woman was trying to fill her daughter’s prescription for Misoprostol before she had an IUD inserted, and the pharmacist refused. According to the Albuquerque Journal, the mother and daughter are suing the pharmacy chain for violating their human rights under the state’s law, on the grounds that “Had (she) been a man with a valid prescription for the same medication, the prescription would have been filled.”

Despite the law in Arizona, Walgreens told local 10 News that company policy requires an objecting pharmacist to refer the prescription to another pharmacist or manager on duty. That is not what Arteaga said she experienced, even though there were two other employees who could have helped her.

“I was not given the option to have someone else in that store give me the prescription,” she told 10 News. “Those guidelines were broken.”

Instead, she had to go to another pharmacy across town the next morning. She filed a complaint with the Arizona Board of Pharmacy and contacted the Walgreens corporate office, which has said it is looking into the matter.

The National Women’s Law Center advises anyone who is refused contraceptive medication to do just as she did, and then some: File a complaint with the state’s pharmacy board, communicate the story to the press, ask the board or state legislature to put policies in place to allow for access to legal pharmaceuticals, and contact the pharmacy’s corporate headquarters to find out if they have rules in place to protect customers.

“I share this story because I wish no other women have to go thru something like this at time when you are vulnerable and already suffering,” Arteaga wrote on Facebook. “I am in left in disbelief on how this can happen? How is this okay?”

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

It is within his rights and supported by state law. Do note, this woman (hell bent on k*****g her child) obtained the medication from another pharmacist.

rumitoid

Point taken.

PeterS

I think it every bit as valid as denying someone a meal because you don't like their political beliefs. This is what the Supreme Court ruling has opened up so I hope everyone enjoys it while they can...

PeterS

True, just a Sanders obtained a meal someplace else--no harm no foul. I do love the new wild west that the supreme court ruling has opened up--don't you...

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Were you aware that the owner of the Red Hen followed the Sanders party to the next eatery, formed a group of people to harass them? I do not think the SC sanctioned that kind of behavior..... Oh and harm..... Lexington residents are boycotting the Red Hen. It will close by the end of the month. She should have thought her actions through before she took action for the sake of her biased political agenda.

The state of Az has had the law on the books for a very long time saying that a pharmacist does not have to assist anyone in committing murder. Indeed, even doctors can tell a patient seeking to k**l their unborn child to go find another doctor. But, there is always a "progressive" doctor who is willing to rip a baby away from its mother.

PeterS

I think when you allow discrimination to exist then you erase all of the traditional bounds--this means what the pharmacy did is well within the boundaries laid out by the SCOTUS ruling.

And this from Sanders, who has received widespread criticism in the past for defending the president’s lies, tweeted about her experience at the Red Hen on Saturday, saying, “Last night I was told by the owner of Red Hen in Lexington, VA to leave because I work for @POTUS and I politely left. Her actions say far more about her than about me. I always do my best to treat people, including those I disagree with, respectfully and will continue to do so.”

If Sanders makes no mention of being chased and harassed by the restaurant owner when going to other restaurants then I am going to assume, since it was only reported in RW sources, that it is f**e news with no merit to it what so ever.

And just for the record I don't approve of anything the RH owner did but when you have a SC ruling that removes discrimination as a basis for denying service to others then there is no limit to whom you can ban from your business and for what reasons. What's truly unfortunate is that there are any number of RH restaurants in the area and all are going to be banned by conservatives even though the actions of one do not reflect the actions of another...

This is a mess started by the Supreme Court and sadly one I doubt they are going to be able to clean up by themselves...

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Ms. Sanders did not tweet the entire story because she and her husband decided to go home instead of eating. I guess they lost their appetite. It was her father-in-law that reported what happened afterwards. Regarding the pharmacist, the law was on the books many years before the decision from SC.

Conservatives will not boycott all the Red Hens, especially if we know the owners and they treat all their customers well. I do see a lot more Trump hats being worn in Virginia after Friday's drama, even in my small town where polite conversations does not include religion or politics.

-

Gatsby

If a gunshop owner can refuse to sell a AR-15, then a pharmacist can refuse to sell a drug.

The only real difference is that the former "might" be used to k**l, in this case, the latter is used "only" to k**l!

Betta

The fetus was already dead, Pennylynn. It was not viable, had no heart beat and had not developed. The pharmacist was all out wrong. I had a miscarriage where the fetus had been dead since 8 weeks. Thought I was going into my 4th month of pregnancy and still no heart beat. There was bleeding but the fetus had not expelled (aborted) from my body. The medical term is "missed a******n". There was no heart beat and also had not developed. The dead fetus had to be surgically removed via DC & E (dilation, curettage and evacuation). Neither I nor this poor woman were seeking a******ns. Tests showed our babies had died and had to be removed.

Betta

You might want to re-read the post. The fetus had no heart beat, meaning it was already dead. It can't stay in there so absolutely has to be removed. I've had this happen to me. Not fun to find your baby has died early in development.

PeterS

More Trump hats? That means everything worked out for the best.

Betta

Rumitoid, I don't always agree with you but going by the responses to your post show that in this case people don't read. They see what they want to see. This is very telling about how quick people are to judge someone else's life. The part where the fetus had died was COMPLETELY overlooked. The woman is instead judged and accused of trying to k**l her baby that was already dead. This was a loss to her yet folks want to sit on a high horse and MISjudge her any way. Sad.

PeterS

They went home? The owner of the local B&B said they stayed the whole weekend and were more than welcome with hope that they returned in the future.

Snip>>LEXINGTON, Va. - After this weekend, Good Place Farms Bed and Breakfast in Lexington is in the national spotlight.

Justin Peery, the owner of the bed and breakfast, heard about Sarah Huckabee Sanders' experience at The Red Hen soon after she and her family settled in.

"She became a guest of Good Place Farms. She wasn't the press secretary. We didn't treat her differently," said Peery.

The Red Hen's owner, Stephanie Wilkinson, asked Sanders to leave because of her affiliation with the president. Peery said that he was surprised and saddened by the encounter.

"Our motto here is no matter where you come from, no matter your race or creed, no matter what you believe in, when your feet go under our table, we will serve you," said Peery.

There are mixed reactions about the incident at The Red Hen. An online poll calling for Wilkinson to resign from her position as executive director with Main Street Lexington has gone v***l.

If someone learns of an experience AFTER Sanders and her family settle in wouldn't that indicate that they didn't go home right away but stayed in Lexington and enjoyed the rest of the weekend?

Now no offence Pennylynn but do you ever vet anything that comes from your RW f**e news sources? If the RH restaurant owner was chasing Sanders around town pointing her crooked finger at her don't you think it would be reported in more than RW f**e media sources and certainly be reported by Sanders herself who should have been more upset by the situation than she clearly was. As is, she seems to have blown it off with conservative peeps the ones who have blown it into the proportions we find now. But hey, if people end up wearing more Trump hats I guess it doesn't matter if f**e news is the reason they are wearing them does it. Politics being what they are one needs to garner support in any manor possible--even if f**e news necessary for the gain...

https://www.wsls.com/news/virginia/lexington/owner-of-bed-and-breakfast-where-sarah-huckabee-sanders-stayed-speaks-after-incident-at-the-red-hen

PeterS

Just curious but did you read the part where there was no fetal heartbeat which is why they prescription was written. Few women morn the loss of a fetus they are hell bent on destroying--if that were the case the doctor had already stated he would do a D&C but the woman choice to use a prescription drug instead to induce labor.

I love how you present yourself as open minded and fair yet if something is against your ideology you can't even be bothered to read the first sentence of an article to find out the t***h instead of believing in a lie.

Please explain how the law protects a pharmacist who endangers the life of someone who is there to legally terminate a life that sadly has already ended.

This is the oath a pharmacist takes:

"I promise to dev**e myself to a lifetime of service to others through the profession of pharmacy. In fulfilling this vow

I will consider the welfare of humanity and relief of suffering my primary concerns.
I will apply my knowledge, experience, and sk**ls to the best of my ability to assure optimal outcomes for my patients.
I will respect and protect all personal and health information entrusted to me.
I will accept the lifelong obligation to improve my professional knowledge and competence.
I will hold myself and my colleagues to the highest principles of our profession’s moral, ethical and legal conduct.
I will embrace and advocate changes that improve patient care.
I will utilize my knowledge, sk**ls, experiences, and values to prepare the next generation of pharmacists.

I take these vows voluntarily with the full realization of the responsibility with which I am entrusted by the public.”

I see no place where a pharmacist can endanger the life of a patient simply because they find some imaginary religious objection to the patient do you? (sounds like someone else around here doesn't it)

And yes she fortunately found a pharmacist who was ethical enough to treat her but the point remains the same--the first pharmacist endangered the life of his patient because he made a false assumption and failed to do any background research and find out the t***h that the woman, his patient, had to endure all to satisfy his misplaced religious beliefs.

I doubt seriously that State Law as written so a pharmacist could endanger the lives of those who seek his/her help do you?