In 1999, Wal-Mart stores nationwide refused to carry emergency contraception on the basis that it went against their Christian values and family-centered customer service. Although the company reversed this policy in 2006, pharmacists began to get in on the act.
Some pharmacists are refusing to fill prescriptions, specifically for birth control and emergency contraception, citing that it goes against their personal moral beliefs.
Despite the fact that these pharmacists are simply refusing to do their jobs, companies aim at remedying this by insisting that any pharmacist refusing to fill a prescription must refer the patient to another pharmacist or store that will.
A recent study, however, shows doctors are headed in the same direction as pharmacists. A study conducted by researchers at the University of Chicago and published in the New England Journal of Medicine, said that out of the 1,144 doctors who responded, 42 percent objected to prescribing birth control to a minor without a parent's consent. In addition, 53 percent said they opposed abortion for failed contraception, such as "the morning-after pill."
In the worst case of care refusal yet, doctors have taken a page out of the pharmacists' playbook, insisting it is not only their right to refuse certain procedures or medications for patients, but that they also have a right to withhold information about any methods they morally oppose.
This decision to ignore the health and needs of a patient is completely and ridiculous. When a person becomes a doctor, his or her job is to treat patients. It is as simple as that. Doctors are not moral compasses, denying care in an effort to change the practices they oppose. This is just another misguided and pathetic attempt to stifle the reproductive rights of women under the guise of religious freedom.
In the same study, 18 percent of doctors said they felt no obligation to inform their patients of options they disapproved of or to recommend them to another doctor. Essentially, these doctors have forgotten their oath to "do no harm" and are now on a strange crusade to stop anyone in their path from going against their personal, moral and religious beliefs.
If a doctor wants to refuse to practice certain types of medicine, especially when it comes to contraception, it is his or her right to do so. Doctors, however, also have a responsibility to their patients and a duty to their communities to provide health care in an unbiased manner. Any professional who cannot be bothered to practice medicine to its full extent should, at the very least, be required to post this fact for their patients.
Doctors need not post their specific religious orientations, as this could potentially be seen as a violation of the right to freedom of religion. The people, however, also have a right to quality health care from knowledgeable professionals who will share information readily.
While religious freedom is an incredibly important right, it is absolutely ridiculous to hold it above the right to proper medical care. The website www.religioustolerance.org actually suggests women in areas where emergency contraception may be difficult to obtain because of pharmacist refusal should determine "in advance of need, the nearest pharmacy which will supply them with the medication … because of rape or contraceptive failure." Emergency contraception is used for emergencies and the implication that any woman should be planning for rape is intolerably offensive.
It is the job of health care providers to inform patients of their options, as well as providing them with the best care possible. Perhaps if doctors and pharmacists feel their religious beliefs trump this objective, they should find another profession.
-
Katie McIntire is a cinema-television critical studies freshman from Manhattan Beach.
