Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

PLAN B: Where’s focus on patient care?

Letter by Kristina Nielson, Tacoma on Feb. 22, 2012 at 5:20 pm with 56 Comments »
February 22, 2012 5:20 pm

Re: “Judge says Washington can’t make pharmacies sell Plan B” (TNT, 2-22).

To all the pharmacists out there who daily do a wonderful job without the need to pass moral judgment on their customers, thank you.

To all those who feel that their personal issues are more important than patient care, perhaps you are in the wrong profession.

Tags:
Leave a comment Comments → 56
  1. Anothermoniker says:

    What is worse, Kristina is that the pharmacy in question has sold contraceptives since they were invented and NOW says that Plan B isn’t a contraceptive, even though it definitively is.

    Once the customer base sees the hypocrisy (those that haven’t already) they can take their business to other firms.

  2. PumainTacoma says:

    Unlike the writer, I am proud I live in America where individual beliefs still count regardless of where they check into work. The letter writer obviously does not appreciate the fact that courts still stand for a person’s beliefs versus having the government dictate that aspect (not yet) of their life. Having lived near East Germany and having seen the difference between freedom to pray vs. restricted prayer, freedom to think vs. restricted thinking, freedom to have an opinion (even heaven forbid a moral one) vs. restricted beliefs, I am proud to be an American where the judicial system still upholds such liberties.

  3. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    … they can take their business to other firms.

    Problem solved. Pretty simple, ‘eh? (Pssst… it’s called the free market.) And no need for the histrionics of the letter-writer.

    To all the business people out their who use the courage of their convictions as a guide to running their business rather than selling out to the almighty dollar and/ or pressure from special interest group of the day, thank you.

  4. trixicopper says:

    @ PumainTacoma

    As an American you have the right to pray in public or private 24/7 if you wish. What you do not have a right to is government sponsored prayer. It’s that whole freedom of and from thing. Your rights do not trump mine. Especially when it comes to receiving LEGAL medical procedures, supplies and treatment.

  5. whitman411 says:

    It’s not called the abortion pill for nothing.

  6. I hope they loose a lot of clients. They don’t have any patients.

  7. Anothermoniker says:

    It’s not an abortion pill, whitman.

    You are ignorantly mistaking it for RU 486. Just like the pharmacy, who is suppose to know better.

    Maybe they don’t have the knowledge to be running a pharmacy.

  8. whitman411 says:

    How Does Plan B® Work?
    Plan B® (levonorgestrel) may prevent pregnancy by temporarily stopping the release of an egg from a woman’s ovary, or it may prevent fertilization. It may also prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus. ”
    Source: http://www.go2planb.com/ForConsumers/AboutPlanB/HowItWorks.aspx

    It’s an abortion pill.

  9. PumainTacoma and Vox,
    So individuals and businesses who supported segregation should been allowed to continue their ‘whites only’ policies?

    Whitman,
    It is called the abortion pill only by the so called ‘right-2-life’ mob.

    Most others call it the morning after pill.

  10. whitman411 says:

    Morning after fertilization (conception). Contra (against) conception would be things like a condom (stops conception). It’s an abortion pill.

  11. sandblower says:

    Fertilized eggs are prevented from attaching to the uterus naturally far more often. We should tell God to stop doing that.

  12. bobcat1a says:

    Heck, let’s make sure lot’s more unwanted children get born. Then the sanctimonious among us can wring their hands and decry the end of civilization.That’s what they love to do anyway.

  13. Well said Kristina. Talk about letting your personal agenda/ feelings cloud your professional duty. I go to the Rx to get a prescription filled, not to be preached to.

  14. alindasue says:

    whitman411 said, “Morning after fertilization (conception).”

    Actually, it’s morning after sex.

    The sperm float around in the body for a while before actually meeting up with the egg (if they are going to). So if Plan B is taken in a timely manner, conception doesn’t actually occur.

  15. Theefrinker says:

    Clearly, this world could use a lot more abortion; too bad there’s not a pill for that.

  16. Blah blah blah blah that’s all I hear coming from the left…Blah blah blah blah. The only difference between a fetus/baby and a baby is time, that’s it a few months. My baby was born at 26 weeks and is doing great but I see the left would have gladly aborted a baby that young in the name of the sanctity of a woman’s body. Screw religion I am talking about life that has every right to live, you know what a poor excuse for abortion is, a little time…

  17. JimK? I myself would not get an abortion, or use a Plan B but I would never presume to be so righteous and arrogant to tell another woman what she can and cannot do. Have you considered what happens to the baby once its born? What about ectopic pregnancy? Not to mention, do you realize that a woman’s body aborts all the time with the egg never implanting?

  18. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    So individuals and businesses who supported segregation should been allowed to continue their ‘whites only’ policies?

    Apples to oranges, x, a specious analogy at best. A decision by a business not to sell an item does not affect any individual’s Constitutional rights under Equal Protection, nor is it a “fundamental right” of anyone to be able to purchase anything at any time, on demand, from a private business.

    Conversely, discrimination on the basis of race (your example) doesn’t come close to making it under the same 14th Amendment wire.

    But nice attempt to Cardy-ize the discussion by injecting the racial angle where it has no business (pun intended).

  19. To answer the letter writer’s question, “where’s the focus on patient care”, there are 35 pharmacies within a 5 mile radius of the plaintiff’s business. These other pharmacies dispense the Plan B pill.

    So now tell me how the patient is not served?

  20. alindasue says:

    JimK said, “Blah blah blah blah that’s all I hear coming from the left…Blah blah blah blah. The only difference between a fetus/baby and a baby is time, that’s it a few months.”

    Jim, we are talking about a totally different topic. Plan B is nothing but a mega-dose birth control pill that is taken withing the first day after sex, during that period before we are even talking about a fetus or even a zygote. As I pointed out before, the sperm and egg don’t meet up immediately at the time of sex.

    I am very much pro-life, and I feel that both men and women should take responsibility for any life they create when they CHOSE to have sex. However, Plan B is ideal for rape (or date rape) type situations when the attacked person seeks help after being attacked. By making it available without a prescription, it avoids the time consuming hassle of trying to get in to see a doctor first. The idea is to allow her to take the pill in time to avoid conception.

    That said, I feel that a merchant (and a pharmacist is a merchant) has the right to not carry products in his store for whatever reason, not just moral reasons. Most pharmacies do sell it. If people don’t like that a particular pharmacist/merchant doesn’t carry whatever product she wants to buy, then she should take her business elsewhere.

    Whether it be Plan B or just a specific type of cold medicine, if a drugstore doesn’t carry the drug someone wants to buy, then that someone will buy the drug AND little side items like pencils, kotex, candy bars, etc elsewhere.

  21. Vox – once again your historical knowledge is flawed. The ‘personal beliefs/morals/religion’ and ‘separate but equal’ arguments were, and still are used by segregationists.

  22. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    So you’re saying that if I choose not to sell tobacco in my store I’m a “segregationist”.

    Okey-dokey.

  23. If a pharmacist only wants to carry aspirin so be it. People will shop where they can get what they need at a price that they’re willing to pay. Very few will go out of their way to intentionally support or boycott a pharmacy due to this issue. How can a pharmacist get a job with a chain drugstore if he/she is unwilling to fill certain prescriptions?

  24. Judging by many of the comments it’s clear that moral issues are trumped by money.

  25. “It is called the abortion pill only by the so called ‘right-2-life’ mob.”

    “Most others call it the morning after pill.”

    It doesn’t matter what it’s called. In a certain sense it doesn’t even matter what it does, as long as it is approved for sale by the U.S. govt. FDA.

    Some businesses choose to NOT sell Playboy in their stores. Magazines have always been held up as “Freedom of Speech” yet, no business is required to sell Playboy or even Woman’s Day if they don’t want to.

    Businesses need to be allowed to decide what they wish to sell, because that’s how they determine how they are going to remain profitable, and they must remain profitable to stay in business.

    I am Pro-Life, and I would hope that folks would be more careful about what they do, how they do it, and with whom they do it so drugs and abortions were not needed to undue what they perceive as mistakes. Also, I would like to someday see the incidence of rape completely eliminated, so that no one is ever raped ever again, and never needs to consider such a Plan B option out of necessity.

    I am also Pro-Choice. I DO NOT believe that it is my right (or anyone else’s right) to impose my personal choices or religious beliefs on anyone else. I make my own choices, and you make your own choices, and ultimately we will answer at the final judgement for how well we made our choices. Right now all we can do is just try to do the best we can.

    To Kristina, in response to her last line above: Their personal issues are just as important and valid as yours. If you don’t like their personal issues, then go to a different pharmacy. They have a right to be in the business they are in, even if they choose to not carry the product you want.

  26. itwasntmethistime says:

    The ICEE machine is broken at the gas station near my house. They aren’t getting it fixed until late March. Can I sue them for not selling what I want?

  27. hansgruber says:

    It’s a private business.

  28. old_benjamin says:

    To all those who feel that their personal issues are more important than the relgious convictions of others, perhaps you are in the wrong country.

  29. Anothermoniker says:

    “xring says:
    Feb. 23, 2012 at 8:16 am Vox – once again your historical knowledge is flawed. The ‘personal beliefs/morals/religion’ and ‘separate but equal’ arguments were, and still are used by segregationists.”

    Nothing new here.

  30. Anothermoniker says:

    “hansgruber says:
    Feb. 23, 2012 at 9:52 am It’s a private business.”

    So is a bar. Do they get to sell alcohol to minors because “they believe in it”?

  31. old_ben, I think in this case when the writer says “personal issues” she is also saying “religious convictions.”

    In fact, you could easily clarify her last line by making this slight alteration below:

    To all those who feel that their personal issues “and/or religious convictions” are more important than patient care, perhaps you are in the wrong profession.

    Having said that, I still think your “perhaps you are in the wrong country.” is kind of a really stupid statement. This is why America is here. This is why America has been so successful. Because, in America, we have the freedom to think differently than others, and speak out with our views, and not be thrown into religious jail because we don’t agree with our version of a Taliban.

    “America: Love it or Leave it!” has always been one of the stupidest slogans in all of recorded history.

    “America: Love it, and make it better!” is the way you should be thinking. And, if YOU don’t think that way old_ben, I will be sending the Thought-Police over to your place to arrest you. Now, what is your address?

  32. Anothermoniker says:

    “old_benjamin says:
    Feb. 23, 2012 at 10:15 am To all those who feel that their personal issues are more important than the relgious convictions of others, perhaps you are in the wrong country.”

    Are we to assume you supported the Branch Davidian’s sex with children? How about Westboro Baptist? Then, of course, you’d support a Muslim owned business requiring women to wear a burka, regardless of their personal feelings?

    Here’s a clue – “religious convictions ARE personal issues”.

  33. old_benjamin says:

    muck, we have the right to think and say what we want to. We don’t have the right to force others to act in accordance with our beliefs and in oppostion to their own, e.g., sell us contraceptives. Those who think otherwise are most assuredly in the wrong country.

  34. aislander says:

    Do I understand that some members are saying that people have a right to have prescriptions filled even if that would force others to perform an action that is contrary to their moral convictions?

    I really don’t see how that is anyone’s business other than that of the store’s owner, who can hire people who do not have such compunctions; the pharmacist, who can find a job that is more suitable; and the customer, who can simply use a different pharmacy or a different pharmacist in the same store, if available.

    Which of those involved has the least disruptive option, and why in the world should government be involved?

  35. old_benjamin says:

    anothermoniker, I oppose the use of force, as in the case of the Branch Davidians and the moslem women. In the case of the Westboro Baptists, I abhor their behavior but recognize their right to be idiots, as have the courts.

    When the Catholic church declines to provide contraceptive insurance, it is not using force. It is exercising it’s constitutional right, just as are the Westboro Baptists.

    Here’s a clue for you. Use of contraceptives isn’t a religious sacrement.

  36. old_ben, It’s clearly obvious to me that you have not read any of my comments, because if you did…. Well, read my comment above at 9:05 Am and then you figure it out for yourself.

    Here’s where I disagree with YOU.

    If people don’t like that one pharmacy does NOT sell Plan B, then they can just go to another pharmacy that DOES. If people don’t like that the pharmacy they have always gone to is now selling Plan B, then they can just go to a pharmacy that doesn’t sell Plan B.

    Telling people if they don’t like this, or that, because it doesn’t agree with what YOU believe, is just plain stupid. It’s UN-American!!!

  37. Anothermoniker says:

    So, Ben, you pick and choose your applications of the First Amendment. Branch Davidians would not say they used force. Muslims will say it is God’s will that women be covered. The Catholic Church used to require women to be covered. I can remember when school lunches were always fish, to accomodate the Catholic students.

    There are tons more “beliefs”, that you would oppose. I just grabbed the low hanging fruit.

    The First Amendment also allows for people to NOT practice religion.

  38. old_ben, that last sentence should have read…

    Telling people “THEY CAN LEAVE THE COUNTRY” if they don’t like this, or that, because it doesn’t agree with what YOU believe, is just plain stupid. It’s UN-American!!!

    (Apparently some special characters surrounding text, make the text disappear.)

  39. old_benjamin says:

    muck, read your own last post. It’s obvious you didn’t.

  40. aislander says:

    How is possible to have a “right” that obligates other people to do something for you?

  41. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

    old_man, you need to make an appointment very soon with an eye doctor.

  42. old_benjamin says:

    muck, sling it somewhere else. Your ad hominem doesn’t mask your incoherent rhetoric.

  43. old_benjamin says:

    Moniker, people can say most anything. Fact is, the last set of examples you used are all examples of the use of force, which I oppose.

    Certainly, people are free to not practice religion. Go to another school, another pharmacy if you don’t like what they do or don’t do, just as you would go to another barber if he didn’t cut your hair the way you like. It’s called being intelligent.

  44. old_ben, You accuse me of being “incoherent”! That’s a laugh, considering you wrote the following on another topic…

    old_benjamin
    FEB. 23, 2012 AT 10:44 AM
    Just because your religion opposes robbery, there is no reason you should impose your beliefs on me. The government should stay out of the church, and the oppoents of robbery have no right to impose their views on others. To do otherwise would be against the founding principles of our country and therefore unconstitutional

    Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/letters/2012/02/22/logic-applies-equally/#storylink=cpy

    You are saying that “people who are AGAINST robbery” do NOT have a right to impose their “opposition to being robbed” on anyone else. Yes they do! It’s called THE LAW. We have LAWS in this country against robbers and against being robbed. (More explanation available by going to the above link.)

    And what “ad hominem” are you accusing me of? I did not attack your motives or character, I simply pointed out that your logic is NUTSO!!! You have attacked people personally by telling them if they don’t agree with you then they should leave the country. That, my friend, is blanket ad hominem! And, as I wrote before, UN-American.

    Oh, and by the way, as regards your comment above:

    old_benjamin
    FEB. 23, 2012 AT 10:15 AM
    To all those who feel that their personal issues are more important than the relgious convictions of others, perhaps you are in the wrong country.

    Reread the original letter. As I pointed out to you before, but you completely missed it, “personal issues” means the same exact thing as “religious convictions” in the original letter. Thus, your comment make no sense at all. Weird logic man!

    Good day to you sir!

  45. Anothermoniker says:

    Ben…you call it “force”. The people practicing don’t call it force. It’s all subjective.

  46. Anothermoniker says:

    “muckibr says:
    Feb. 23, 2012 at 11:51 am There are none so blind as those who will not see.
    old_man, you need to make an appointment very soon with an eye doctor.

    Then says….”And what “ad hominem” are you accusing me of? I did not attack your motives or character”

    Knee deep in hypocrisy, as usual.

  47. old_benjamin says:

    muck, look up “satire” in the dictionary. Maybe you’ll recognnize it next time you see it.

  48. whitman411 says:

    After all this, it’s still an abortion pill.

  49. bobcat1a says:

    Perhaps some News Outlet (hint) could list those pharmacies that refuse to carry plan B so we can choose which ones to do business with. Thus capitalism prevails.

  50. For all those folks on here who are in support of an Rx’s right to not dispense the Plan B pill, and are telling all of us “liberals” to go away… remember that without access to the Plan B, the “liberals” will all procreate and take over the country. Be careful for what you wish for.

  51. whitman411, this emergency contraception is as much of an ‘abortion pill’ as the group of individuals who seek to limit the rights of women are pro-life. Both terms are clearly misnomers.

  52. hansgruber says:

    Anothermoniker

    Feb. 23, 2012 at 10:43 am

    “hansgruber says:
    Feb. 23, 2012 at 9:52 am It’s a private business.”

    So is a bar. Do they get to sell alcohol to minors because “they believe in it”?

    LOL! They do not have to serve anyone over 21 if they do not want too even though it is legal to sell.

    It really is that simple.

  53. It really is not that simple at all, hansgruber. In order to refuse service to a certain group of people in a public accommodation, there must be a verifiable reason. To use your example of a bar, the bartender is required by law to refuse to serve a patron who is obviously intoxicated, under 21 or without proper identification, or he/she believes the patron to be buying for someone else. However, if the bartender simply tells a patron that he/she doesn’t wish to serve them, he/she better hope they have a legally justifiable reason or there is a good chance for a lawsuit.

    Since you seem to be so well-versed in law, I’m sure you can tell me if it’s legal for a bartender to refuse to serve a pregnant woman solely on the basis of her being pregnant.

  54. Anothermoniker says:

    tburki – please tell me you are joking…

    “Since you seem to be so well-versed in law”

  55. Don’t really understand what you’re getting at. If you’re referring to that quote specifically, it was obvious sarcasm.

  56. I highly recommend to ALL other legitimate posters on these blogs to completely ignore ImLarry, Cardinous and Anothermoniker who is the same person formerly known as ManuelMartini. It is totally pointless to engage in discussion with a person whose ONLY purpose here is to antagonize others.

    Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/letters/2012/02/22/afghan-culture-is-just-too-different/#comment-205985#storylink=cpy

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0