Pla Plan B Ethical Dilemmas

Pete’s Thriftway and its employees are required to stock and dispense “morning after” pills which are against the family’s moral code. As a part of a complete argument, the family states that according to the Due Process Clause of the Constitution the pharmacy should be able to decline dispensing the drugs and refer the patients to another pharmacy.

I think this particular ethical dilemma encompasses three of the APhA Code of Ethics principles. The principles involved are as follows: “pharmacist promotes the good of every patient in a caring, compassionate, and confidential manner”, second “pharmacist acts with honesty and

In 2013, Deborah Nucatola, a “physician” and “senior director of medical services” with the Planned Parenthood Program wrote an article called “Morning-After Pill a Boon for Women” concerning the promotion of emergency contraceptives as an over-the-counter birth control. In agreeance with Nucatola, placing emergency contraceptives on the shelf could be an easy way for women to access birth control without having to go to their doctor, along with “reducing the need for abortion” for unwanted pregnancy.

Access to emergency contraception has been heavily debated issue, because there has to be a balance between protecting healthcare providers’ religious and moral beliefs on one hand, and providing a uniform standard of care and maintaining patients’ rights on the other. This principle gives a significant approach to the analysis of ethical questions arising from the general obligation to preserve human life, and the limits of that obligation.

In 2002, pharmacist Neil Noesen refused to refill a woman’s valid prescription for birth control pills based on his personal religious beliefs. Not only did he refuse to refill her prescription but also refused to transfer the prescription to another pharmacy. Because the woman couldn’t get her prescription refilled she had to use a backup method. In 2008, The State Pharmacy Examining Board of Wisconsin disciplined Noesen for failing to inform his employer that he would not dispense prescriptions for birth control due to his religious beliefs, and for his refusal to transfer the prescription to another pharmacy.

To start with, all the possible actions Thomas could take would be to fill or not to fill the prescription, re-read the agreement he signed, talk to his employer, or quit his job. Following this, Thomas would need to discard any action which would not be reasonable for others to follow. The option to not fill the prescription should be eliminated because it violates the rule of universality, which means that we should act how others would act. After discarding this, the actions Thomas should proceed with is to fill the prescription because he signed an agreement, talk to his employer about his beliefs, and if Thomas feels the need to leave the pharmacy then he should quit his job. Next, Thomas must discard any action that uses anyone. If Thomas refuses to fill Eve’s prescription, then he is exploiting her by his own benefit because he doesn’t believe in birth control. Eve may need birth control pills for other health concerns. By refusing to fill her prescription he is implicitly harming her for his own benefit.

I agree with you that not only the matter of contraceptives, large companies like Target or Walgreens should regulate the action of their pharmacists on every matter. Because if the decision leave up on personal branches than a pharmacists can refuse to fill anyone prescription, if he or she she think that the situation is immoral. For that a person need to go to another drug store or talk with another pharmacists to get fill the prescription. That's the way inconsistencies will be create with in companies, and a costumer get disappointed. From this, a company's image and sale can get affected and they have chance to lose customer's and their trust.

As stated in Joseph A. Carrese’s article “Refusal of Care: Patient’s Well-Being and Physicians’ Ethical Obligations,” introduces the fundamental principles and responsibilities that physicians have in order to preserve the welfare of their patients in any circumstances. On the other hand, Debbie Dempsey, author of “Refusing Treatment: Practical, Legal, and Ethical Issues,” strongly supports the patient’s right to make their own medical choices, whether it be to accept or decline any help. W.D Ross solidifies the dependent yet incompetent patient to not refuse care and treatment because the physician has a duty of fidelity, beneficence and a duty to

With the implementation of the Affordable Health Care Act; the role of the Federal government has taken a strong stance on ensuring that every American has health care coverage. The delivery of health care and public policy-making consists of several structures which directs the implementation of medical treatment and it's fairness. But what about the effects of Bio-ethical issues in the delivery of health care? Health care administrators are constantly faced with these type ethical issues in the medical setting; who gets the best medication available, how will it be divided? What is done about physicians not performing ethically? Patient's who are terminally ill, seek care from physicians whom they trust and believe. " The ethics of 'principlism' is common, wherein there are four guiding principles: justice, autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence (Bioethicsorgau, 2016)." In conclusion, there is an absolute must that there be policies and laws in place to ensure that health care is delivered appropriately and in all fairness without

For Nelson, the rights of conscience to pharmacists to protect their refusal on all levels; to provide, to refer, and to education, is a necessity. This right is needed to prevent the extinction of ‘religious health care professionals. Nelson states, “If society is prepared to legalize controversial health care products and procedures, it must also work to protect those who do not agree with them”. This statement stands at the core of Nelson’s stance. If the patents have protective measures in choice on their end, then professionals should also.

The principle VIII of the Code of Ethics for pharmacists emphasizes the importance of a pharmacist to seek justice in the distribution of health resources. Furthermore, a pharmacist has an obligation to balance the needs of patients and society by allocating limited health care resources in a fair and equitable manner. Under managed care, the needs of the patients are balanced with efforts to provide cost-effective care. During my managed care IPPE this semester, I had an opportunity to see how pharmacists in managed care settings perform their due diligence by providing patient centered care, as well as demonstrating cost-effectiveness strategies to address the societal needs. Managed care pharmacists engage patients to participate in their health related decisions by providing education regarding medications and health conditions and how they are related.

In this article, Cantor and Baum outline several arguments in favor of and against a pharmacist’s right to object to providing certain medications to the public. Those against pharmacist’s right to object, do so for several reasons. First, they believe that pharmacists are vital parts of the health care team and should be able to implement, to their own decree, the healthcare they provide, including refusing to fill certain prescriptions such as emergency contraceptives. Second, pharmacists should not be obligated to surrender their morals; other members of the health care team may refuse to take part in any form of reproductive services, and this should include pharmacists. Lastly, democratic society allows professionals to refuse to partake in any acts that disagree with personal ethical, moral or spiritual principles; not allowing pharmacists to have a choice in issues of reproductive rights would be controversial (p.

Ethics: perhaps the most controversial thought process used when making complicated decisions. To reach medical conclusions, physicians often attain an ethical consensus using various thought-provoking processes. In cases where physicians disagree with patients, it is important to consider and weigh arguments on opposing sides- physician and patient- in general terms and applying them to distinct yet relevant examples. This essay will evaluate the general situation along with two suitable scenarios pertaining to patients who request an inappropriate and potentially harmful medical treatment by analyzing both sides of the argument. Scenario One: Rose demands physicians to withdraw a dangerous amounts of her rare blood to donate to her 85-year

After reading Emergency Contraception, I do not think that the pharmacist, Monique Marquesa, was acting within her rights in refusing to sell Samantha Plan B for reason of consciences. She is not Samantha's parent or legal guardian, so she herself cannot tell her what she can and cannot take. This situation would be different if the pharmacist thought that this wouldd potentially harm Samantha in any sort of way, but that is not the case. It also might be different if Samantha did not know what Plan B was at all. To go along with this case, I do not believe that personal beliefs can override professional responsibilities. The pharmacist has a job, and that job is not to lecture people on what they should and should not be doing. Professional

In this article, the author is trying to provide the reader with a complete picture of the national debate discussing, “If a pharmacist has the right to refuse health care services based on moral grounds.” Also, the article tries takes a look at the overall controversy and the laws surrounding the pharmacist’s refusal to provide health care. It helps educate the reader and show them that a pharmacist’s right to refusal is wrong and should not be allowed. They begin discussing how an individual’s views on emergency contraception correlate with when they believe life begins. If someone believes life beings at fertilization, then they would view emergency contraception as an abortifacent. Consequently, if an individual believes life begins at contraception or