Showing posts with label Right to Conscience. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Right to Conscience. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Must Read: Rep. Steve O'Ban's Floor Speech on HB 1044

Right not to be Coerced to Take Human Life

Mr. Speaker, this bill is not about one’s views on regulating abortion or a women’s right to choose. This bill is about the value we place on the freedom of conscience. This bill is a test of all of us in this chamber. Do we nurture and celebrate people who follow their conscience? Or, do we burden and undermine conscience? And not just any issue of conscience is at stake.

This bill would force Americans to violate conscience on the most profound moral issue imaginable. This bill would force Americans to assist in taking what they believe to be innocent human life. Since the Quakers in colonial America were jailed for refusing to serve in colonial militias, our nation has affirmed the right of conscience. Their refusal to take life changed colonial laws and in every armed conflict since, Americans have been exempted for conscience sake. Our laws have responded to protect conscience, again and again.
  • Within weeks of Roe v Wade in 1973, every state and the federal gov’t enacted exemptions so doctors would not be forced to take human life.
  • Our state’s physician-assisted suicide laws, exempt physicians from being coerced to take human life. 
  •  Our state corrections employees are excused from participating in state executions.
And yet, not since the Quakers were jailed in colonial America, would a law punish Americans who refuse to take human life, until HB 1044. No other state, no other gov’t has broken with the long tradition of our nation protecting conscience in this way, until HB 1044.

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Constitution 1, Rob McKenna 0

Oops. Rob McKenna bet on the wrong side yesterday.  Rob McKenna believes allowing people to refuse to participate in murder is a violation of the Constitution and Judge Leighton smacked him down.

Court upholds pro-life pharmacists’ objections to dispensing abortifacient contraceptives.

We applaud the court's decision because it was the right one. AIW was at many of the Board of Pharmacy hearings and covered the controversy in-depth. We provided the only public reporting on the incestuous business relationships between Planned Parenthood of Western Washington, the UW School of Pharmacy/Don Downing, Barr Labs, the Board of Pharmacy and the governor of Washington. ALL of them colluded against pharmacists (and others) who said, "Plan B kills and we don't want to be part of it."  Specifically, they targeted Christians and people of conscience.

WE TOLD YOU SO. And the court agrees with US. He sent everyone involved in the selling and promotion of the snake-oil known as Plan B out the door.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Washington State Capitulates, Recognizes Pharmacists' Conscience Rights

Something for the "We told you so file":

From the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty
Jul 7, 2010

Washington State Capitulates, Recognizes Pharmacists' Conscience Rights

This afternoon, less than two weeks before the start of a civil rights trial in Tacoma federal court, attorneys for the State of Washington told a federal judge that the State would seek to create new rules for pharmacists with conscientious objections. The new regulations would give the plaintiffs in the lawsuit--the owners of Ralph's Thriftway pharmacy and two pharmacists--what they've wanted all along: the right to refuse to stock or dispense Plan B (the so-called "morning after pill") based on their conscientious objection.

Read more...

Monday, November 17, 2008

Abortion Industry Hooks-up with Euthanasia Movement to Deny Pharmacists Right to Conscience

On November 14th, the Governor Christine Gregoire's office produced an email that is addressed to Planned Parenthood of Western Washington from Christina Hulet, the Governor's Aide. It says…

Amy,
The Governor received a letter of strong support from Robb Miller, Executive Director of Compassion and Choices of WA, regarding the pharmacy board issue.

We're following up with a letter from the Gov, but wanted to also pass on the name to you in case their organization isn't part of the coalition. His contact number is 206-256-1636.
Christina


Saying "I told you so" just doesn't cover the sum of my feelings on this topic.

It's interesting that the supporters of assisted suicide claim they believe in allowing providers to opt out (as stated in the initiative's exemption), but they have also urged the Governor to force pharmacists to fill all prescriptions. I'll bet the long term plan is to get rid of the opt-out.

We are looking forward to reading the promised follow-up letter from the Governor. Perhaps someone can send all the correspondence to Archbishop Burnett since he still believes Gregoire to be a supporter of the Catholic Church's teachings on life. Maybe an email and a letter from Governor Gregoire showing her pimping for the Euthansia-Abortion-Contraception movement will get his attention.

Friday, February 15, 2008

Judge Leighton Sides with Pharmacists and Public...Again

Judge won't lift suspension on Plan B sale requirement

And a few observations from those in the courtroom today:

The judge said that the rule seemed to be motivated by something other than sincere concern for access to medication;

He said that the rule was clearly targeting opponents to Plan B and not medications in general (as asserted by the Defendants);

He remarked that his bailiff was battling cancer and had to go to three pharmacies before he was able to get his prescription filled and asked if the BOP would consider this a violation of the rule.

Smart man. These are points we have been arguing all along. Let us also remind everybody that no pharmacist wants to deny patients legitimate health care. Pharmacists want the right to be able to consult and converse with their patients about any drug the patient is taking and at the same time don't want to be forced to give out a drug that may kill a tiny embryo before it has a chance to implant.

Award for worst reporting on this story goes to...the AP and Seattle Post-Intelligencer. No surprise there. See how many errors and instances of bias reporting you can spot.

Update 2/21/08 from another courtroom observer: One other thing he said (and I hope the press takes note) is that he is absolutely amazed that the coverage of this case never mentions the Constitution. And...To those who say that pharmacists who don’t want to dispense Plan B should find another profession, I say: Citizens who disagree with the US Constitution should find another country which does not protect religious freedom. China, Cuba, and N. Korea come to mind, but there are many others.

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Thought Crimes Bills Tabled

Not happy with Judge Leighton's decision that indeed the Washington Board of Pharmacy, Christine Gregoire and the abortion lobby were attempting to recind First Amemendment rights for pharmacists, the legislature considered passing their own thought crimes bills.

Three bills were were written up: SB 6361, SB 6519 and SB 6189.

All were flawed. In an attempt at compromise, even the one (SB 6361) written by Republican members had serious problems.

Read more here in the PI.

NARAL and the ACLU have appealed Judge Leighton's injunction in favor of the pharmacists to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Judge Leighton will hear the full case in October 2008.

Monday, January 14, 2008

Local Clergy Promote State Imposed Morality

Coming on the heels of Pope Benedict's statement that moral relativism is at 'emergency' levels, this "guest columnist" piece, entitled Denial of Contraception is Immoral, appeared in the Seattle Times.

The "emergency" to which the Holy Father referred was the growth of relativism. Young people, he said, find it difficult to develop "firm certainties and criteria upon which to build their lives." This failure of moral guidance, the Pope said, threatens "the very basis of coexistence and the future of society."

Well, duh. When you have a bunch of no-nothings like Catherine Fransson and Jamal Rahman basically promoting the idea that one's personal opinion is to be the final arbiter for right and wrong, you are going to have confused people making bad, harmful decisions.

What is truly frightening about this group of "clergy" is that they take it one step further and actually push for the legislation of morality. It's a twisted morality but it is nonetheless a demand that the State, through the force of law, make others conform to their opinion about morality.

Fr. Frank Schuster makes this point in a response in a letter to the editor:

By way of analogy: Are we ready to give government greater power to tell clerics what we can teach our people and what we can't? What if the state told all faith communities to hand out literature some of us fundamentally disagreed with? I don't know of many clerics who would like the state to go down that road.
Amen, Father.

They don't say it in the article but these two "clergy" are undoubtedly part of Planned Parenthood's posse of "religious leaders" who will do their bidding on an as needed basis.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Looking at the Pharmacist Conscience Clause Issue in Context

Many people have bought into the mistaken idea that the dispute over the proposed pharmacist conscience clause and Plan B is a struggle between religion and women’s health care. In reality, it is something else entirely. All impartial observers of the conscience issue need to be aware of larger context in which it is moving: An overall strategy by the abortion industry to increase the number of health care workers performing abortion either voluntarily or through state or economic coercion.

One of the biggest problems facing the abortion industry right now is the lack of “providers.” Most doctors who spend a good deal of time, money and effort to finish medical school and complete a residency don’t want to be involved in a business that kills children. While the money might be there, the prestige, gratitude, and professionalism isn’t. After 35 years the abortion industry hasn’t been able to shake their “back-alley” image. Furthermore, doctors are burnt-out and many suffer from the effects of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome.

The response of the abortion industry has been to first search for escape hatches and magic bullets, i.e. chemical abortion pills like RU-486, to help distance the physician from the trauma of abortion. In this scenario, the woman, rather than the physician, is the one usually left to confront the bloody parts of the dismembered fetus. Secondly, they’ve made serious efforts to recruit non-physicians to voluntarily participate in abortion while simultaneously working to pass laws and apply pressure that will compel others to participate.

That Seems a Little Extreme
You don’t have to take my word for it. Visit the web site of groups like The Abortion Access Project and you can see that they are already recruiting midwives, nurse practitioners, and physicians assistants for abortion training. Or as AAP explains on their web site:

New Abortion Provider Training Initiative (NAPTI) seeks to address the shortage of abortion providers and to expand the scope of practice of advanced practice and other primary care clinicians to include medical and surgical abortion.

Hospitals aren’t off the hook either. They are slated for a strategy of intimidation and pressure as the abortion industry attempts to shift abortion services away from the current archipelago of abortion dominated mills toward a “community-based” delivery system. In pharmacies, community or hospital health clinics, and small one- and two-nurse practices in strip-malls, the idea is that abortion could mix in seamlessly with flu shots, mid-wifery, and cold medications.

More Abortions over a Larger Group of Providers
This strategy benefits the industry by increasing access to abortion and diffusing abortion services over a larger number of providers, making it harder for pro-life activists to target any particular provider. It also seeks to address some of the isolation that abortion providers feel within the medical community as well as release the pressure that comes with doing abortions as a primary part of one’s practice. If “everybody’s doing it” there’s support and comfort for those who have a nagging conscience. Of course there will be financial incentives along with the honors and awards that generally fall to those who assist those in power.

But I thought only Doctors were Supposed to do Abortions
Tell it to the governor, or the health department or the sheriff. But don’t expect much of a response. Despite the state law only allowing physicians to perform abortions, Christine Gregoire as attorney general, ruled that Advanced Nurse Practitioners can administer RU-486 chemical abortions without physician supervision,

Attorney General Gregoire, in the 2004 ruling, declared that the “physicians-only” part of Initiative Measure No 120 was obsolete by stating,

[T]he state now recognizes a new category of health care professional with a scope of practice that overlaps in certain ways the “practice of medicine” that was once reserved to licensed physicians.

She also ruled that the “right to abortion” is preeminent and that the state is required by the statute to place the “least restrictions on a woman’s right to have an abortion”. Therefore, “freezing” (her word) the scope of practice of health care professions would make it more difficult for a woman to get an abortion and conflicts with the statute. Washington’s abortion law is obviously continually evolving.

Hey, I didn’t Vote for That
Well, maybe you did and maybe you didn’t. It all depends on who is doing the interpreting.
Here’s the language from Gregoire’s ruling:

We note, first of all, the opening language of RCW 9.02.110 itself that the “state may not deny or interfere with a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion prior to viability of the fetus, or to protect her life or health.” The initiative opens with a statement of policy that “[e]very woman has the fundamental right to choose or refuse to have an abortion”. RCW 9.02.100(2). Furthermore, the initiative also contains language requiring that the state impose “the least restrictions on the woman’s right to have an abortion” of the available alternatives. RCW 9.02.140(3). It would be inconsistent with these statements of intent to read RCW 9.02.110 as
“freezing” the scope of practice of health care professionals in such a way as to make it more difficult for a woman to obtain an abortion in those circumstances where she is constitutionally and statutorily entitled to do so.
According to this logic, NOT allowing pharmacists or other health care workers to administer abortifacient drugs or perform abortions in any manner would be contrary to the statute.

Finally, we are told that when new laws conflict with old laws the new law prevails: “If there is an irreconcilable conflict between the new provision and the prior statutes, the new provision will control as it is the later expression of the legislature.”


They Can’t Force Me
Why not? If the “right to abortion” is preeminent and the state is required by the statute to place the “least restrictions on a woman’s right to have an abortion” then what reason could anyone possibly give for resisting participation. Employers who enjoy the revenue certainly won’t stand by such trouble makers. Any fall-back on conscience rights you think you might have is just about to be eviscerated by either the state Board of Pharmacy or legislature – both heavily influenced by the abortion industry.

It Couldn’t Happen Here
Advanced Nurse Practitioners can already administer RU-486 in our state, so it is happening. Here’s how it can continue to happen on a much grander scale.

Are pharmacists, because of Collaborative Practice Agreement legislation currently on the books in Washington and Attorney General Gregoire’s 2004 ruling that a “new category of health care provider with a scope of practice that overlaps in certain ways the ‘practice of medicine’…,” already empowered to administer RU-486? If pharmacists don’t have a right to conscience regarding Plan B how will they have a right to conscience for RU-486 or other abortion drugs?

Will physicians and health care workers be compelled to offer abortion as a matter of course whenever and wherever a woman seeks pregnancy related health care? A friend of mine reported that when she went to Group Health for a pregnancy test not too long ago they did just that. When her pregnancy test came back positive they handed her a list of abortion centers simply because she was pregnant. The medical establishment in the state as long viewed abortion as “health care” so such a move wouldn’t be radical for them in the least.

If hospitals in Washington (including Catholic hospitals) that are already compelled to administer Plan B to “rape” victims, and workers in the health care field do not currently have a right to conscience as has been argued by the state of Washington, then how can they expect an exemption from offering and performing abortions?

Clearly the going forward strategy on the part of the abortion lobby is to find ways within the existing laws (or through new legislation), and with the help of abortion-friendly attorneys general, to allow for all health care workers to practice both chemical and surgical abortion and to force others to do so under fear of losing their employment.

What about the Women?
It’s never been about the women. And it’s never been about health care. All it really takes is the right attorney general, an arrogant and misdirected legislature, and a public uncomfortable with and uninformed about abortion to twist the laws and institutions of Washington to the idea that anything that doesn’t serve the cause of abortion is against the law.

(This is the second in our series on the pharmacist conscience clause leading up to the March 29th Board of Pharmacy meeting.)

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Dumb, Dumber and Just Plain Stupid

Gov. Chris Gregoire has appointed a board member of NARAL Pro-Choice Washington to the state Board of Pharmacy.

This move pretty much confirms the fact that the Democrat party is a wholly owned subsidiary of the culture of death.

They also hate the Constitution,

"We will pass a law the revokes the license of any business that refuses to dispense medication based on ethical preferences," said Senator Karen Keiser.

And science,

She [Vandana Slatter] said that emergency contraception prevents implantation of the egg.

A pharmacist on the state Board of Pharmacy that doesn't even know the fundamentals of human development and the female reproductive system. Eggs can't implant Vandana. That would be why you get your period every month. No need for Plan B.

But they sure love money,

She [Karen Cooper] reminded us that NARAL is the organization that does this work and that they cannot do it without the support of the folks in that room.
[Insert perfunctory link to donation page here.]


There you have it: Karen Cooper the smartest of the bunch.

Monday, November 06, 2006

Afraid of the Truth About Plan B

“Why are you afraid to post the real exchange?” asks Geoff Simpson in this post.

We aren’t afraid to post the real exchange. I’m assuming that the additional comments Mr. Simpson has left in the comments box came later than the version I received. I’ve pulled them out and posted them here for all to see.

Mr. Simpson: I'll attach a copy of the mailer since you apparently have not seen it. I did not violate anyone's rights, on the contrary, I am trying to protect people's rights against activist pharmacists who choose to lead the charge to prevent women from preventing an unwanted pregnancy.

My mailer stated my position clearly: “Decisions about family planning should be made by women, with their families and doctors. Not by pharmacists, insurance companies or politicians.” Mr. Ramseth stated his position clearly in the newspaper: In the mind of pharmacist Jim Ramseth, there is a moral hierarchy when it comes to preventing pregnancy: Selling condoms and birth control pills is OK. But the emergency contraception known as Plan B is not, and Ramseth refuses to provide it.

How is repeating his own statement a violation of the Constitution?

AIW: We’ve attached the flier here for all to review. The idea that Mr. Ramseth is “leading any kind of charge” is simply laughable. I don’t know him but he seems to be an honest man trying to make an honest living who doesn’t want to participate in the taking of a human life or the abuse of women by rapists, abusive boyfriends, Planned Parenthood and the pharmaceutical industry.

Mr. Ramseth is free to violate his own conscience. You are free to violate your conscience, which you are doing quite nicely as you go skipping down the lane with Planned Parenthood and NARAL. A woman is free to violate her own conscience by procuring abortion or contraception. The problem is that YOU hope to use the power of the state to force Mr. Ramseth to violate his conscience and deny him an opportunity to earn a living. That is against the constitution of the state of Washington and United States. Maybe you just don't understand the First Amendment. Here's a link to the Constitution.

In fact, the court in Chicago agrees with me and Mr. Kahler on this point. Judge Jeanne E. Scott has allowed for the lawsuit filed by the Illinois pharmacists who were fired after refusing to distribute the Plan B to proceed to trial. Specifically she said that if proven at trial, the pharmacists’ allegations, “may establish that the object of the Rule [morning-after-pill mandate] is to target pharmacists, such as the Plaintiffs, who have religious objections to Emergency Contraceptives, for the purpose of forcing them either to compromise their religious beliefs or to leave the practice of pharmacy." Gee, that sounds an awful lot like what a certain legislators in Washington are trying to do.

Mr. Simpson: As a full-time professional firefighter, I am not free to deny emergency medical care because of my personal point of view. I am required to treat everyone equally.

AIW: Plan B is NOT medical care. It is an overdose of hormones that alters a woman’s normal healthy condition. It has negative short-term side-effects. The long-term side effects are yet to be determined, but if the known side-effects of OCs and other contraceptives are any indication of what's to come, the best interests of women’s health will not be served by passing out Plan B like Chicklets. Plan B is not health care anymore than salting a field is agriculture. If the firefighters of this state actually believe that contraception and abortion are “health care,” and if being pregnant or having sex is an “emergency” then God help us all.

Mr. Simpson: I'm glad you asked: (Mr. Simpson was asked to provide a source for his contention that “Thousands of abortions per year could be averted and millions in scarce health care dollars saved if emergency contraception were more readily available”, and provided this link.)

AIW: For me this is probably the saddest part of this whole exchange because it shows how easy it is to dupe well-meaning people like yourself. Here it is in a nutshell: They lied to you to get your support for Plan B. They made promises they knew they couldn’t deliver or had no interest in delivering. Now that Plan B is over the counter they’ve backpedaled, and admit it won’t have the impact they said it would. Here they are in their own words:
"It will not reach that potential," Jackie Payne, the abortion businesses' director of government relations, told the Associated Press.

And this, “Kirsten Moore, president and CEO of Reproductive Health Technologies Project, conceded there is no evidence that easy access to the morning-after pill reduces the number of pregnancies or abortions.”

In real life, not six year old position papers published by people who make their living off pushing abortion or contraception, the facts show increased abortions and VD, here, here and here. The abortion industry makes $400 to $600 per abortion. Can you explain to me why they would push a drug that would supposedly cut their revenue so significantly?

As for this state, we are holding steady at about 25,000 abortions a year, with the number of first time abortions actually increasing, and we’ve had widespread access to EC since 1997. Are you willing to reverse your support for Plan B if we continue to see no decrease in abortion or an increase in abortions and/or rates of VDs? We've actually seen an increase in Chlamydia since the introduction of EC to this state.

Plan B was a drug developed with the financial assistance of Planned Parenthood of Western Washington to aid and abet sexual activity by teens and keep money for contraception, abortion and VD treatments flowing into Planned Parenthood’s coffers. That’s the real drain on the state’s precious health care dollars and they’ve got you thinking you’re helping women. How tragic.

Mr. Simpson: I've stated my position and I stand by it.

AIW: Stand by what? The lie that EC will reduce the number of abortions and save millions in “scarce health care dollars”? The argument from a position of self-interest that you aren’t advocating a repeal of the First Amendment for certain groups of people? The laughable idea, but apparently flattering thought, that you are protecting women from some little old man in a white lab coat. Please. You really don't have a very high opinion of women if you think that we can't stand up to a pharmacist or are too stupid or lazy to find another pharmacy.

Mr. Simpson: Although it is theoretically possible, there is no scientific evidence that Plan B prevents implantation

AIW: Do you remember those Seattle firemen who went into the burning building because they thought there might be some homeless people inside? There was no “scientific evidence” that they were inside but they didn’t want to take that chance that someone might die.

You might also consider why the consent form that women are forced to sign includes this telling line: "...it may prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb..."

And why does the approved EC education program for pharmacists in Washington tell readers that preventing the implantion of the blastocyst in the endometrium is one of EC's mechanisms?
Mr. Simpson: You are free to draw the line where you wish. I choose to demand that all pharmacists provide Plan B or turn in their licenses.

AIW: Back to Mr. Kahler’s and Judge Scott's point, which you’ve proved quite nicely – Shame on you for advocating the denial of First Amendment rights to the pharmacists of this state.

I would encourage you to open your mind, forget about anything you might owe Planned Parenthood, and peruse our other articles in this topic. It's never too late to do the right thing.

Further Reading:
Prescriptive Authority Agreements for EC in Washington
Your Friendly Neighborhood EC Certified Provider
Emergency Contraception Consent, Release and Assessment Form
Are You Experienced?
Mixed Messages
Rates of Chlamydia Rise after Introduction of Plan B to Washington

Geoff Simpson (D) makes Common Cause with State's Abortion Industry to deny First Amendment Rights to Pharmacists

At right you can see an image of the flier that was sent out by the Washington State Democratic Party on behalf of Geoff Simpson (D) who is running for re-election 47th legislative district.

Below is a letter sent to Mr. Simpson from pharmacist C.J. Khaler. Below that is Simpson's resonse and further response from Khaler.

Original letter
Dear Rep. Simpson:
I am writing you to ask you to do the right thing - publicly apologize to Jim Ramseth, the owner of Covington Pharmacy.

Recently the Washington State Democratic Central Committee mailed a postcard to the voters of your district that "criticized" Covington Pharmacy for taking a stand on the issue of the emergency contraception pill. Its owner Jim Ramseth refuses to dispense the pill on the basis of his freedom of conscience to act in accord with his ethics and morals. While refusing to dispense the pill, he provides to patients with such prescriptions a list with contact information of other pharmacies within a close proximity to his pharmacy where they may go to get the prescription filled.

Article 1, Section 11 of the Washington State Constitution states: “Absolute freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment, belief and worship, shall be guaranteed to every individual, and no one shall be molested or disturbed in person or property on account of religion”. As a member of our government, you must and should uphold our constitution and not violate it. Jim did nothing but act on this freedom of conscience that this constitution guarantees.
In addition, Gov. Gregoire, has said “As Governor, I do not believe the state should discriminate against any citizen. I also believe that personal religious beliefs are protected by our Constitution.” I realize that your campaign office did not sponsor this postcard. However, the postcard does support your re-election. It is up to you to stand up and apologize to Jim and let the citizens of Washington know of your integrity.

Correspondence between Simpson and Kahler
Simpson: What is it exactly about the mailing that you did not like? It simply reprinted information that appeared in in the second largest newspaper in Washington State.

Pharmacist: I repeat. As a member of our government, you must and should uphold our constitution and not violate it. Jim did nothing but act on this freedom of conscience that this constitution guarantees. The postcard singles out Covington Pharmacy and its owner, Jim Ramseth, for acting on his state guaranteed right of conscience. The postcard suggests that Covington Pharmacy has done something wrong, and that is just not right.

Simpson: I disagree that pharmacists should have the right to refuse to dispense emergency contraception.

Pharm: And why don't they have this right just as legislators, firefighters, physicians, nurses, and all citizens of the US who are guaranteed this First Amendment right? It is possible for patients to get legal prescriptions filled and pharmacists to be able to refuse morally objectionable presriptions if all are willing to be tolerant of different religious beliefs and find a way to work together.

Simpson: Thousands of abortions per year could be averted and millions in scarce health care dollars saved if emergency contraception were more readily available.

Pharm: What is the source for these statistics?
(Editor's note: Widespread use of EC in Europe has shown to be ineffective in decreasing abortion rates, though rates of VD have increased.)

This is not an issue of access to legal prescriptions. There are adequate locations where a patient can access Plan B in Washington:
a. WA pharmacies:
With a prescription: at 1177 community pharmacies
Without a prescription: 418 pharmacists have a collaborative agreement with a physician to dispense Plan B
b. WA physicians
c. WA health centers or departments
d. WA hospital emergency rooms
e. Planned Parenthood of Columbia/Williamette: Overnight mail on
Monday thru Friday
f. In advance as recommended on the Plan B website


In fact, Washington pharmacists have led the nation in allowing pharmacists to write prescriptions for Plan B under a protocol arrangement with a physician. Approximately 3600 pharmacists have been trained with the Emergency Contraception Provision by a Pharmacists training program through the Washington State Pharmacy Association. Approximately 200,000 Emergency Contraception prescriptions have been written and dispensed by pharmacists in WA since 1997. This number does not include Emergency Contraception prescriptions written by physicians and ARNPs.

This lack of availability is further supported by the fact that while only 25 formal complaints of a pharmacist refusing to fill a prescription have been filed with WA Board of Pharmacy for the period of June 28, 2004 to June 6, 2006 (2 years), only 1 was for Plan B. It has been estimated that the pharmacies in WA will fill 85,000,000 prescriptions in 2006 including approximately 24,000 prescriptions for Plan B.

Simpson: Plan B is not an abortifacient. It prevents fertilization from ever taking place.
(Editor's note: Obviously Mr. Simpson hasn't done his research. Wonder who he's been talking to that would give him such erroneous information.)

Pharm: Your statement is not accepted by all health care professionals. According to The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th Ed, Keith L. Moore, PhD. & T.V.N. Persaud, MD, (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), the embryology text currently used at the UW School of Medicine: “(The zygote) results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization.”(p.2-18) “Postcoital birth control pills (‘morning after pills’) … These hormones prevent implantation, not fertilization. Consequently, they should not be called contraceptive pills. Conception occurs; but the blastocyst does not implant. It would be more appropriate to call them “contraimplantation pills.” Because the term abortion refers to a premature stoppage of a pregnancy, the term abortion could be applied to such an early termination of pregnancy.” (p. 532)

Handing out lists of other pharmacies is not adequate. Time is of the essence when unprotected sex has occurred, such as a condom breakage, and women should not be forced to go from pharmacy to pharmacy to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.

Pharm: A woman has from 72 to 120 hours (depending on your source) to take Plan B for effectivenes. See above statistics for sources of availability. In addition, she has a responsibility to seek the out the right health care professional to give her the care she desires. A woman may not go to any physician to get an abortion. Likewise, she may not go to any pharmacist to get a prescription for Plan B.

If we spent as much time in trying to figure out how to live together in a diverse society, as we spend in digging in our heels to support our position, this issue would no longer be debated.


Sincerely,
Geoff