Women being refused the pill

Another form of sexual bias:
My health care provider was Blue Croos/Blue Shield Traditional, through my employer.
I had great prescription drug coverage, except it would NOT pay for birth control pills. Or tubal ligations.

We can make fun and laughed but for women all over on childbearing years this is a slap on the face of any women and another show of how our society wants to regulate what's going on inside women�s uterus, this is not a point for pro or against choices but the right of women to take control of her body.

Our women right are being denied without impunity. Now if women around the country denied their husband of their �husband rights� you will see how the views will be change.

Originally posted by zerotime

I've never heard of this before but I guess it can probably happen in some hick rural locations in the US. I'm sure if the customers would go over the pharmacist's heads and tell the store owners what happened then those pharmacists would be fired almost instantly.

Yeah, that's all good and everything. But, it's kinda hard to talk to store owners anymore.. Since most are now Multi-national Conglomerates. A complaint from one person at one store means nothing to them...So they lose one customer, they'll have some stupid sale and get 50 more to replace them.

Originally posted by marg6043
We can make fun and laughed but for women all over on childbearing years this is a slap on the face of any women and another show of how our society wants to regulate what's going on inside women�s uterus, this is not a point for pro or against choices but the right of women to take control of her body.

Not really Marg, this is a slap in the face of any thinking person, regardless of gender.

Actually itrepid I have not seen my husband having problems with birth control pills or any other man as a matter of fact.

Yes your are right about everybody slap in the face.

Well, it doesn't have to be the store owner. Talk to the store managers. I'm betting that 99% of the time they will not allow this to happen in their store. Like I said, this type of activity sets up lawsuits. $$$ trumps just about everything (religion, personal beliefs, etc) in the business world.

Seems that not only is it far from just a "hick country" thing, but also there are laws to prevent suits being filed against the pharmacists.

When pharmacist Neil Noesen refused to fill a customer's prescription for birth-control pills at a Kmart in Menomonie, Wis., he did so on the basis of his religious beliefs.

Seems it's happening all over.

Two states - South Dakota and Arkansas - already have laws protecting pharmacists who refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions on moral or religious grounds. Ten other states, including Wisconsin, are considering such legislation - Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

Full article www.csmonitor.com...

So now it's not only small individuals. Look at the first instance and your'll see the pharmacist even refused to transfer the ladies prescription to another pharmacy?!?!?
Not only did he infringe on her personal control of her own body, but he then took away her right to seek other help.

Luckily there is still some sense out there.

In Denton, Texas, a pharmacist at an Eckerd pharmacy lost his job in January after turning away a rape victim who wanted to fill a prescription for a morning-after contraceptive.

But what would the case have been in one of these 10 states that either have or are considering laws to give legal protection?? Would that case have been thrown out? Would the pharmacist have been able to file for unlawful dismissal? It seems just way too much when you can look a woman straight in the eyes who has just had the ordeal of rape and say "I'm not going to help you"

[edit on 17-9-2004 by feygan]

Just wondering....
If we geared the law so that income was a requirement to obtaining custody of the children, if maybe, all of a sudden, birth control would be more important to people....

I mean, for most of the world, the women has little or no income potential, they most definately don't have enough to provide for that children.
And, in most of the world, and in most of the religions, they have little power over their sexual activities either....an Islamic women could concievable be beat if she refuses her husband.
And, yet, society expects them to be the ones who prepares the food for them, keeps their home nice, clothes them, ect, ect, ect. and when things screw up, it is her who is expected to be there and try to alleviate the after effects of that screw up. The father isn't the one looking into empty cubboards while listening to crying children. So, since society seems to be unwilling to allow her the means buy the food, clothes ect the children needs, and seems to place her in such a subservient position to the husband, and well, shuns the idea that she should be able to prevent pregnacy....(subservient positions prevents them from taking the abstinance only route, doesn't it now).
well, maybe it's time for women just to decide that hey, I'll just have the kid and go on my way, the man can raise it, since he can provide for it, I'm lucky if I can provide for myself, so obviously I can't take care of the kids....let him have them.

At the very least there shoud be some sort of public statement that this pharmacy won't give people birth control and related items. Are they also not selling condoms? What a crock. I find this a little hard to beleive tho; did she speak with the managment? THe person behind the counter might've just been some schmuck, not the actual pharmacist. I have to wonder at that, becuase they aren't saying its the store's policy to not sell this item, heck, apparently they still carry it, this jerk just won't give it out.

I've seen articles on this in California, Ohio, Nebraska, Vermont and other places. Don't be lulled into thinking it's a "southern" or "hick" problem and letting it slide because you don't live in those regions. It's a semi-religious thing, and there are churches all over the country. All are in danger of losing these rights.

Simple solution...

Here's what I'd say to the Pharmacist...

"Hmm...I wasn't aware that my purchase choices were governed by what YOU deem good for me. Last I checked, this is a free country. To prove this point, I'm now going to exercise my freedom to now patronize another Pharmacy. One that wishes to operate as a business, not as a church. In addition, I'm going to exercise my freedom of speech, and let my friends, relatives, and acquaintences know that this Pharmacy only fills prescriptions based on staff, not doctor approval. Have a nice day, and good luck in whatever career path you choose after your Pharmacy closes."

Gazrok,

You have made a wonderful point, women can take these pharmacies to court in the base of religious persecution and sexual discrimination, if you are smart enough and get a good lawyer you can come out very good indeed.

Originally posted by marg6043
Gazrok,

You have made a wonderful point, women can take these pharmacies to court in the base of religious persecution and sexual discrimination, if you are smart enough and get a good lawyer you can come out very good indeed.

That would seem the right thing. However as shown already some states have laws to protect against that in place, and others are considering the same kind of legal protections.

I though that religious persecution and sexual discrimination was a big issue in this country and the law protects victims of such.

Then it would seem the law is trying to be both god and satan all at once> how can it have laws to protect against discrimination and yet at the same time have laws the protect those that discriminate???

Originally posted by feygan
Then it would seem the law is trying to be both god and satan all at once> how can it have laws to protect against discrimination and yet at the same time have laws the protect those that discriminate???

Well you got me on that one, I guess I will have to agree with you, our nation is not perfect.

Guess what I just read and article on the house bill letting doctors refuse care what I am getting out of all these is that religion of freedom has gone a step futher and by being back by the congress now we are being force religion upon, so this is discrimination any way you see it.

Even rape victims has to bear the burden of not being treated by medical profesionals, this is nothing more and nothing less that more discrimination against womens.

[edit on 17-9-2004 by marg6043]

Originally posted by marg6043

Our women right are being denied without impunity. Now if women around the country denied their husband of their �husband rights� you will see how the views will be change.

Ahh, the Lysistrata strategy... I knew Aristophanes was onto something... (eserver.org...)

Originally posted by ishari

Originally posted by marg6043

Our women right are being denied without impunity. Now if women around the country denied their husband of their �husband rights� you will see how the views will be change.

Ahh, the Lysistrata strategy... I knew Aristophanes was onto something... (eserver.org...)

I was told once in a past life reading that I was the fedra or fredra on another life and I kind of don't like her story.

Hmmm, well, going by religon, my religon says I am to kill you now, sorry, you have to follow your religon, I have to follow mine. See how quickly he would have filled it.

Using religon in business leads one place, Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. Nope can't serve you a glass of water, you are a jew and I am a Buddist. Nope can't fix your computer for you are a Hindu and I am a christian. This is a christian computer place, no one else. Oh an atheist, sorry, go away. Doesn't work.

James i see your point exactly and agree totally. But that is just what is happening. Should be interesting to see how far it gets pushed.
Hell in a handbasket??? Yes, ticket for one please. One way.