Current Events > CVS fired Arizona pharmacist who refused to transgender woman's medication

(+) Yeah! (+)

*provide

Fair, next

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.azcentral.com/amp/810613002

CVS has fired a pharmacist who refused to fill the prescription of a transgender woman seeking hormone medication at a Fountain Hills location, and the drug store chain apologized for the incident.

Hilde Hall, the transgender woman, detailed her encounter with the pharmacist in a blog post published on the ACLU of Arizona's website Thursday.

Hilde Hall, a transgender woman, says a CVS pharmacist refused to fill her hormone medication and loudly questioned her in front of other customers.
Hilde Hall, a transgender woman, says a CVS pharmacist refused to fill her hormone medication and loudly questioned her in front of other customers.
She claims the pharmacist loudly questioned her in front of other customers and rejected her and her doctor's requests to transfer the prescription to another location.

News of the encounter comes weeks after another woman, Nicole Arteaga, was denied her miscarriage medication at a Walgreens pharmacy in Peoria.

Both pharmacists' actions were justified under Arizona law.

Arizona is one of six states that allows pharmacies and pharmacists to refuse to fill a prescription on religious or moral grounds.

In Arteaga's case, Walgreens stood behind its employee. The pharmacy chain released a statement after the incident, saying company policy allows pharmacists to step away from filling a prescription anytime they have a moral objection.

CVS, however, fired its employee and apologized to Hall Friday.

The idea that a pharmacy can refuse to provide medication on religious grounds is insane
---

How dare he not transgender the medication
---

DrizztLink posted...

How dare he not transgender the medication

lol
---

Arizona is one of six states that allows pharmacies and pharmacists to refuse to fill a prescription on religious or moral grounds.

that's the stupidest shit I've ever heard. unless there's a "public option" for pharmacies (or some other dispensary that is obligated to fulfill any and all requests it is able to), it would basically allow a community to collectively and legally deny medication to certain people, similar to how sundown towns treat non-whites

DrizztLink posted...

How dare he not transgender the medication

How dare he assume the medication's gender!
---

FrisbeeDude posted...

Arizona is one of six states that allows pharmacies and pharmacists to refuse to fill a prescription on religious or moral grounds.

remove those states from existence immediately
---

She claims the pharmacist loudly questioned her in front of other customers and rejected her and her doctor's requests to transfer the prescription to another location.

Refusing to fill is one thing... Refusing to transfer? That's 100% bullshit and that Pharmacist deserved to be terminated on the spot for that
---

The pharmacist was within their legal rights to do so, so this isn't a justified firing.
---

Delirious_Beard posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

Arizona is one of six states that allows pharmacies and pharmacists to refuse to fill a prescription on religious or moral grounds.

remove those states from existence immediately

There is some merit behind that though. It's not as black and white as you think. Some Doctors are absolute trash. They write prescriptions with dosing not suitible for the age or it's flat out WAY too strong. There is also TONS of fake prescriptions out there for drug addicts. Hell, there are legit Doctors that run pill mills at their office and write absurd amounts for control substances that we refuse all the time. You know it's a pill mill because that Doctors office is a cash only office.

If you think Pharmacist should just fill every prescription without fail then you are ignorant and don't know what it's like to work in retail Pharmacy.
---

thelovefist posted...

The pharmacist was within their legal rights to do so, so this isn't a justified firing.

Refusing to transfer is a justifiable termination. Period. No excuse for that unless it was a C-II and wasn't transferable.
---

known2FAIL posted...

There is some merit behind that though. It's not as black and white as you think. Some Doctors are absolute trash. They write prescriptions with dosing not suitible for the age or it's flat out WAY too strong. There is also TONS of fake prescriptions out there for drug addicts. Hell, there are legit Doctors that run pill mills at their office and write absurd amounts for control substances that we refuse all the time. You know it's a pill mill because that Doctors office is a cash only office.

What does that have to do with religious or moral grounds, though? A pharmacist can refuse if they are suspicious or it could be dangerous, and neither of those things are about religion or morals.

known2FAIL posted...

thelovefist posted...

The pharmacist was within their legal rights to do so, so this isn't a justified firing.

Refusing to transfer is a justifiable termination. Period. No excuse for that unless it was a C-II and wasn't transferable.

I don't know what those words mean so I will take your word for it.
---

As a pharmacist:

She claims the pharmacist loudly questioned her in front of other customers and rejected her and her doctor's requests to transfer the prescription to another location.

Here. Right here. This is where the pharmacist in question failed. Yes, we are able to refuse to fill and dispense prescriptions depending on state law, but we are then obligated to refer the patient over to a pharmacy where they can receive it.
---

thelovefist posted...

The pharmacist was within their legal rights to do so, so this isn't a justified firing.

People get fired without breaking the law all the time.
---

Super Saiyan 3 Goku posted...

As a pharmacist:

She claims the pharmacist loudly questioned her in front of other customers and rejected her and her doctor's requests to transfer the prescription to another location.

Here. Right here. This is where the pharmacist in question failed. Yes, we are able to refuse to fill and dispense prescriptions depending on state law, but we are then obligated to refer the patient over to a pharmacy where they can receive it.

this seems like the biggest issue. does Arizona's pertinent religious freedom law allow pharmacists to do this?

Good, fuck that scumbag pharmacist
---

Fucking religious gatekeeper. Imagine if this dude got denied service of any kind due to some ridiculous Muslim belief. He'd probably lose his mind while remaining completely oblivious.
---