Kaleen, a high school senior, had received a prescription for oral contraceptives from a local family planning clinic and went to a Walgreens to have it filled. Because it was just before the pharmacy closed for the night, there was only one pharmacist on duty. He asked what she was going to use the prescription for; to treat a disease such as endometriosis or irregular menstrual periods or if she intended to use the prescription for contraception. When she replied that it was for birth control, the pharmacist, who strongly believed in Constitutional personhood, refused to fill the prescription, explaining that to do so would be against his religious beliefs. She thought that he was joking. The pharmacist made it very clear to Kaleen that he was not joking and because of his religious beliefs, he had concluded that he could not dispense contraceptives, especially to a minor. He also refused to transfer the prescription to another pharmacy or tell her how or where she could get the prescription filled. Kaleen filed a complaint with the State’s Department of Regulation and Licensing’s Pharmacy Board. When the pharmacist was called before the Board to explain his actions, he stated that from his point of view, distributing contraceptives would be akin to committing a crime against the Constitution and human life. In considering the actions of this pharmacist, the review board quoted the standards of care for pharmacists which included the requirement that: “a pharmacist who exercises a conscientious objection to dispensing of a prescription must ensure that there is an alternative mechanism for the patient to receive his or her medication, including informing the patient of their options to obtain their prescription." Questions • What is Constitutional Personhood? • Does a pharmacist ever have a right to refuse to fill a prescription? • Does the fact that Kaleen was a minor affect the legality of the action?
Hello, Im required to do this case study this week. I am new to this website.
Case Study
Kaleen, a high school senior, had received a prescription for oral contraceptives from a local family planning clinic and went to a Walgreens to have it filled. Because it was just before the pharmacy closed for the night, there was only one pharmacist on duty. He asked what she was going to use the prescription for; to treat a disease such as endometriosis or irregular menstrual periods or if she intended to use the prescription for contraception. When she replied that it was for birth control, the pharmacist, who strongly believed in Constitutional personhood, refused to fill the prescription, explaining that to do so would be against his religious beliefs. She thought that he was joking.
The pharmacist made it very clear to Kaleen that he was not joking and because of his
religious beliefs, he had concluded that he could not dispense contraceptives, especially to a minor. He also refused to transfer the prescription to another pharmacy or tell her how or where she could get the prescription filled. Kaleen filed a complaint with the State’s Department of Regulation and Licensing’s Pharmacy Board. When the pharmacist was called before the Board to explain his actions, he stated that from his point of view, distributing contraceptives would be akin to committing a crime against the Constitution and human life. In considering the actions of this pharmacist, the review board quoted the standards of care for pharmacists which included the requirement that: “a pharmacist who exercises a conscientious objection to dispensing of a prescription must
ensure that there is an alternative mechanism for the patient to receive his or her medication, including informing the patient of their options to obtain their prescription."
Questions
• What is Constitutional Personhood?
• Does a pharmacist ever have a right to refuse to fill a prescription?
• Does the fact that Kaleen was a minor affect the legality of the action?
• What are the ethical principles involved in this case? Do you think that the pharmacist’s
actions constituted a danger to the health, welfare, or safety of a patient?
• Was the pharmacist practicing in a manner which did not follow the standard of care?
• If you were on the Board, what would you do about the pharmacist’s license? Revoke
it? Add restrictions to his practice? Other?
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 3 steps
