Tuesday, June 21, 2005

AMA Accidentally Promotes Good Social Policy

How do you get the American Medical Association off their fat reactionary asses to support progressive patients' rights? Poach on their territory, that's how.

The AMA has finally taken action against the unspeakably eville and frightening trend of pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for drugs they morally oppose (originally emergency contraception, then birth control pills, now apparently also psychotropics and pain meds), a trend which, btw, is given strong implicit support by the Clinton-and-Kerry-sponsored Workplace Religious Freedom Act.

[On a side note, it appears that not only are pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions, they're also refusing to return them to the patients so they can have them filled elsewhere. I am so filled with bile my fingers are digesting the keys as I type.]

The AMA voted yesterday to lobby for state laws allowing docs to dispense medications themselves if no pharmacist within 30 miles is willing to fill a prescription. The beauty of this, of course, is that it's blatantly a pissing contest: how dare those insignificant little pill-pushers countermand my orders! If I say a patient will have psychotropic drugs, He Will By God Have Psychotropic Drugs, if I have to bottle them up for him myself!

Whatever. I don't give a fuck, in this instance, why they're doing it. This is a rapidly snowballing crisis: 14 states are considering conscientious-objection legislation for pharmacists, and 9 others are already passing legislation to allow pharmacists to refuse to fill scripts 'for any reason.' That should scare the piss out of anyone who values their freedom not to have their pharmaceutical life arbitrarily dictated by some psychotic stranger, which rubric should, I would imagine, cover most of humanity. Apparently barring the legislatures of those 23 states, that is.

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com