Wednesday, April 19, 2006

The law of unintended consequences

Laura Billings has a column in yesterday's Pioneer Press that is definitely worth a read. Its title is Conscience clause for pharmacists could be bitter pill. You said it Laura. In the column, boys and girls, it is pointed out that the so-called conscience clause bill now under consideration has ramifications far beyond what most people (or "folks" as Katie might say!) think.

RU-486, the morning-after pill, and perhaps contraception first come to mind with respect to a pharmacist's "conscience." Bad as this is, it's not all. You can read the bill in its current form here.

As Billings points out, under the bill pharmacists could refuse to fill Viagara prescriptions for divorced men, or insulin for chubby patients with adult-onset diabetes, or prescriptions to combat sexually-transmitted diseases.

How about a pharmacist who thinks anti-depressants are over-prescribed? Or one who believes Lipitor is also a balm for poor life-style choices? This is plain nuts, boys and girls.

Since Spot is a shameless self-promoter, he wants you to read his posts about how we can make sure we don't educate sanctimonious twit pharmacists at public expense, and then Spot's new hymn for you to sing softly to yourself at the bus stop.

Link to Billings' column via the Power Liberal.


No comments: