Over the past year, there have been a number of reported incidents of pharmacies refusing to fill birth control prescriptions for ideological reasons. In as many as 20 states pharmacies are able to refuse to fill women’s prescriptions for contraception, including the morning-after pill.

When a woman and her doctor decide that a prescription for contraception is in the woman's best interest, a third party has no right to override that decision.  Pharmacies must ensure that patients get their doctor-prescribed medication without delay or inconvenience. 

Talking points

• The concept is simple: Women walk into a pharmacy with a birth control prescription from their doctor and walk out with the medication -- without intimidation, without inconvenience, and without delay.
• In many rural areas in this country there is only one pharmacy, and in many instances only one pharmacist.  For women in these areas simply “going elsewhere” to have their prescriptions filled is not an inconvenience, it is an impossibility.  
• When a woman and her doctor have made the decision that a prescription for birth control is in her best interest, a third party has no right to override that decision. The pharmacy has a duty to dispense.
• Pharmacies have a moral and legal obligation not to endanger their patients’ health by withholding basic health care.  For the 95% of women who will use contraception during their lifetimes, birth control is basic, essential health care. 
• It’s shocking enough that there are pharmacies that won’t fill prescriptions, but it’s even more disturbing that there are politicians working to encourage them.
• Timely access to birth control is essential to preventing unintended pregnancies.  Those who oppose abortion should be working to ensure women’s access to their prescriptions not blocking their access. 
• Women are acting responsibly by taking control of their reproductive health.  They should be treated with respect and dignity from their pharmacist and should not be subjected to lectures and intimidation. 

More background information

From The New York Times: "A pharmacist's refusal to fill a prescription for birth control or EC has the pernicious effect of delaying, and sometimes even denying, a woman's access to medications that may be urgently needed. Although allowing pharmacists to refer women to another pharmacist or pharmacy to fill a birth control or EC prescription may seem at first blush like a reasonable compromise, ... it is a prescription for disaster in the real world because many of the pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions berate, belittle or lecture their customers. A pharmacist's refusal to fill a prescription is an intolerable abuse of power, and pharmacists have no business forcing their own moral or ethical views onto customers who may not share them." [Continue reading...]

From the St. Petersburg Times: "The clash between religious morals and personal freedom may soon be coming to your drugstore. A growing number of pharmacists are refusing to fill legal prescriptions for contraceptives, saying that enabling their use violates their own religious beliefs. The sad irony is that such denials - making it harder for women to exercise their family planning options - will likely increase the number of abortions. In a metropolitan area filled with pharmacies and physicians, the only casualty from such refusals may be the customer's pride. But in small-town communities where doctors and pharmacists are scarce, the denial of prescriptions for items such as birth control pills, hormone patches and the morning-after pill could have serious consequences." [Continue reading...]

From The Washington Post: "Pharmacists are regulated by state laws and can face disciplinary action from licensing boards. But the only case that has gotten that far involves Neil T. Noesen, who in 2002 refused to fill a University of Wisconsin student's birth control pill prescription at a Kmart in Menomonie, Wis., or transfer the prescription elsewhere. An administrative judge last month recommended Noesen be required to take ethics classes, alert future employers to his beliefs and pay what could be as much as $20,000 to cover the costs of the legal proceedings. The state pharmacy board will decide whether to impose that penalty next month." [Continue reading...]

From The Alan Guttmacher Institute: "U.S. policymakers first enacted "refusal clauses" in response to the nationwide legalization of abortion in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. These early policies—adopted by the federal government and all but a handful of states—were designed to allow doctors and other direct providers of health care to refuse to perform or assist in an abortion, and hospitals to refuse to allow abortions on their premises. The federal policy also applies to sterilization, and a minority of states’ policies apply to sterilization or contraception more broadly." [Continue reading...]

From CBS news: "The battle over reproductive rights has spilled over into your local drugstore. Lawmakers in at least 26 states have introduced bills that would allow pharmacists to refuse to fill birth control prescriptions if it offends their religious or moral beliefs." [Continue reading...]

A personal story:

Becky P.'s Story

"I'd like to share my personal experience at the Pamida Pharmacy on Saturday, April 16th, 2005.

I walked up to a busy counter with a prescription for two medications. The pharmacist took the note and told me she'd fill one medication, but I'd have to come back on Monday to have the birth control filled by the other pharmacist. I verbally questioned this, because she herself was a pharmacist. Her answer was "for moral reasons I will not fill a birth control prescription."

I challenged the pharmacist by telling her, "It's a valid medical prescription signed by a medical doctor. Your other customers are receiving service. I shouldn't have to come back Monday when I'm here now." I was refused a second time on the same grounds and told to try another pharmacy. My response, "No, my insurance information is here and this is where I come to get my prescriptions." I was refused a third time. When I asked her to show me written documentation that would give her a legal right to refuse, she had nothing to show me.

Correspondence with the Pamida pharmacist manager was most disturbing. I was again told to come back when the other pharmacist was working or to follow a sticker on the prescription that instructs the patient to call in their refill a week ahead of time. Although they upheld the actions of their pharmacist, I was not told anything regarding their policy on the issue or given any evidence that the pharmacist acted within her legal right.

We are constantly being confronted with such emotionally charged issues as abortion, family welfare, domestic abuse, etc. It seems very contradictory to refuse a product whose absence will only make these issues more volatile."