Milledgeville Pharmacist Refuses to Fill Prescription for Miscarriage Patient...
- Thread starter goldfly
- Start date
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
that is rejecting it not on medical reasons
that is rejecting it for moral reasons
imo of course since she didn't say she didn't need it for medical reasons.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Shenanigans.
A pharmacist should be able to recognize doses and realize what it's being used for. Even with that, it's not really the pharmacists job to play judge jury and executioner. They can be skeptical but if a doctor is just prescribing a drug to induce labor and that's it, it's almost certainly not for an abortion. As in your quoted text, they say that Misoprostol isn't as effective on its own. But then agian, that would require you to remain consistent. My source was a doctor as well, and had to do with just the success of misoprostol on its own.
https://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2013/07/27/what-is-the-mexican-abortion-pill-and-how-safe-is-it/
Basically, find an OB/GYN or physician who just prescribes it for an abortion, it doesn't exist.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
No if I was being you, I"d be defending a doctors "right" to refuse medical service to someone in need.
That is rejecting it for reasons unknown.
You are injecting morality into the equation here, and I understand what might lead you to believe it's involved, but that may not actually be the case at all.
Before I make any real judgement I'd need to know more about the Doctor. Is he/she legit?
Also, from what little I just read about miscarriages, this particular method of removing a fetus is somewhat irregular -- so I can see where there might be some waffling on the part of a pharmacist.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
pretty odd to question the doctor more than the pharmacist imo
being irregular or not has nothing to do with it. it is done this way sometimes and the unless the pharmacist has a medical reasoning for withholding the drug a doctor said the patient should take, they should do their job and give that drug to the person
end of story
Please, read again: There are several regimens and dosages used to terminate pregnancies using Misoprostol alone. The success rate depends on the length of the pregnancy as there is nearly a 100% completion of abortion for patients less than 6 weeks gestation. For pregnancies less than or equal to 16 weeks gestation, the success rate is 85 to 90%. For patients 17 weeks or greater, the rate is 92 to 96% successful.
Misoprostol has a 92-96% success rate, BY ITSELF, after 17 weeks. Period. That rate goes up when you add the other three medications.
The more likely explanation is that the pharmacist wasn't familiar with the methodology and/or the doctor and didn't feel comfortable taking the risk. Which is clearly his/her (justifiable) prerogative.
But DAMN CONSERVATIVES, and such ...
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
IF
that is the case
she sounds like her license should be revoked since she doesn't sound qualified for the job and could be giving bad advice and putting peoples lives in danger
She works at a Wal-Mart in Milledgeville. I'm hoping that people aren't living and dying by her advice.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
uh, she is distributing drugs
and from your scenario, she doesn't know what some of them do or why you would take it
i would say some people could be living or dying from this under trained person
My scenario was akin to the belief that some doctors have regarding prescribing ecstasy to children with autism. Or veterans with PTSD.
Hey, there's (some teeny tiny, but enough that EVERYONE should know and accept it) clinical evidence to support the practice.
Of course, this situation is not as extreme as either of us are making it.
It's really actually quite stupid.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
I read it. And the results you're linking are different which is what's giving me concern. They often won't prescribe it later on because the health risks to the mother are much higher. Again, we're dealing in the real world here, not theoretical.
From one of your sources
"The medicine still works, but the risk of heavy bleeding, serious pain and complications increase the longer the pregnancy lasts."
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
MDMA is illegal. Not comparable.
So you understand that this would support the pharmacists position?
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
If the circumstances were that way. She was 5-6 weeks according to the article. Not 12+ weeks. And according to article not prescribed anything else as OB/GYN and physicians often do to the point that it's talked aobutby WHO and other sites. So moot point.
Irrelevant to my point.
I know ignoring facts makes it easier to conclude the same thing over and over again, but this has already been amply rebutted.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
How is it irrelevant. Can't prescribe something that's not carried at any pharmacy in the US.
My point was that it is a methodology (Misoprostol for miscarriages) that may not universally be known or accepted AND because of its alternate uses it is understandable why the pharmacist might exercise a degree of skepticism.