The AMA has adopted a policy that supports state laws allowing physicians to dispense medications that are unavailable from pharmacists who conscientiously object to filling a legally written prescription.
The new AMA position, adopted by its House of Delegates June 20, was supported by the AAFP, which in May adopted its own policy on the issue. The Academy policy affirms pharmacists' rights to conscientious objection while calling for governmental policies that protect patients' rights to legally prescribed and medically indicated treatments.
AMA Acts to Protect Access to Prescriptions
Academy Supports Policy on Conscientious Objection by Pharmacists
By Leslie Champlin
7/22/2005
"The pharmacist has the right to abide by his or her ethical principles or conscience, but not when that interferes with a decision the patient and doctor have made," said AAFP President Mary Frank, M.D., of Mill Valley, Calif., after the AMA vote. "The patient's needs have to take precedence."
Frank had testified in favor of the resolution, which calls on the association to:
Frank had testified in favor of the resolution, which calls on the association to:
- support legislation that requires referral to other pharmacies if a pharmacist objects to filling a legal prescription,
- work with state medical societies to support legislation that would protect a patient's ability to fill a legal and valid prescription, and
- work with other associations to guarantee individual pharmacists' right to conscientious objection while ensuring referral to another pharmacy.
The Academy also supported an amendment to the original resolution. The amendment, proposed during House of Delegates floor debate, called on AMA to support state legislation that would allow physicians to dispense medications when "no willing pharmacist (is) available within a 30-mile radius."
The amendment passed because AMA delegates recognized that, in such circumstances, "this becomes an access issue," said Frank.
Debate over pharmacists' rights to conscientiously object to filling prescriptions came to the fore in March when national news media picked up on the issue. Much of the debate centered on emergency contraception. But since then, anecdotes of pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for pain medication or birth control have surfaced, said Frank.
"Pharmacists may decide the prescription is for the wrong medication or for too large a prescription of pain medication," she said. "Or they may refuse to fill a prescription for oral contraception, without knowing that the prescription is to treat polycystic ovary disease or menstrual cramps."
Since March, 14 states have begun considering bills that would protect pharmacists who refused to fill prescriptions based on conscientious objections. Four states have bills that would require pharmacists to fill all legally written prescriptions.
Meanwhile, the Access to Legal Pharmaceuticals Act, S. 809, introduced by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., is before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. A companion bill, H.R. 1652, introduced by Reps. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., and Debbie Wasserman Schwultz, D-Fla., is before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health. Both bills acknowledge individuals' rights to religious belief and to legal contraception, but say, "An individual's right to religious belief and worship cannot impede an individual's access to legal prescriptions, including contraception."
The amendment passed because AMA delegates recognized that, in such circumstances, "this becomes an access issue," said Frank.
Debate over pharmacists' rights to conscientiously object to filling prescriptions came to the fore in March when national news media picked up on the issue. Much of the debate centered on emergency contraception. But since then, anecdotes of pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for pain medication or birth control have surfaced, said Frank.
"Pharmacists may decide the prescription is for the wrong medication or for too large a prescription of pain medication," she said. "Or they may refuse to fill a prescription for oral contraception, without knowing that the prescription is to treat polycystic ovary disease or menstrual cramps."
Since March, 14 states have begun considering bills that would protect pharmacists who refused to fill prescriptions based on conscientious objections. Four states have bills that would require pharmacists to fill all legally written prescriptions.
Meanwhile, the Access to Legal Pharmaceuticals Act, S. 809, introduced by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., is before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. A companion bill, H.R. 1652, introduced by Reps. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., and Debbie Wasserman Schwultz, D-Fla., is before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health. Both bills acknowledge individuals' rights to religious belief and to legal contraception, but say, "An individual's right to religious belief and worship cannot impede an individual's access to legal prescriptions, including contraception."
