From Mr B. Whittaker, MRPharmS
SIR,—I wish to comment on the letter from Mrs Smith (PJ, October 30, p708) as it typifies the monopoly of morals attitude exhibited by several religions: "Only we are right." I agree with her that a child should be brought up in a loving family relationship and would go further: every child should be wanted. Also, the choice of having a child should be with the woman and not the church. In this age of health care, a pharmacist is deemed to be accessible and approachable, as contrasted with the surgery. How long does it take to get an appointment?
I deem it permissible for a pharmacist to supply one pack of EHC after questioning and receiving satisfactory answers. The pharmacist should treat the patient and not impose his or her moral code.
For comparison, if a careless adult has a chip-pan fire, he or she is entitled to call the fire service to prevent the house being burned down. They expect the service and might receive a caution, but not a moral lecture.
Regarding 12-year-olds, do we want teenage mums? Also there are others. In this area there is a chronic shortage of adoptive parents, throwing a burden on to the local council who then have to take children into care. They often run away and finish up on the streets. I have read that potential adopters complain of the bureaucracy involved. Does Mrs Smith think it right that a child should be born to be adopted?
Society is changing. We have to recognise divorce, contraception, abortion, child abuse, paedophiles, drugs and unemployment. It is a cold, hard world out there: no use looking heavenward. My sympathies are reserved for the millions of girls in the third world who become brides at 12 years upwards.
Bernard Whittaker
Keighley, Yorkshire