The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 280 No 7490 p213
23 February 2008

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 50K, Acrobat Reader

• Emeritus status
• Community pharmacy
• EHC (3)
• Dispensing
• The profession (2)
• Manufacturing
• Supply

Letters to the Editor

Emergency hormonal contraception (EHC)

Defending both stances

From Mr G. Diamond, MRPharmS

Simon Lewis is to be commended as a man of principle with regard to his stance as a Christian pharmacist refraining from issuing emergency hormonal contraception on prescription or a pharmacy sale (PJ, 9 February 2008, p149).

However, it is easy to grandstand on the moral high ground with any religious belief. Morality and ethics are not the sole preserve of those that cry “Lord, Lord” but are the domain of every pharmacist, too.

Therefore, I would defend the actions of pharmacists equally as strongly who choose to assist women and their partners to make the best choice for them and their family-planning needs.

Indeed, proposals to help pharmacists provide both long-term oral contraceptive options and EHC services should be welcomed wholeheartedly by the profession and public alike.

Religion in my experience tends to be historically a male dominated club that has given tokens of recognition to women and conspires to persuade believers that personal freedom is gained through compliance with its doctrines.

I have no qualms in helping distressed patients who genuinely need access to EHC in a pharmacy, since I am confident that pharmacists give a valuable and professional service in that respect.

Gerry Diamond
Manchester

Conscience or dogma?

From Mr J. Knowles, MRPharmS

I am sure that most pharmacists think carefully before refusing a service to the public. Those who deny emergency hormonal contraception on religious grounds, however, should not fool themselves into thinking they do so as a matter of conscience.

Simon Lewis proudly states that “as a Christian pharmacist” EHC may cause an abortion because it may prevent implantation (PJ, 9 February 2008, p149). We could have a lengthy debate about this but there is no point.

Positions like his can reflect religious dogma rather than conscience, and unfortunately the Royal Pharmaceutical Society still allows pharmacists to force their religious views onto the public in this way.

I only hope that he displays a prominent sign explaining that he refuses to supply EHC together with the address of the nearest pharmacy that will.

John Knowles
Lichfield, Staffordshire

Careful consideration

From Mr C. A. Boucker, MRPharmS

I respect Simon Lewis’s decision to refuse supply of emergency hormonal contraception on grounds of religious conscience (PJ, 9 February 2008, p149) and, although my own opinions differ, I think it is important that we all give careful consideration to our beliefs in this area, rather than just “follow the herd”.

I would be interested to know if pharmacists agreeing with Mr Lewis’s views have considered their attitude to the supply of hormonal contraception per se? The patient information leaflets for every oral contraceptive list prevention of implantation as a mechanism of action and thus the same objection could be raised.

Also, do we do enough to ensure that patients are aware of these potential issues so that they can make informed decisions?

Colin Boucker
Gloucester

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Community pharmacy)
Next Topic (Dispensing)