Walgreens needs to walk its prescription fairness talk

How many times do the corporate suits at Walgreens in Illinois have to be told that, in the great scheme of things, what a prescription filled at their pharmacies is used for is really none of their business? Apparently at least once more. Back in 2012, the company was called on the carpet by the New Mexico American Civil Liberties Union when one of its Albuquerque pharmacists refused to fill a prescription for birth control pills because of his religious beliefs. The national drugstore chain agreed in 2013 to affirm its policy of filling birth control medications “as efficiently as other prescriptions without imposing any burden on the customer.”

Yet, in 2016 a pharmacist at the Walgreens at Coors and Montaño refused to fill a prescription for a synthetic hormone with several uses, including treating stomach ulcers, as well as softening the cervix for insertion of an IUD. The customer was told to drive to another Walgreens to get the medication and, in its best corporate doublespeak, Walgreens company officials claim that shows they “take very seriously our responsibility to serve the prescription needs of our patients ... while also respecting the sincerely held views of our pharmacists. We believe our policy has been very effective in doing that.”

Um, no. What it has been effective in is allowing a pharmacist to jump to the conclusion the hormone was not for its intended procedure, but to induce an abortion, as well as to allegedly mock the woman trying to get the medication for her daughter with a snarky “Oh, I have a pretty good idea” what it’s going to be used for.

In a new letter to Walgreens, the ACLU emphasizes that forcing customers to travel to another pharmacy after being denied service is a significant burden. As in 2012, it asks the company to immediately address the discriminatory practice and specify steps to prevent such discrimination, as well as a lawsuit contending a violation of the state Human Rights Act.

Attorney Erin Armstrong writes, “Religious liberty does not mean the right to discriminate against others. Walgreens should take reasonable steps to accommodate employees’ religious beliefs and practices, but it cannot do so by imposing additional discriminatory burdens on women.”

Pharmacists are expected to do many things beyond simply counting out pills — including checking databases to prevent opioid doctor shopping, making sure the drugs in new prescriptions don’t conflict with current medications and negotiating the bureaucracy of prescription insurance coverage.

But they, of all professionals, should know there are many uses for the same medications. And Walgreens officials should know their company needs to walk the talk they instituted four years ago and figure out a way for staff at each of its stores to fill all prescriptions without second-guessing doctors and patients.