Address to College Council and Pharmacists AGM, College of Pharmacists
of B.C.
Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
20 November, 2004
Reproduced with permission
The following address was made in support of a motion requesting that
the College of Pharmacists of BC respect freedom of conscience among
pharmacists, the fourth year such a motion has been brought forward. The
motion was defeated. The College has been hostile to the concept of
freedom of conscience for some time. (See
Project Report
2001-01) [Administrator]
I believe a pharmacist should have the right to
refuse a prescription that is not in the best
interest of their client.
My name is Ann Nadalini, and I have been a
pharmacist for 20 years. I have worked half of my
career in a hospital pharmacy, and the other half in
a community setting.
Every day I make judgements that affect my
client's lives, and yes I have refused
prescriptions, and with counselling have helped
these clients make healthier choices (dimenhydrinate
injection, Plan-B, zopiclone, ativan).
It is important for a pharmacist in their
clinical practice to utilize all their resources and
abilities: intellectual, ethical, and moral. When
clients come to my pharmacy, and I counsel them,
they know I care about their well-being.
My job is to be their champion in the area of
medical and health related issues. Every client that
comes into my pharmacy I treat as if they were a
member of my family. I treat each
client with dignity and respect. In order to really
care for my client's health, I utilize both
intellect and ethical judgements. The
ethics I use are based on my personality, my morals
and my beliefs.
As an example, we all choose our physicians with
care. We take into consideration the doctor's moral
viewpoint on sensitive issues, such as abortion and
euthanasia. Doctors are not forced by
their college to provide abortions, or write
prescriptions for emergency contraception, or birth
control pills for that matter. Doctors are not cut
from one cookie cutter, so that they all fit the
same profile, and so it is with pharmacists.
I will not be forced to dispense gravol
injection, zopiclone, or ECP's, if I feel it is not
in the best interest of my client. To do so would be
to try to separate my intellect from my ethics. To
do that would create a corrupt personality, which is
untrue to my client and myself. If a
client does not agree with my intellectual, or
ethical standards, they have the free will to use an
alternate provider, even if they have to travel down
the block, or around the province to get it.
We are not robots that cater to a mass; we are
professional practicing individual pharmacists who
dispense medication to our community of friends and
family. We should have the right to refuse
prescriptions based on our own intellectual and
ethical abilities. That is why I support the
resolution that Value VIII of the Code be amended,
so as to be aligned with the medical profession, and
state:
A pharmacist will inform a
client when his own moral/religious/ethical beliefs
may influence his recommendations, so that the
client may have the option and freedom to seek
advice and or services elsewhere.
If the College makes it illegal to refuse a
prescription, based on intellectual and ethical
abilities then they take away the very heart of what
a pharmacy practice should be.