Women sue Wal-Mart over contraception

2sisters

New Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2004
Messages
2,958
Reaction score
122
BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) -- Three Massachusetts women backed by pro-abortion rights groups sued Wal-Mart on Wednesday, saying the retail giant violated state law by failing to stock emergency contraception pills in its pharmacies.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/02/01/walmart.contraception.ap/index.html
What is so hard about just being responsible using birthcontrol during sex instead of the next day? There isn't a pill to prevent STD's so what would they do if they got an STD?
 
What is so hard about just being responsible using birthcontrol during sex instead of the next day?
Nothing for normal people. But this is all about targeting the evil empire that is Wal-Mart. I hope it goes before a judge with a brain and gets thrown out.
 
2sisters said:
the retail giant violated state law by failing to stock emergency contraception pills in its pharmacies.

What is so hard about just being responsible using birthcontrol during sex instead of the next day? There isn't a pill to prevent STD's so what would they do if they got an STD?
Um... let's see...

Rape? Broken Condom? Slipped Diaphragm? There is no 100% effective birth control.

How about simply that it is the law in Mass. that pharmacies have to supply it?
Or this? That a prescription is between a woman and her doctor- and it's no one else's business?
 
IrishMist said:
Um... let's see...

Rape? Broken Condom? Slipped Diaphragm? There is no 100% effective birth control.

How about simply that it is the law in Mass. that pharmacies have to supply it?
Or this? That a prescription is between a woman and her doctor- and it's no one else's business?
THANK YOU!:clap::clap:
 
IrishMist said:
How about simply that it is the law in Mass. that pharmacies have to supply it?
Or this? That a prescription is between a woman and her doctor- and it's no one else's business?

The suit will decide whether or not it is actually state law.
"Massachusetts pharmacies are required to stock all medications that are commonly prescribed to meet the usual needs of the community," Perkins said.
Let's go ahead and tie up the courts with bull***t. Personally if I can't find what I'm looking for I go somewhere else.
 
Sally said:
The suit will decide whether or not it is actually state law.
Let's go ahead and tie up the courts with bull***t. Personally if I can't find what I'm looking for I go somewhere else.
No, it is the law.

But I agree, this is bull-puckey. To have to go to court to force a pharmacy to fulfill it's duty... bull-puckey to the max. Can you imagine if it were Viagra that they wouldn't dispense?? Congress would hold an emergency meeting!! :D

As far as going to another pharmacy- that's fine if: there's another one to go to AND the pharmacist at WalMart didn't keep your prescription and refuse to return it.

It's a slippery slope. It's shameful that anyone has to go to court to have lawfully prescribed prescriptions filled. (That also includes birth control.)
 
If in the case of rape then it should be given at the hospital upon reporting the rape. I'm not saying there aren't situations when it's a good drug. It's just irresponsible to have unprotected sex period and not just because of unwanted pregnancies.
 
May be more here than meets the eye ladies. Some pharmacists have actually been fired for refusing to fill this prescription. They consider it to be "abortion," and refuse to give it to the women. If he pharmacist(s) in the instant case refuse to stock this medication due to this reason, then a lawsuit is the only remedy.
 
2sisters said:
BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) -- Three Massachusetts women backed by pro-abortion rights groups sued Wal-Mart on Wednesday, saying the retail giant violated state law by failing to stock emergency contraception pills in its pharmacies....
I think that I heard, by law, a pharmacy must stock commonly used drugs. This is not a "commonly used" drug. By that I mean, people don't come in every day with this prescription. It would have to be special ordered from their supplier.

I was very sick last year and on special medication. It was a real hassle getting the drugs from my pharmacy. They had to special order them each month for me--and they got the prescription wrong every month. I was on a very specific regimen and had to take my medication at a precise time and couldn't miss a day. So, I worried each month that I wouldn't get my refill in time.

My pharmacy did not stock my medicine because it was very expensive. They told me that they have to buy it from the supplier and cannot return it. Since it wasn't ordered very often, they chose to buy it only when a customer brought in a prescription. Perhaps, this is also Walmart's procedure.
 
2sisters said:
If in the case of rape then it should be given at the hospital upon reporting the rape. I'm not saying there aren't situations when it's a good drug. It's just irresponsible to have unprotected sex period and not just because of unwanted pregnancies.
Do you really think it is that simple? You are assuming that every rape victim goes to the hospital. There are many cases when women don't report their rapes. In my own situation, I was threatened and scared for the safety of myself and loved ones. Additionally, many times the media and the court rooms are not sympathetic to date rape victims. If I had access to this drug back then damn right I would have taken it. It isn't fun to be 14 years old and terrified that you might be pregant due to being raped.
 
Masterj said:
Do you really think it is that simple? You are assuming that every rape victim goes to the hospital. There are many cases when women don't report their rapes. In my own situation, I was threatened and scared for the safety of myself and loved ones. Additionally, many times the media and the court rooms are not sympathetic to date rape victims. If I had access to this drug back then damn right I would have taken it. It isn't fun to be 14 years old and terrified that you might be pregant due to being raped.
No, that's horrible, Masterj. I'm sorry that you had to go through that.
 
People don't see the control and power issues here. These "men" with their religious views are using their position as a pharmacist to "impose" and force their views and beliefs on women.

If the "men" don't feel they should stock and fullfil these RX, then they have the ultimate control and power if a women will have an unwanted baby due to "unfortunate circumstances".

These men were hired to do a job. That is to fill RX for everyone, not just "some people" whom they feel should receive the RX because they "don't want to".

Frankly, I will not allow anyone to "force" their religous view upon me, especially when it comes to doing their job or not.

This is all about what power and control guised up(once again) in religious and moral views.

Wal Mart is a national chain, it looks good on them to be taken to court to "force" their employess to do the job they were hired for.

It would be the same as the "pharmacist" refusing to fill an RX for a 15 year old girl for birth control pills. He says: No sex before marriage, according to my "religion and views" therefore I am not going to give you the prescription that your doctor prescribed. You you don't have these pills, of course you will not have sex. If you have sex and become pregnant, well it is your fault.

But little does the pharmacist know, that these pills were prescribed to this teenager for reasons other then birth control.

The job of the pharmacist is to fill ANY RX presented to him, not pick and choose which ones HE feels like filling.

There is the power and control issue.
 
Sally said:
Let's go ahead and tie up the courts with bull***t. Personally if I can't find what I'm looking for I go somewhere else.


I agree. I have gone to the pharmacy several times fr my childrens' allergy meds, and there have been several times that they have been out of the medication.. If I NEED it, you bet I will go somewhere else.
 
As I read this, this isn't about being "out" of this medication, this is about Walmart refusing to stock it for moral/philosophical reasons.

I don't know how I feel about that, it's a huge issue with good points on each side, this abortion debate.

But it isn't a stocking error, it's a decision made by management. And I AM getting tired up to here with ProLife intimidation, even though I see their point.
 
My brain is moldy for certain. I didn't even know there was such a pill.

Perhaps we need another choice in pills, the 'Morning Before Pill, just in case the girl donut take BC pills dang near every day, from her little roundy box.

My mom always said, keep yer dress down. Nancy Reagan had it right although it was about drugs it WORKS fer most anything. Nancy Reagan said, "JUST SAY NO".

My momma always said, girls can run faster with their dress up than guys can run with their pants down. My momma was born in 1888.

To say that I never had the URGE, would be a lie, but I always said NO.

My 'system' (Just say NO) worked really well. I had a long and happy marriage, eight children who had a live in father for 45 years, and a live in mother for 47 years, that would be me.

Boyfriends in my day, wanted 'IT' and did take no for an answer. These past few decades we now have show and tell TV and movies, they are visual training schools with NO ONE saying NO. Both leap into the air and land in the bedn then fight and lose brain cells over 'what should they do now when baby OOPS shows up'.

Never got pregnant out of wedlock, never fought or cried about a known or unknown sperm donor on topic of whut he should pay for, for 17 years of his worthless life (til the baby comes of age), for one night of bliss.

Heck there are so many more fun things to do other than concentrate on just one of lifes wonderful pleasures.

I have a friend that makes a most delicious cake, she calls it 'Better Than Sex, cake".

Help me out here, IS the morning after pill used for any other health condition for which I am not aware? IF IF it is then is should be stocked.

A better idea might be a pill that both could take before they go OUT, it would make you both forget about sex, and learn more about what you want for your FUTURE life.

You could call this pill 'Sexnesia'.


.
 
Under a capitalist system such as our companies operate,there used to be a element of choice.Companies had the right to offer the services/goods they wanted,and consumers had the choice of shopping where they pleased.I firmly believe in this system and commend Wal Mart for having the balls to exercise their rights to sell or not to sell....No one complains when Wal Mart refuses to sell Playboy.
 
proadvocate said:
Under a capitalist system such as our companies operate,there used to be a element of choice.Companies had the right to offer the services/goods they wanted,and consumers had the choice of shopping where they pleased.I firmly believe in this system and commend Wal Mart for having the balls to exercise their rights to sell or not to sell....No one complains when Wal Mart refuses to sell Playboy.

I agree with you to a certain extent, Proadvocate, but Playboy isn't obtained by prescription.
This is medical- a prescription lawfully dispensed by a physican. In my opinion, that makes it a whole different matter.
 
IrishMist said:
I agree with you to a certain extent, Proadvocate, but Playboy isn't obtained by prescription.
This is medical- a prescription lawfully dispensed by a physican. In my opinion, that makes it a whole different matter.
Not at all.In a system of Free Enterprise a company does have the right to sell or refuse to sell any given product.The problem here is that liberals like to overlook the foundations of the American system and impose their own warped ideas.I do not think any of the founding fathers would have agreed to the senseless murder of thousands of unborn each year as a mere method of birth control.Quite the contrary they practiced a system of keep your fly zipped and your skirts down.Sadly liberals wanna have their sex and eliminate any unwanted consequenses...Wal Mart should be applauded for their refusal to participate in the murder of kids.
 
proadvocate said:
Not at all.In a system of Free Enterprise a company does have the right to sell or refuse to sell any given product.The problem here is that liberals like to overlook the foundations of the American system and impose their own warped ideas.I do not think any of the founding fathers would have agreed to the senseless murder of thousands of unborn each year as a mere method of birth control.Quite the contrary they practiced a system of keep your fly zipped and your skirts down.Sadly liberals wanna have their sex and eliminate any unwanted consequenses...Wal Mart should be applauded for their refusal to participate in the murder of kids.
The founding fathers also didn't think that I, as a woman, had a right to vote... and let's not get into the slavery issue, huh? Please forgive me if I don't have a desire to return to the colonial mentality.

Plan B does NOT cause abortions!!

Here's some information from the ETSU College of Nursing:
http://www.etsu.edu/studenthealth/Emergency_Birth_Control.htm#General%20Information

General Information About the Medication Called "Plan B"

Plan B is the brand name of an oral emergency contraceptive medication. Plan B is very effective in preventing a pregnancy if taken within 72 hours after unprotected sex. (Some studies say 120 hours, but the FDA approves only 72 hours.) Plan B is not as effective as more traditional forms of birth control. (e.g. Condoms, Birth Control Pills, Depo- Provera, NuvaRing)


Plan B is sometimes referred to as the "morning after pill". Plan B is NOT the medication ( Mifepristone) that is referred to as the "early option/abortion pill". Plan B will NOT cause an abortion. Plan B will NOT terminate an established pregnancy.

Plan B will not protect you from sexually transmitted infections

 
Kudos all the way from Canada to Irish Mist.

I thought this was Law and that Wal Mart is breaking the law to enforce it"s view, religious and moral on its customers and therefore violating their legal right.

These women have a legal right to medicine that is required by law to be stocked and available. WalMart refuses to follow the law and are breaking the law in the "name" of their religious and moral views.

So they are operating as "thugs" when it comes to women, after all this is all about, domination, power and control once again "guised" up as "my religious right". Sorry, no one can "detrimently" affect my legal right and security of the person because they leave me no choice but to suffer, because of their views.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
95
Guests online
818
Total visitors
913

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,759
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top