Plan B, 'Morning After' Pill
Photo: Joe Raedle / Getty Images
The government and supporters of a woman's right to make autonomous decisions about her own reproductive cycle support the compromise because it ensures that women will be able to obtain emergency contraception on the same basis as any other medication. Opponents of choice and autonomy, however, are still unhappy — they seem to be going along with it because it's the best they'll get, but they are clearly distressed that they won't be able to stand in the doorway and thwart women's access to means of preventing pregnancy.
Francis Manion, who represents the anti-abortion pharmacists, called the settlement "a good step in the right direction." The amended rule recognizes that some pharmacists object to emergency contraception, "but that doesn't mean the woman needs to go to another store" with her prescription, Manion said. ...
Even the objecting pharmacists pronounced it fair, though the agreement didn't go as far as they had hoped.
Melanie Antuma, a pharmacist for CVS/Caremark in Mt. Prospect who was one of the original plaintiffs, said of the settlement: "I'm OK with it. I know they're trying to balance the two interests. But I think they could do better." Antuma said she would have been happier if store owners -- not just employees -- were also given the right to object to dispensing Plan B.
Source: Chicago Tribune
Emergency contraception is easier now for most women to get because it's been made available over the counter and there is no need to wonder if the pharmacist will cause trouble. Not everyone has it easy, though, because girls under 17 still need a prescription as do women who want insurance reimbursement. Conflicts will thus continue between women who have the gall to want to exercise control over their reproductive organs and pharmacists — mostly men and all religious, from what I've read — who believe that a theoretical fertilized egg has more rights to the body of the woman standing before them than the woman herself.
Personal autonomy, one of the foundations of modern, liberal democracy, is scary to religious authoritarians. They themselves have difficulty imagining living a life without hard, fast rules that constrain all their choices, but what makes them truly dangerous is their unwillingness to allow others to live without those rules as well. Perhaps they don't like being reminded that it's possible.