Standing up for pharmacists

Although you may not think about it often, your pharmacist plays an important role in keeping you healthy. The person who sees you after your doctor's appointment, dispensing your medicine and giving you advice and information on how to take it, is an important link in your health-care chain.

Are you aware, though, that your pharmacist isn't required to fill every prescription? There are several reasons for this. What those reasons are is the centerpiece of a current debate in our state.

This debate stems from a June 1 draft ruling by the state Board of Pharmacy outlining expectations for a pharmacist when he or she does not fill a prescription. The ruling said a pharmacist has the flexibility to fill or not fill a prescription.

This rule generated a lot of media coverage, and generally was portrayed as a new "right to refuse." It is not.

As mentioned earlier, pharmacists already have the "right to refuse" — and for good reason. I know because I am not only a legislator, but also a pharmacist. In fact, not only has this been a long-standing policy, but also an important one to the patient's health.

For example, pharmacists have the right to refuse to fill a prescription for medical reasons, such as an allergy or drug-to-drug interaction. In these cases, we contact the prescriber and make the appropriate changes before our patients receive medicine. A pharmacist may not fill a prescription if he or she believes it's fraudulent, because the pharmacy doesn't stock the drug, or because the pharmacist believes the patient has dangerous intentions — like committing a suicide overdose.

If unable to dispense the medicine, it is common practice to refer the patient to another pharmacy. In fact, that requirement is in the pharmacy board's ruling.

So, why all the controversy? It's called Plan B, and it's been a political issue for more than a year.

Plan B is an emergency contraceptive also known as the "morning-after pill." It comes in the form of two birth-control pills taken by mouth after unprotected sex. The drug can prevent an egg from being released, prevent its fertilization, or prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the womb.

The pharmacy board's decision as it relates to Plan B is what stirred controversy. The ruling allowed pharmacists to choose not to dispense Plan B. Those protesting the ruling say it infringes on a woman's right to choose. The governor said it was a "mistake," and some of my colleagues in the Legislature promised to submit legislation to "correct" this decision.

As a pharmacist watching this debate, I want to stand up for my profession.

From my perspective, this issue is really about politics. It began nationally more than a year ago when advocacy groups opposed a federal Food and Drug Administration decision not to grant Plan B over-the-counter status.

It continued in our own state earlier this year with Senate Joint Memorial 8032. The memorial, which died in the Senate Rules Committee, formally asked Congress to grant over-the-counter status access for Plan B.

In reality, Washington actually offers more access and choice than most states by allowing pharmacists with special training to dispense an emergency contraceptive without a doctor's prescription. Thanks to Don Downing, clinical associate professor at the University of Washington, our state became the first in the nation to go this route, and today more than 3,500 certified pharmacists can independently dispense Plan B.

This is the type of flexibility our state is known for, and we should continue this type of flexibility. That's why the ruling by the Board of Pharmacy was right on the mark.

For many reasons, we cannot and should not turn to a law requiring every pharmacy to carry every drug. This wouldn't be good medicine. Pharmacies are small businesses, and forcing them to stock all drugs would make running that business extremely expensive. The result would be fewer pharmacies, especially in rural areas, and diminished access to needed medicines.

Although many consider pharmacists among the most trusted professionals, they sometimes don't fully understand the role pharmacists play.

Pharmacists are not, as some have implied, political robots trying to use an emerging issue to promote their own agenda. They are highly educated, trained professionals who keep patients' best interests in mind.

It's a mistake to use this health ruling as a political issue, looking at it through a narrow lens and discounting the many important, health-conscious reasons why a prescription may not be filled.

Questions? Talk to your pharmacist.

Sen. Linda Evans Parlette, R-Wenatchee, is the deputy Senate Republican leader and serves on the Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee, among other assignments.