Skip to content

Pharmacies Continue To Deny Women Birth Control

March 30, 2010

I recently read that the U.K. has decided to uphold it’s policy to allow pharmacists to deny birth control and emergency contraception to customers based on moral beliefs.


And I thought this crap was only going on in the United States.

First of all, this just seems like bad business practices. It is your job to give me pills that my doctor has prescribed to me, not to moralize at me. If you can’t handle this, then you are a shit employee and deserve to be FIRED. If the responsibilities and duties of your job are too much for you, then you need to leave it. This policy just punishes women who are choosing to be responsible about their sex lives and not just praying to Jesus that they’re not ovulating while they’re gettin’ down and dirty. To deny someone emergency contraception is also incredibly dangerous, as their effectiveness depends on time. I shouldn’t have to waste my time and  jeopardize my health and well being because whoever is working behind the counter is an asshole.

Fortunately, I’ve never had this happen to me. Also, I live in a city where there is a Walgreen’s or CVS on almost every street corner, so I have plenty of business options for my no-baby needs. However, I can say that if some uppity pharmacy technician denied me service, I would take him/her down. First, I would report the failure to perform their job to their manager, and then to the general store manger. Maybe I’d contact the area’s corporate headquarters as well. And if I was feeling particularly spiteful, I’d contact the local news station and women’s rights organizations.

Really, this just seems like a gateway to all sorts of shit. If someone can say, I’m not going to give you your birth control pills because I believe you shouldn’t have sex, what’s to stop someone from saying, I’m not going to give you your antibiotics for your STD because I believe you shouldn’t have had sex. Or maybe I need to be denied my emphysema medication, because the pharmacist believes I shouldn’t have been smoking in the first place.

Fuck that shit.

Give me my drugs and shut your fucking mouth.

Finally, this policy is a blatant violation of women’s rights. It’s my body, and I am going to do whatever I want with it. No one has the authority to tell me that my lifestyle is wrong because they don’t agree with it. I can choose to consume whatever substances I want, fuck who and when I want, or choose not to engage in sexual activity as long as it’s my choice.

And nobody has the right to take that away from me.

Go forth and hate (and don’t let anyone stop you).

Have you ever been denied birth control or emergency contraception?

Related The Hating Expert Posts:
Safe Sexy Time Part One: Barrier Methods

7 Comments leave one →
  1. March 31, 2010 2:18 am

    Hey there,

    I’m a Brit and a feminist and I have to say I support this law. I think that if you tell people their jobs are more important than their morals you’re on a slippery slope to a very bad place. People have a tendency to do terrible things when they don’t have to take responsibility, look at the military! I wouldn’t work in a shop where I had to sell clothes made in a sweatshop. If you came in looking for a cheap dress am I denying you your right to do whatever you want with your body by not supplying one?

    It isn’t unproblematic, but I think a law which allows people to uphold their beliefs is good for freedom.

    Not an Odalisque

    • March 31, 2010 4:24 pm

      Your logic is flawed, you’re comparing apples to vacuums. Look at what you just said:

      If you don’t believe sweatshops are okay, you should not work in a store that sells items made in sweatshops.
      If you don’t believe in emergency contraception, you should be able to deny people it despite that your profession is DISTRIBUTING FUCKING PILLS AND THAT’S IT.

      When someone in the army is told to shoot whoever comes at the door and does not surrender, and a child approaches, you HAVE TO SHOOT THE CHILD, even if it is against your morals to shoot children. You signed up for a job that requires you to that, and your employers should have to adjust their business for your morals.

      “If you came in looking for a cheap dress am I denying you your right to do whatever you want with your body by not supplying one?”

      Yes, because as a salewoman your job, that you chose, is to sell clothing. You don’t get to withhold a dress because you think its ugly.

      If you have such a big problem with denying emergency contraception (would you rather
      I get an abortion later? Because I will if I don’t get the pill) then stay out of the pill-supplying business, or at the very fucking LEAST, get another member of your team to supply it to that person.

      Emergency contraception is 100% legal, and when you are in a chosen job, that you are getting paid for, you have the goddamn obligation to either supply it or quit.

  2. Brandi permalink
    March 31, 2010 1:22 pm

    That’s stupid. If you don’t want to give women birth control don’t work as fucking pharmacist it’s that easy. If you have such morals to uphold, just stay away. And you’d think with how money hungry businesses are they wouldn’t deny customers. Working in a store that sells clothes made by a sweat shop = women taking control over their bodies/lives by not having children they don’t want/aren’t ready for? The latter certainly hurts no one.

  3. March 31, 2010 5:20 pm


    Spirited opposition! I’ve made my point so I’m not going to argue. I just want to point out, though, that in the case of the military international law trumps orders, so you could be prosecuted for war crimes if you shoot the child. Signing up doesn’t get you out of taking responsibility for yourself, in any job.

    • March 31, 2010 6:35 pm

      Your stance is pretty offensive to me as a woman, but whatever.

      Also I don’t know what the laws are in your country, but in America it is 100% okay to shoot a child if you’re in a foreign country and at war. It happens often, actually, that the opposition (Afghanis haven’t done it a lot, but the war with Vietnam was notorious for this) uses children (usually orphans) or very old people as suicide bombers, and send them to American military spots.

      As such, it’s part of the the American military’s job to shoot that child if the order is to kill anyone who does not surrender by a certain point. You do not get prosecuted for war crimes if you shoot a child in that case.


  1. Why Does A Fetus Have More Value Than A Woman? « The Hating Expert
  2. Having a baby? Don’t go to Oklahoma. « The Sangfroid

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: