Once you start allowing this kind of choice by the professional, there will be no end to the goods and services that will then come into 'moral question'. They took an oath. They knew what was expected of them. Do the job or get out of your profession. Case closed.
Being a pharmacist means handing out medication to people who need it. If you have a problem giving people medicine who need it then quit your job and find a new one because obviously you are not qualified enough to be one. If you want to deny certain medication, open your own business and have a sign stating what medication you do not carry/distribute. BUT if you are going to work at a big company then do your job and quit complaining. Should have thought about that BEFORE you decided to become a pharmacist. Your job is to give people medicine, not judge and deny who needs it.
That is like a vegan working at McDonald and refusing to give people cheeseburgers because s/he (vegan person) does not eat meat.
If a pharmacist doesn't want to fill out a legal prescription just because he or she doesn't morally agree to the drug being used, then they should reconsider their career choice.
Refusing to fill out a prescription just because of their moral beliefs disagree with is utterly unprofessional and I think if they refuse, they should be fired.
Even if the pharmacist believes that someone may get addicted to some kind of drug, it is still not their place to refuse to fill the prescription. They are there to do their job and if what they are filling is legal then they need to fill it. Plus what the pharmacist believes could not be true at all. They do not always know. I think that putting restrictions on how often a prescription is filled could be up to the pharmacist but otherwise they should fill the prescription.
Yes, pharmacists should be forced to fill legal prescriptions they personally object to on moral grounds. As the world changes, there will be things that many people object to on moral grounds. While we all have the right to our beliefs, we do not have the right to impact other people’s lives through our moral convictions. If another person has already made the decision requiring the use of one of these drugs, the onus is on that person, not the pharmacist. Having moral objections to something does not give that person the right to impose their will on someone else. It is not the pharmacist’s decision to make and he or she is not held accountable for it.
Should a Muslim or Jew be forced to sell pork products at his restaurant simply because you refuse to eat at any number of other restaurants that have no problems selling it? Should a Catholic doctor be forced to perform an abortion? Just because you are a consumer, it doesn't give you an automatic right to dictate what a business will or will not sell you. If you want something that they do not sell - GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.
A pharmacist is like any other person in the medical field. The person should first, do no harm. If a pharmacist feels like an opiate-type drug may get someone addicted, despite an overwhelming pain, then the pharmacist should advise something different. With medical marijuana entering many states, this matter becomes even murkier. Perhaps alternative therapies are advisable instead of drugs.
I don't believe that pharmacists should be forced to fill legal prescriptions they personally object to on moral grounds because they are in a position of authority. Just like doctors, pharmacists are medical professionals who should use their best objective judgment to make important choices regarding moral decisions. If a pharmacist feels filling a prescription would be harmful or cause any complications or put someone in danger, they should not be forced to fill it.