Cross-posted at the Writing on the Wal
I am totally sympathetic to the idea of pressuring Target to reverse its ridiculous decision to allow its pharmacists to opt out of filling customers' prescriptions for emergency contraception (i.e. the morning-after pill). Target is a red company with a disproportionately blue clientele, and they need to be reminded of that fact.
But we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that while some Target customers will have needless trouble accessing emergency contraception, ALL Wal-Mart customers will have the same trouble because Wal-Mart doesn't even sell it.
However,
Wal-Mart Watch offers two quotes that show there has been a slight change in Wal-Mart's stated policy. First, from the
Dallas Morning News last April 29th:
"We do not carry emergency contraceptives," said Wal-Mart spokeswoman Jacquie Young. "It's based on business factors. We have to refer our customers to another pharmacy in the community that can help them in a timely manner."
The second is from Women's E-News just a couple of days ago:
Wal-Mart spokesperson Dan Fogleman confirmed that the company does not cover contraceptives and said the company stocks emergency contraception in states where it is required to by law, but does not in other states because there is not sufficient demand.
[Emphasis added by me]
They ask, quite rightly, "When did this change?" I was wondering the same thing, so I did some digging in order to answer Wal-Mart Watch's question. Here's what I found in the April 4, 2005 edition of the Feminist Daily News Wire:
Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois created an emergency rule on Friday that requires pharmacists to fill prescriptions of contraceptives immediately and without delay. The Governor's action was in response to a pharmacist's refusal to fill two prescriptions for emergency contraception (EC) on February 23, and draws attention to a problem that is becoming increasingly widespread,...
According to Wal-Mart Watch, Illinois is the only state in the country with such an order in place. How widespread is this problem? Back to the newswire:
Cases of refusals to fill prescriptions -- which the New York Times reports could be as high as 180 refusals in a six-month period of 2004 -- have occurred in at least 10 states, with some pharmacists refusing to even transfer the prescription to someone who is willing to fill it. Often these refusals are accompanied by demeaning and medically inaccurate lectures from the pharmacists.
Unless the pharmacy profession has been taken over by evangelical Christians, a lot more than 180 women have been getting prescriptions for emergency contraception filled at other pharmacies besides Wal-Mart. Yet Wal-Mart insists that there is not enough demand among their customers to carry it. How can this be?
There's only one logical explanation: Wal-Mart thinks its female customers don't have sex. After all, they don't cover contraception in their workers' health plan; isn't this the same logic?
Wait . . . there might be another explanation. Wal-Mart's p.r. department could be lying through its teeth in order to hide the company's policy of blatantly kissing up to the misogynist faction of the Christian right.
Which explanation do you think is more likely?
JR