Missouri House OKs amendment to let pharmacies refuse contraception pills

Tuesday, April 28, 2009 | 7:48 p.m. CDT; updated 9:57 p.m. CDT, Tuesday, April 28, 2009

JEFFERSON CITY – The House has approved an amendment to keep pharmacies from being required to distribute emergency contraception and other drugs.

The chamber approved the amendment 115-43 Tuesday but delayed a vote on the entire bill. The bill allows certain state boards to hold disciplinary hearings for people who are licensed by the state and are convicted of certain felonies.

The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Ed Emery, R-Lamar, states that a pharmacy can't be sued for not carrying medication and that the state cannot revoke a license if a pharmacy does not carry certain medication. It specifically mentions Plan B, an emergency contraception drug that can prevent pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, and RU-486, the drug used to induce an abortion.

According to the Federal Drug Administration, emergency contraception drugs cannot cause an abortion. Women over 17 no longer need a prescription to obtain Plan B.

Women can take RU-486 to abort a pregnancy if they take it within 49 days of conception. The drug is only available through a doctor and cannot be distributed by a pharmacy.

The amendment is similar to "conscience legislation" passed in other states that protects pharmacists who object to dispensing birth control medication. In recent years, Missouri lawmakers have attempted to pass bills both protecting pharmacists and bills requiring them to fill all prescriptions.

Democrats said the amendment is an attempt to control women's bodies.

"To implement a law like this, especially in a rural area, seems to me to put another road block before women," said Rep. Mary Still, D- Columbia. "This is one more weapon of mass distraction that we see at a time where we should be paying attention to the real issues of the state."

Rep. Cynthia Davis, R-O'Fallon, argued that businesses owners should have the right to choose what products they carry. She said the amendment will protect businesses from lawsuits.

"I have trouble understanding why anybody who is an American, who is not in favor of Communism, would want us to dictate what we're going to say people can and cannot stock," Davis said. "I fear for all the businesses in Missouri if we're going to start telling them what they can sell and what they cannot sell."


Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Ray Shapiro April 28, 2009 | 8:22 p.m.

I would rather have both "Plan B" and RU-486 only be available in the doctor's office.
Should these drugs become too readily available, they could replace the condom, which is relatively effective in preventing pregnancy AND sexual transmitted diseases.
That currently not the case, if Mary Still thinks this amendment creates a roadblock to rural women, then she can advocate that churches transport these desperate "out in the boondocks/abandoned women" to a participating pharmacy. My guess is most pharmacies will have "Plan B" in stock.
(Should a "rural" woman actually not be able to easily get "Plan B," she should have a plan B, anyway.)

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 28, 2009 | 8:57 p.m.

Whatever happened to parents teaching "Plan A" in the home from childhood?

Sure nothing can ever be 100% positive in the nurturing process of children but it seems a dam fine place to start.

(Report Comment)
Traci Wilson-Kleekamp April 29, 2009 | 12:27 a.m.

I find it so interesting that men want to dictate what women should have available to them in terms of birth control. The idea (miseducation) that condoms are 100% effective is false. It infuriates me -- that one political party wants to police women's bodies and reproductive rights; while on the other hand says businesses should have the freedom/right to sell whatever products they chose. My -- what hypocrisy. Businesses should have power to do what they like; but women shouldn't control their reproductive systems as they like.

What a legacy to build on.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 29, 2009 | 1:17 a.m.

Traci Wilson-Kleelamp:
Who's dictating?
(Don't have sex with men and they won't express a concern.)
Also, are there no men left in the Democratic party?
Does every member of the Democratic Party want to force pharmacies to stock every drug imaginable?
Are there no Democrats who think promiscuity and abortion pills is not the best lifestyle to promote amongst our society?
Does the developing fetus have no meaning to every Democrat?
Should men AND women have a say in procreation?
Are you one of those Venusian Amazons?

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking April 29, 2009 | 2:42 a.m.

Traci wrote:

"I find it so interesting that men want to dictate what women should have available to them in terms of birth control."

It's not so much men that do this, but religious people who make people's private choices their business. There's a lot of men that support the idea of pharmacies selling emergency contraception, and a lot more that don't feel it is their business what methods of contraception a woman chooses to use.

BTW, one can use regular birth control medication as emergency contraception. See the Planned Parenthood website for information on dosage.


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley April 29, 2009 | 11:10 a.m.

Charles Dudley Sr. April 29, 2009 | 11:03 a.m.

Women should learn their place in the world which is to be silent and have babies.

Ahhh, another post from "Mr. Dudley" designed to bring forth strife and controversy on this thread. Bored today, Charlie?


(Report Comment)
John Schloot April 29, 2009 | 11:30 a.m.

Are there now two Charles Dudley's (Jr. & Sr.)with little to do?

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 29, 2009 | 12:10 p.m.

The Sr name is a name cloner only posting to further try to discredit me. It is more than likely the same name cloner that was on the old Trib Board.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley April 29, 2009 | 12:20 p.m.

AND, he is posting as your "Daddy"... LOL.


(Report Comment)
John Schloot April 29, 2009 | 1:02 p.m.


(Report Comment)
curtis maes April 30, 2009 | 5:30 p.m.

If people wish to practice death control then they need to practice birth-control. One of the best forms is the pill, including the morning after pill. Insisting that women should just make their partners wear condoms is like insisting that people just wear masks instead of getting vaccinated during flu season. It's stupid. We have all sorts of options when it comes to keeping our sorry behinds alive much longer than nature intended. It is not anyone’s place to limit women's personal options when it comes to preventing us humans from breeding ourselves into oblivion. And if pharmacists have the right to refuse women birth-control then pharmacists should have the right to limit the longevity of fruitful people by refusing them life saving medicine.

(Report Comment)
jeanjoel spatafora May 2, 2009 | 9:56 a.m.

I think Traci's hypocrisy point is valid.

We can't have it both ways. If you don't want government to tell you what to sell in pharmacies then it shouldn't tell you what to do with your body.

(Report Comment)
Barbara Chally May 2, 2009 | 11:43 a.m.

I don't see many women other than Traci posting on this issue that clearly affects us the most. What do you suppose would happen if a group of women rallied in a Carrie Nation-type movement to ban Viagra and everything similar out of spite and formed a majority? Would men like to be told what they may and may not use in their sexual lives? Then we would begin to see some more forceful arguing!

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro May 2, 2009 | 2:51 p.m.

Ms. Chally:
Who is mandating what you may and may not use in your sexual life?
Nowadays, almost anything can be delivered to your home doorstep, discretely packaged and wrapped in brown paper.
Why the spite?
Also, I'd be flat out without my addiciton and dependency on viagra, enzite, extenz and hand pump! Besides, these items are supposedly also for your pleasure.
Didn't men also recently give you the right to vote?
Maybe men should advocate to have that taken away from women, just out of spite?
I'm beginning to think my dear old grand daddy was right. Keep 'em barefoot and pregnant or they just might turn on ya'.

(Report Comment)
Gordon Christy-Stefanik May 3, 2009 | 1:19 p.m.

Charles Dudley Jr asked:

"Whatever happened to parents teaching "Plan A" in the home from childhood?"

Good question Charlie, and perhaps we should ask Sarah Palin about the success of Plan A???

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley May 3, 2009 | 1:29 p.m.

Barbara Chally May 2, 2009 | 11:43 a.m.

What do you suppose would happen if a group of women rallied in a Carrie Nation-type movement to ban Viagra and everything similar out of spite and formed a majority?

Uhhh, people would not have as much sex? LMAO! I could not resist.... LOL.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr May 3, 2009 | 1:45 p.m.

Gordon Christy-Stefanik I totally agree with your statement.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.