Dilemmas over the efficacy of medicines are by no means the only manifestation of the tension between ‘health’ and ‘business’ values. For example:
You own a community pharmacy. You wish to reduce your hours and employ a pharmacist to work in your pharmacy three days a week. You have received two applications and have interviewed both applicants. You must now decide who to employ. The first applicant, Jackie White, fits all the criteria you are looking for. She is an experienced pharmacist who comes with glowing references.
However, during the interview she tells you that she will not sell or supply emergency hormonal contraception (EHC) because of her deeply held religious beliefs.
The second applicant, Lesley Brady, has adequate references but is inexperienced, and has never worked in a pharmacy as busy as yours. Lesley tells you that she is happy to supply EHC. Your pharmacy is close to another competitor pharmacy which provides EHC so you are aware that patients would likely go there instead, and this could have significant implications for your business in general, should they come to prefer your rival.
What’s more, you are situated in an area with a high proportion of young people and regularly supply four or five EHCs a week, which provides an income of £18 per individual supply (https://www.drugtariff.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/#/00850171-DC/DD00849923/Part%20VIC%20-%20Advanced%20Services%20(Pharmacy%20and%20Appliance%20Contractors)(England).
It is unlawfully discriminatory to employ the pharmacist who would supply the EHC (https://www.pharmacyregulation.org/sites/default/files/in_practice-_guidance_on_religion_personal_values_and_beliefs.pdf) (18) - but in this area there is a need for EHC and not supplying it would have a negative impact.
Should you therefore employ Lesley, the inexperienced pharmacist willing to supply EHC?