Pharmacists would be free to exercise their moral objections when filling prescriptions under a bill proposed by S.C. Sen. Kevin Bryant, R-Anderson.

Under the legislation, a pharmacist could refuse to fill prescriptions for a drug based on ethical, moral and religious grounds and be protected from being fired, demoted or suspended, as well as from civil or criminal liability.

The pharmacy would be required to post a notice in their store with the name of the pharmacist and the drugs they object to dispensing.

Under current law, nurses and doctors are protected for moral objections, but there is no specific provision for pharmacists, Sen. Bryant said.

“It is a broad concept, I guess, but it’s something that’s understood in the practice that we’re the last person a person sees before they get their medication,” Sen. Bryant said, owner of Bryant Pharmacy & Supply. “I didn’t understand why pharmacists were not named in our current laws. I don’t think someone’s employment would be in jeopardy.”

The legislation includes abortion-inducing medications, but could have more far-reaching implications, according to Sen. Bryant.

Several years ago, Sen. Bryant, said one of his pharmacists refused to fill a prescription for a patient because they were being overmedicated. The doctor who prescribed the medication had the patient on several drugs within the same therapeutic class.

“He thought (the doctor) was over prescribing,” Sen. Bryant said. “He refused to fill it because the patient was on like 12 medications. In those kinds of situations, the pharmacist ought to be protected from doing his job.”

Sen. Bryant said he does not believe pharmacists would abuse the right to exercise their objections.

“You’re losing business by doing this,” he said. “Only in extreme situations would a pharmacist do this.”

While it’s never been an issue at his store, said Hank Clinkscales, owner Clinkscales Drugs in Belton, there are situations where a pharmacist could be uncomfortable filling a prescription, including birth control bills.

“To me, that’s the scenario I can think of that might pose such a dilemma,” he said, adding he’s always left the decision up to the pharmacist as an individual choice.

Mike Depalma, owner of Depalma Drugs Inc., said pharmacists in chain stores need more protection than those employed by independent retailers.

“If you’re an independent store and you have an objection and I didn’t want to give out a drug, then you just don’t stock the drug,” he said. “In the chain stores, the pharmacists have to work for somebody else and the individual has to make a decision about whether they will or will not fill a prescription.”