So I just heard a news story out of New Jersey that made me question the nature of our country and people in general. A New Jersey women, Katherine O'conner, while out and about with her boyfriend suffered a major asthma attack but did not have her inhaler on her at the time. Luckily they were quite close to a CVS Pharmacy and he was able to rush into the store to find the pharmacist to buy an inhaler. Coming out to a price of $21.50 the boyfriend hurriedly reached within his pocket to find he had only a $20 bill and because he didn't have the extra change the pharmacist refused to sell him the inhaler. The boyfriend begged and even offered up his wallet, cell phone, and informed the pharmacists he would come back with the money after he had helped his girlfriend still the pharmacist refused. He was prepared to potential watch a women die in front of him for $1.50. Luckily the boyfriend was able to call a personal friend who was a paramedic and had an inhaler and was able to arrive just in time for the women. But really $1.50 this man couldn't have let that go for a young womens life? It is stories like this and the one about the homeless man who bleed to death last year that consistently shock me. How can you watch a person suffer and even die? What could bring you to make such a decision? I mean even if you feared for you job the man offered you his wallet, phone, and to return with the money I should think that would be ample info to protect you in the case you got in trouble for selling a inhaler for $1.50 less. Anyways what do you all think? And how would you have handled this?
On The Road – Elma – Eclipse Trip
3 hours ago
15 comments:
Wow. What a jerk. I have to agree with you Ross--I don't think it's humane to risk someone's life for $1.50. I would have given the guy the inhaler even as long as he wasn't trying to steal. I mean if a guy offers his wallet and cellphone, for $1.50, I'm pretty sure he's not lying about his girlfriend's state--that's if I were the clerk. If I was the boyfriend, I would probably ask someone in the store for money or just run out because I'm sure the cops wouldn't throw me in jail for $1.50. Plus, I'm sure if the cops saw that the woman's welfare was in jeopardy, I think my actions would be justified as $1.50 definitely does not amount to one's life. This clerk is just plain inhumane and I would like to see him in this situation if he were the boyfriend. I guess there are just some terrible people out there, who don't care about anyone else.
This is indeed very messed up. First of all, the pharmacist should be fired; withholding the means of saving another person's life is one of greatest wrongs an individual could commit to humanity. Perhaps the pharmacist could get fired for selling the inhaler for less. But is it really okay letting someone die so you could keep your job? I think it is not. The psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg once talked about the "Heinz dilemma", a situation in which a man is faced with the decision of either stealing a drug from his pharmacy to save his dying wife or allowing his wife to die by not choosing to steal the medication that could cure her illness. In my opinion, the pharmacist should have given the inhaler for free to the boyfriend of the women with asthma because it would be in accordance with universal human ethics. Despite the risk of someone losing their job, human life is of an immensely greater value than the property of another person. If I was in the pharmacist's shoes at that time, I would have immediately given the woman's boyfriend the inhaler for free with no questions asked. I strongly believe that the pharmacist who refused to sell the inhaler for less should be immediately fired for being selfish and irrational.
I think that this is an example of how greedy and corrupt our world has now become. People only think about their own needs; they only consider what will benefit them the most, or what will be the easiest course of action. People only want to stay safe, and are unwilling to take any risks for others. I guess that this might be a consequence of our capitalistic society, where those who act only in their own interests are most successful.
What the pharmacist at CVS did was completely unethical. As a man or woman who was required to study medicine in order to perform his or her job today, he or she ought to have known that it is in his or her (sorry for all the "his" and "hers") best interest to save the woman's life, regardless of the fact if she or her boyfriend was able to pay for an inhaler. I do not know if pharmacists are required to do this but the Hippocratic Oath states that the doctor must do whatever he or she can to save his or her patient's life. This oath ought to be applied whether or not they are in a hospital environment or not.
I personally hope that the pharmacist is punished for his inappropriate actions. He should not be thinking about the profit of the CVS business, but of the life of a human being.
Some people just want to watch the world burn.
On the other hand, I don't think that the clerk would do this for no reason whatsoever. Perhaps the story has been mangled and twisted. Either way, I reserve judgement on a situation that I only know one side of.
Heinz dilemma was the first thing I thought of when I saw this. ^5 Michael, AP psych. (right?)
Anyway, on topic, this is tough because what the pharmacist did was basically say, "not my problem." Even if the woman dies, he isn't legally responsible, although he would get some indignant bloggers and newscasters on his case (as he already has). Psychologically speaking, it's a lot easier not to get involved in a mess, and that means not selling the inhaler.
I'm not saying he was right; I'm simply trying to justify his actions as not being completely selfish and greedy, but more the result of an "I don't want this on my hands" motive that seems to have backfired. Yes, he should've taken the $20; if he really wanted to stick to the books, maybe kept the phone until the teenager came back with the remaining $1.50. But would I have done the same under pressure? It's hard to say.
First of all, being a considerate human being should be the top priority for every single person. Putting your job or money before the well being of someone else is extremely selfish and unethical. In my opinion, there's really no excuse for that pharmacist to have taken those actions. As someone stated before, it's easier to not get involved. But I mean, it's someone's life. And I'm sure CVS wouldn't even come close to punishing him as long as he got the money. Even so, $1.50 isn't a large amount of money to lose in comparison to how much they make. I would definitely put someone's life over $1.50, an inhaler, and even my job. Material things never outweigh the importance of life.
When I finished reading this article, I honestly couldn't believe that someone would ever do something like this. It's pretty mind-boggling (and disturbing) to know that for some people, $1.50 is more valuable than a human life. What could possess someone to stand by and watch another human being die? I am curious to hear the clerk's side of the story, and see how he justifies his actions.
Oh, also. And I'm glad the woman was able to be saved by the paramedic friend. It could have been a pretty tragic story.
Really is this what the world has come to? Wow, all I can say is that this is REALLY unethical. Okay, so the pharmasist is not a doctor, but he is still in the health care industry. This makes it seem like the guy is greedy and has no intention of benefiting people other than himself. I mean $1.50, what the heck? I mean even if the it was more than $1.50, the woman's life was on the line! Furthermore, the fact that the customer offered up some of his other valuables, just goes to show that he seemed to be the only one who cared. In a situation like this one, the pharmacist should have cared equally as much. This just makes me livid, because I don't think we realize how materialistic people can be until something like this happens.
~Emily Zelter
While I agree with the comments here, I have to also think about the economic repercussions of even $1.50. Obviously, you or I would not run into a store, find an inhaler, and try to get it for $1.50 (and tax) less than it costs. However, there are some people in our world who, unfortunately, would. A few dollars doesn't seem like much to a big store, but think about the Claire's in the mall. Their earrings were about $4 for three pairs when I first got my ears pierced. Now, they cost over$6.50 for those same three pairs because so many people steal from Claire's. But it's only a few dollars, right?
I'm not about to say that this is my viewpoint. In this case, I absolutely think that the clerk was in the wrong. But how is he to know this isn't just a desperate man trying to save a buck or two? Where can we draw the line?
Too everyone bashing the cleric. Maybe there is a company policy that says he can't ANYTHING for free even if it's an emergency. He would have lost his job if he gave that inhaler to the man. The blame should be placed on the company for not teaching their employees when it is appropriate for their personnel to help; although it does seem like common sense.
Kathy brought up a good point in that the pharmacist could have thought that the couple were trying to get an inhaler for $1.50 less. Costs for medical drugs and devices have skyrocketed in the past years, which completely doesn't help the thousands of Americans trying to make ends meat in this aweful recession. Hence, it would seem logical to some who can't afford insurance to help pay for the medicines to fake a situation if they are that desperate. But I feel that if you're a considerate human being, I'm sure you can overcome the "tragic" loss of $1.50 if it means saving a person's life. Plus its not as if the pharmacist had to trust the man. I've walked into a CVS store and have seen cameras everywhere, so there would be ample video evidence if it did happen to come to the point where the man lied on purpose about his girlfriend. I've had asthma for my entire life, and if I was in the pharmacist's position, I would definetally help the woman in danger. And I can also tell you that having an asthma attack is no enjoyable experience.
I can't believe the person who works at the pharmacy!!! I cannot believe he/she did not sell the man the inhaler for a $1.50 less than what it was worth, even after the man offered to leave his wallet and phone. I'm shocked by this story. How inhumane can people act even when it comes down to saving someone's life. Thankfully, the friend arrived and was able to provide the woman with an inhaler.
And I agree with Roslee's title: "What has the world come to?" Unbelievable!!!!
Post a Comment