This is still being argued through the courts, Governor's office, Board of Pharmacists, and State legislature. It's not over and many suspect the Board will win and require pharmacists to fill any prescription written by a doctor. This issue isn't Plan-B but any prescription, so it's unfair to limit the discussion to Plan-B. It was the trigger. And the issue is if a pharmacists is allowed to refuse, what define "another available source."
Is it the same pharmacy, a nearby one or what, and at what price? Some rural areas only have one phamacy, so the next available one is an hour or more drive. The final question will be if everyone negotiates so pharmacists can refuse for moral grounds, where's the limit to any pharmacists conscience, such as birth control, drug treatment, hormones, sex enhancment, or what?
This only came up with Plan-B but opened the pandora's box of medicince. In reality the phamacist must respect the physician's request for the patient. They're not doctors, but pharmacists. The patient isn't asking their opinion or approval for the drug(s), but simply to fill the prescription. But the Governor and/or legislature may balk at an absolute as they want for fear of voters.
--Susan--