CVS fired a pharmacist on Friday, July 20, after he refused to fill a transgender woman's hormone prescription in Fountain Hills, Arizona, this past April.
The woman, Hilde Hall, wrote a blog post for the ACLU in which she recounted the experience.
After years of working to affirm my identity in a world where transgender people are questioned constantly about how well they know themselves, the pharmacist refused to fill one of the prescriptions needed to affirm my identity.
He did not give me a clear reason for the refusal. He just kept asking, loudly and in front of other CVS staff and customers, why I was given the prescriptions.
After nearly three months, CVS finally spoke on the incident via Twitter:
The conduct of the pharmacist, who is no longer employed by CVS, violated company policies and does not reflect our values or our commitment to inclusion, nondiscrimination and the delivery of outstanding patient care.
There is no word on when CVS fired the pharmacist.
You got yourself a loyal customer for life! Thank you!— The Deaf Bartender (@JadePagola) July 21, 2018
You folks did the right thing.— D Raff ✒📄 Retired, Broke, Way Too Much Time! (@TheRealDRaff) July 21, 2018
And with this action, CVS has created a new standard for its pharmacists.
I appreciate your firing this pharmacist to support Ms Hall. This incident is an example of how you could treat ALL of the women you welcome as guests in your stores.... Because when you don't fire pharmacists who refuse to fill bcp's or abortion pills, you're discriminating.— Cristine (@Owl_ofthewoods) July 21, 2018
When you stand up for lgbtqia+ rights but not women's reproductive rights, it is clear that women's reproductive rights are less than. And we can't continue with that kind of behavior and action if we want an inclusive & equal world. #lgbtqiap #DoBetter #prochoice— Cristine (@Owl_ofthewoods) July 21, 2018
Arizona is one of the states technically affected by the Supreme Court's recent decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, in which the court decided that independent vendors could refuse service to any customers based on religious beliefs.
Since CVS is a private company, however, that decision was irrelevant to this particular pharmacist.
That’s false equivalency👆🏽. The baker owns his business, the pharmacist doesn’t.— Jenny Germaine (@JennyGermaine) July 21, 2018
also what exactly was this "unintentional oversight"? what that sounds like to me is "no one higher up took her complaint seriously until it went viral and our sales were about to be impacted"— ｋａｋｉ ★ 🐱⚧🌈💜💖 (@kakimeows) July 21, 2018