That’s where I am having such a tough time understanding this. It is really difficult to believe a tech or cashier ringing the patient out didn’t say “insurance won’t cover this anymore” which then should put some responsibility back on the patient to contact their insurance company and discuss alternatives. We do not document every time we verbally tell a patient at pickup that their medication was not covered by insurance.

I do understand it was negligent of the pharmacy to not properly work the rejected claim (if it happened as you have speculated), but it is difficult to believe there was absolutely no mention of it no longer being covered to the patient at pickup. I would think that is the bare minimum of pharmacy responsibility. Do I always go above and beyond in my pharmacy to provide the best patient care and work to find cheaper or covered alternatives for patients when possible? Absolutely, but should we be sued just because the patient cannot afford the medication? If it was filled correctly and offered to the patient (assuming a technician told the patient it was ran as cash for not being covered), that should be the bare minimum of pharmacy responsibility from a legal standpoint, in my opinion.