notageek

In this post-PDE-5-inhibitor world, one of the most common sources of outrage at the pharmacy (coming in just ahead of the realisation that one can’t just walk up and buy prescription-only items) is the refusal of many insurance plans to pay for erectile dysfunction drugs. Those that do often require running the horrid gauntlet known as prior authorisation, in which prescribers have to call insurance companies and explain that the prescribed drug is appropriate and necessary.

It’s the necessary that often gets tripped up, and that’s when perfectly normal middle-aged men start fuming about doctors obviously writing prescriptions for fun and games, and how on EARTH can a prescription medication not be covered. Then I entertain a faint hope that a middle-aged woman who’s been paying out of pocket for her oral contraceptives most of her life will kick him square in the indicated condition.

This constant angst over getting wieners hard is part of why I was so completely gobsmacked over the indication I read on a prescription I’d taken in at the drive-through: “prn for persistent erection”. I showed it to a co-worker, just in case I’d misread it, but there it was, on an order for a drug that for the rest of my life I have never heard of being used to treat anything wiener-related.

I counseled his parents when they came back through the drive-through, first on the pain medication, and then for the other. I’ve been working hard at improving my sensitivity to family dynamics while counseling, so I delicately explained that the second drug was to be taken only if he “exhibited the indicated condition”.

And then both parents and I busted out laughing.

I gotta work on that.