Laws Protecting Pharmacist's Refusal

National Constitution Center ^ | 5/15/05

[bulldozer]

Lawmakers in several states are considering "conscience clause" legislation that would permit pharmacists not to fill prescriptions for medications that violate their religious beliefs. Meanwhile, four different states are considering laws that would make sure pharmacists dispense all medications for all prescriptions they receive, regardless of the pharmacist's morals. Does requiring a pharmacist to dispense medication she finds morally objectionable violate her First Amendment right to free exercise of religion?

RESOURCES

“Pharmacists’ rights at front of new debate: Because of beliefs, some refuse to fill birth control prescriptions” The Washington Post (DC) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5490-2005Mar27.html

“Are pharmacists right to choose?” CBS News http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/29/earlyshow/health/main683753.shtml

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Why do some pharmacists object to filling birth control or morning-after pill prescriptions? Some pharmacists whose religious beliefs prohibit abortion or the use of birth control believe that dispensing these medications to others is an infringement on their own free exercise of their religion. 2. What laws have states proposed regarding pharmacists and filling prescriptions they find objectionable? Eleven states are considering "conscience clause" laws that would permit pharmacists to refuse to fill certain prescriptions. Four states already have laws that specifically allow pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions that violate their beliefs. Further, legislators in South Dakota, Arkansas and Georgia hope to strengthen existing laws so pharmacists would be able to refuse to transfer or refer prescriptions for contraceptives to other pharmacies.

At the same time, at least four states are considering laws that would explicitly require pharmacists to fill all prescriptions. 3. Why do opponents of these proposed laws object to them? Opponents object to these laws because they say that pharmacists have an obligation to fill all prescriptions and that refusing to fill them violates patients’ freedom of conscience. Emergency birth control is often needed late at night and within a short time, making it burdensome to travel to a different pharmacy, particularly for patients in rural communities. Some argue that pharmacists do not have a right not to fill prescriptions. 4. The Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment protects an absolute freedom of belief and an individual right to practice religion. Do you think that requiring pharmacists to fill prescriptions that conflict with their religious beliefs violates the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment? * Yes, because people whose religion prohibits birth control or abortion cannot freely exercise their religion if they are forced to dispense these medications. * No, because the pharmacist is not required to take the medication him or herself, so there is no free exercise issue. * Maybe, but the patients’ need to obtain their medication outweighs the pharmacists’ rights. 5. What other amendments in the Bill of Rights may be applicable for/against these proposed laws? * The First Amendment protects individual free exercise of religion, and pharmacists have a right to exercise their religion in the workplace. * The Fifth Amendment protects property, and the prescription is the patient’s property. * The Fifth Amendment prohibits deprivation of personal liberty without due process. Passing laws to allow individual pharmacists to refuse to refill prescriptions that offend their personal morals would deprive patients of their liberty without due process.

EXTENSIONS

1. Remembering that the First Amendment prohibits government restriction of religious free exercise, have students work in pairs and discuss the following scenarios. What limitations should employers be able to place on the free exercise of religion in the workplace? Which of the following should be constitutionally permitted? Why or why not? * Flight attendants thank passengers for flying their airline and add, “Goodbye and God bless you” as they exit. * A Muslim needs several breaks during the day to pray from his job as an air traffic controller. * A Jewish restaurant waiter refuses to serve patrons their orders if those orders contain meat and dairy together, as this combination is prohibited by his Kosher practices. * An orthodox Mormon who works at a movie theater refuses to sell tickets to young couples on dates, as his religious beliefs dictate that teens should not date until they are 16. * A Presbyterian movie theater projectionist refuses to show a film that tells the story of a gay couple. * A Catholic doctor refuses to perform abortions in a sectarian hospital. B. Have students research Supreme Court cases involving the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment. Students can begin their research at http://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=43 * Reynolds v. United States (1879) * Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940) * Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) * Thornton v. Caldor (1985) * Goldman v. Weinberger (1986)

[sinkspur]

No problem with pharmacists refusing to dispense certain prescriptions.

But, it should be a fireable offense if they do not call another pharmacist to fill, or hand prescription back to the owner.

[Random Nonsense]

Hey mon .. I am a voodoo pharmacist. I fill out any prescriptions :)

[Coyoteman]

Well, it was a great country while it lasted. Wonder where we can go now.

[1FASTGLOCK45]

I can finally get my "i don't want to pay taxes" prescription filled?

[EagleUSA]

The absolute liberal insanity just keeps building -- where does this sheer stupidity come from? If a pharmacist won't fill a prescription, he/she should be in another line of work. If I were a store manager, and a customer said that the pharmacist would not fill my prescription for RELIGOUS REASONS, that pharmacist WOULD BE GONZO -- HISTORY!!!

Freakin' liberal CRAP!!!

[joebuck]

Can't the pharmacy just refuse to stock the drugs which the phamacists object to? This would seem to solve the problem.

[dixiechick2000]

My daughter, a PharmD student, has been struggling with this.

She's decided that, if she is required to dispense the
morning after pill, she's gonna "counsel" 'em to death.

Then, maybe they won't ask her to fill the script again. ;o)

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

"A Muslim needs several breaks during the day to pray from his job as an air traffic controller."


Somebody had a sick post-9/11 chuckle as they put that one out to schools.

[Blue_Ridge_Mtn_Geek]

No problem with pharmacists refusing to dispense certain prescriptions.

But, it should be a fireable offense if they do not call another pharmacist to fill, or hand prescription back to the owner.

---

I agree; this is a fair balance between the right of non-participation in a morally objectionable action of another, and the right of the holder of the prescription to take their request for service elsewhere.

For a pharmicist who works for a drugstore chain, any ethical objections of this sort should be negotiated between employee and employer at time of hire. A drugstore employer has no obligation to hire a pharmicist, or continue the employment of a pharmicist who refuses to transact certain types of sales that the employer wishes to promote.

An analagous situation would be a convenience store clerk who objects to smoking and alcoholic beverages. Such a person should seek other lines of work, or find a retail position where selling objectionable items is not a requirement of the job.

[Verginius Rufus]

The right to an abortion obviously trumps all other rights. If a pharmacist can be required to fill a "morning after pill" (the purpose of which is to destroy a recently-conceived child), a physician can be required to perform an abortion.

That may not happen for a few years yet, but after Hillary gets to select two or three justices for the Supreme Court, anything goes...and she's likely to have two or three vacancies waiting for her on Jan. 20, 2009, because the 'Rats will filibuster any nominations Bush makes.

[Torie]

Oh dear, a common sense post. Frankly, I don't look to pill pushers to assist me in fashioning my moral values.

[Torie]

I would tell her to stop wasting my time, and call the manager. That is an abuse of her function. She is not a pastor.

[thomaswest]

Hmmm. I have a religious belief that all disease results from bad living or bad family history. I, therefore, refuse to fill prescriptions for antibiotics. The cure for disease is getting right with the Lord. The Germ Theory of Disease is unsubstantiated, and it directly opposes God's Will as to who gets sick.

How about I refuse to give penicillin to your child because I have a "moral" objection? After all, getting a cut and allowing it to become infected is a matter of personal responsibility.

Now, if pharmacists took this view, would you as an individual or would we as a society be better off?

[dixiechick2000]

Pharmacists counsel the patients as far as side effects,
how to take the medications, drug interactions with other
meds they are taking, etc. She would make sure they knew
everything about the morning after pill.

This has nothing to do with religion.

Sheesh...

[editor-surveyor]

"Emergency birth control"

Isn't that the foam pad that gets clamped between the knees ?

[Torie]

It sounded more like a filibuster to me.

[Torie]

By the way, I look to the MD to advise me on these matters, not the pill pusher.

[dixiechick2000]

She may be in Pharmacy, but she will have "Dr." before her name.
And, she will know one heck of a lot more about meds than the docs do.