Pharmacist Refusals: Dispensing (With) Religious Accommodation Under Title VII

Amy Berquist

Minnesota Law Review
Minnesota Law Review

Abstract
Conclusion

. . . The pharmaceutical industry will continue to create drugs to which some pharmacists object on religious grounds. Employers must anticipate that some pharmacists will object not only to birth control, but also to Ritalin, 226 Viagra for unmarried men, or drugs to treat AIDS; some pharmacists may even object on religious grounds to serving particular customers. The religious discrimination provisions of the Civil Rights Act allow most employers to dispense with the majority of possible religious accommodations for pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions on religious grounds. Those provisions are meaningless, however, if employers are reluctant to assert Title VII’s protections against accommodations imposing an undue hardship on the pharmacy’s business operations. As pharmacies negotiate the tensions between consumers demanding prompt access to prescription drugs, a tight labor market for pharmacists, pressure from certain religious groups to discourage the use of birth control, vocal national groups advocating expanded access to contraception, and their own economic bottom line, Title VII can serve either as an answer or as an excuse. Employers may use Title VII as a pretense to justify unnecessary accommodations for objecting pharmacists; pharmacies may attempt to use federal law to shield themselves from customer and activist criticism by asserting that they have no choice but to accommodate. On the other hand, pharmacies can utilize Title VII as a tool to define the outer limits of their pharmacist accommodation policies. A clear understanding of the parameters of Title VII’s religious accommodation requirements will help guide and monitor the behavior and legal justifications presented by employers, employees, and customers when pharmacists refuse to dispense certain drugs on religious grounds.


Berquist A. Pharmacist Refusals: Dispensing (With) Religious Accommodation Under Title VII. Minn Law Rev. 2006;90(4):1073-1106.

When an adult female seeks ritual genital alteration: Ethics, law, and the parameters of participation

Julie D Cantor

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Abstract
Ritual genital cutting for women, a common practice in Africa and elsewhere around the world, remains dangerous and controversial. In recent years, a 14-year-old girl living in Sierra Leone exsanguinated and died following a ritualistic genital cutting. Hoping to avoid that fate, women with backgrounds that accept ritual genital cutting may, when they reach majority age, ask plastic surgeons to perform genital alterations for cultural reasons. Although plastic surgeons routinely perform cosmetic procedures, unique ethical and legal concerns arise when an adult female patient asks a surgeon to spare her the tribal elder’s knife and alter her genitalia according to tradition and custom. Misinformation and confusion about this issue exist. This article explores the ethical and legal issues relevant to this situation and explains how the thoughtful surgeon should proceed.


Cantor JD. When an adult female seeks ritual genital alteration: Ethics, law, and the parameters of participation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006 Apr 01;117(4):1158-1164.

Physician Participation in Executions: Care Giver or Executioner?

Peter A Clark

The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics
The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics

Abstract
The fear of many is that some physicians have been co-opted by the penal authorities and state legislatures in this country to believe that physician participation is a civic duty and one that is in the prisoner’s best interest. In reality, these physicians are being used as a means to an end. They are being used by certain states to medicalize executions in order to make them more palatable to the American public and to prevent capital punishment from being declared unconstitutional because it is “cruel and unusual punishment.” A basic tenet of the principle of respect for persons is that one may never use another person as a means to an end. Legislating that physicians must be present at executions uses these physicians as pawns, or means, in order to legitimize capital punishment. This not only violates the rights of these physicians but violates the basic ethical principles of the medical profession and distorts the physicians’ role in society.


Clark PA. Physician Participation in Executions: Care Giver or Executioner?. J Law Med Ethics. 2006 Spring;34(1)95-104.

An Essential Prescription: Why Pharmacist-Inclusive Conscience Clauses are Necessary

Brian P Knestout

Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy
Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy

Extract
Conclusion

. . . The only solution to this dilemma may be the solution that the APhA suggested, namely, to endorse a conscience clause, but simultaneously require pharmacists to refer a valid prescription to another service provider. Those members of the profession who bear the burden of this course of action are those who believe that a referral is equivalent to the act itself. However, such a view safeguards most of the ethical goals of pharmacists while simultaneously serving the public need for effective provision of legally prescribed drugs.


Knestout BP. An Essential Prescription: Why Pharmacist-Inclusive Conscience Clauses are Necessary. J Contemp Health Law Pol. 2006 Spring;22(2):349-382.

On Whose Conscience? Patient Rights Disappear Under Broad Protective Measures for Conscientious Objectors in Health Care

Patricia L Selby

University of Detroit Mercy Law Review
University of Detroit Mercy Law Review

Extract
In 2004 the Michigan House passed a bill called the “Conscientious Objector Policy Act.”. . . The bill as passed reflected no balancing of or respect for patients’ rights to autonomy, or their other needs and interests.

This article traces brief histories of health care conscience clauses and the patient’s right to informed consent. It analyzes the bill in the context of patients’s rights, and proposes alternative approaches to restore balance to the patient-provider relationship, while maintaining providers’ right to conscience. The article’s final section evaluates a variety of potential legal challenges to protect patients if the bill is re-introduced unchanged.


Selby PL. Patient Rights Disappear Under Broad Protective Measures for Conscientious Objectors in Health Care. U Detroit Mercy Law Rev. 2006;83(4):507-541.

Conflicts of Conscience

Katherine A James

Washburn Law Journal
Washburn Law Journal

Extract
There is concern that conscience clauses for pharmacists will lead to pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions outside the area of contraception. For example, pharmacists who believe AIDS is a punishment from God may not fill a patient’s prescription for AIDS medication. Doctors who think children should only be born to heterosexual, married couples may not provide adequate fertility treatment or may not encourage their patients to explore their options fully. The current trend of pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions because of personal beliefs violates a woman’s constitutional rights, a pharmacist’s duty of care, and a woman’s right to confidentiality. Forcing pharmacists to fill prescriptions that conflict with their religious beliefs also violates their constitutional right to free exercise of religion. Allowing individual pharmacists to decline to fill prescriptions while mandating that pharmacies have a policy to ensure that customers’ needs are met will help alleviate the concerns of both parties to the conflict. Thus, any legislation that is enacted should balance the needs of both pharmacists and patients.


James KA. Conflicts of Conscience. Washburn Law J. 2006 Jan;45(415-435).

Assisted Suicide & Euthanasia: a Proposal for Restructuring the Criminal Code of Canada

Eike-Henner Kluge

Humanist Perspectives
Humanist Perspectives

Extract
There are other flaws with Bill C-407, but this is not the place to present them in detail. However, there is one serious flaw that is appropriately considered in this forum, and that is the fact that the Bill is a partial measure at best. It deals only with assisted suicide, not euthanasia. It would not help those who, although competent, could not perform the final act themselves because they are disabled. . . .As well, the Bill ignores those who have never been competent and never will be. Their rights would still be less than those of other persons: they would be condemned to suffer when a competent person would not. An appropriately crafted suicide and euthanasia Bill would change that situation.


Kluge E-H. Assisted Suicide & Euthanasia: a Proposal for Restructuring the Criminal Code of Canada. Humanist Perspectives Online Supplement. 2005;38(4):1-5

Defining the limits of conscientious objection in health care

J Andrew West

Newsletter on Philosophy and Medicine
Newsletter on Philosophy and Medicine

Extract
I will argue that we should prefer narrow conscience clauses because they (1) respect patients’ right to informed consent and (2) reduce risks to vulnerable populations. I will then propose and defend an example of what a narrow conscience clause might look like. The clause I propose allows: (1) any person (2) directly involved in providing (3) nonemergency medical treatment or service (4) to refuse to provide the treatment or service in question, so long as the person (5) objects on moral or religious grounds and (6) cooperates in the transfer or referral of the patient to a willing provider. Before I turn to these arguments, a brief overview of the genesis and evolution of conscience clauses in medicine is in order.


West JA. Defining the limits of conscientious objection in health care. Newsletter Phil Med. 2005 Fall;5(1):25-34.

(Correspondence) The Celestial Fire of Conscience: Prof. Charo Replies

R Alta Charo

New England Journal of Medicine, NEJM
New England Journal of Medicine

Extract
With regard to Dr. Lee’s comment that the proposed Wisconsin legislation does not eliminate a health care provider’s duty to provide a referral after refusing to perform a service, I would note that Assembly Bill 207 . . . specifically permits health care providers’ refusals to “participate in” services they find personally objectionable, with “participate in” specifically defined . . . as “to perform; practice; engage in; assist in; recommend; counsel in favor of; make referrals for; prescribe, dispense or administer drugs”.


Charo RA. (Correspondence) The Celestial Fire of Conscience: Prof. Charo Replies. N Engl J Med. 2005 Sep 22;353(12):1302.

Obstacles to Access: How Pharmacist Refusal Clauses Undermine the Basic Health Care Needs of Rural and Low-Income Women

Holly Teliska

Obstacles to Access: How Pharmacist Refusal Clauses Undermine the Basic Health Care Needs of Rural and Low-Income Women
Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law & Justice

Extract
If pharmacists object to particular prescriptions, they should only be allowed to refuse to fill the prescription if meaningful and logistically feasible alternatives are in place. As an alternative, either another pharmacist must be on duty with the refusing pharmacist, or alternative ways of providing service must be in place. A woman should not have to travel to other pharmacies in search of a pharmacist that serves all patients, nor should she have to wait an unreasonable amount of time to have her prescription filled.


Teliska H. Obstacles to Access: How Pharmacist Refusal Clauses Undermine the Basic Health Care Needs of Rural and Low-Income Women. Berkely J Gender, Law Justice. 2005;20(1):229-248.