Category: Drugs

Letter to the Editor,The Province

Sean Murphy

Readers might be confused by Susan Martinuk’s quote from the College of Pharmacists about what the future may hold for the profession: “preparation of drugs to assist voluntary or involuntary suicide, cloning, genetic manipulation or even suicide.” (Customer isn’t always right on issues of conscience, The Province, 13 June, 2001).

The College Registrar has explained that “involuntary suicide” should have read “involuntary euthanasia“, a clarification that hardly diminishes the moral issues that arise when people are killed without their consent. The second reference to suicide in the same quote is an error in Ms. Martinuk’s article. The sentence in the College statement ended, “…or even execution“. The reference is to the participation of pharmacists in execution by lethal injection, as in the case of Timothy McVeigh.

The paper quoted by Ms. Martinuk was written by the Ethics Advisory Committee of the College, and included imputations of dishonesty directed against conscientious objectors within the profession which the College is unable to substantiate, but which it refuses to withdraw. It is difficult to see how this is consistent with justice nor non-maleficence, two ethical principles that are supposed to be upheld by ethics committees.

Sean Murphy, Administrator
Protection of Conscience Project

Pharmacists Conscience Clause Given Stamp of Approval

News Release

Pro-life Wisconsin

HTML clipboard

Madison–A stamp of approval was given to Assembly Bill 307 (late Thursday),
legislation that will provide much needed job security for pharmacists who conscientiously object to dispensing drugs or devices that can cause death through abortion, euthanasia or physician assisted suicide.

In response to compelling testimony from several Wisconsin pharmacists, the Assembly Family Law Committee in a 4-2 vote sent this measure on for expected full approval of the Wisconsin Assembly.  Pro-Life Wisconsin applauds the support of committee chair Rep. Carol Owens (R-Oshkosh), who authored the bill, as well as committee members Rep. Steve Kestell (R-Elkhart Lake), Rep. Don Friske (R-Merrill) and Rep. Joan Wade (R-Montello).  The dissenting votes came from pro-abortion legislative leader Rep. Terese Berceua (D-Madison) and Rep. Peggy Krusick (D-Milwaukee), who in the past has claimed to be pro-life.

“New abortion techniques focusing on chemical means to end the lives of a preborn babies have received FDA approval or have become more readily available,” explained Mary Matuska, Pro-Life Wisconsin legislative director. 

“While abortion was formerly relegated to a clinical setting, it is now possible to receive life-ending drugs in a pharmacy, forcing pharmacists to be party to abortion.”

Opposing testimony used the scare tactic that this bill would ban birth control.  “This is not true,” stated Mary Matuska.  “This bill will not make drugs such as the morning-after pill and the birth control pill unavailable.  It simply recognizes that employers cannot force pharmacists to be directly involved in abortion, assisted suicide and euthanasia.  It recognizes that pharmacists, like doctors and nurses, are valued health care professionals who should not be forced to choose between their consciences and their livelihoods.”

AB 307 is modelled after legislation which was enacted into law in March, 1998, in the state of South Dakota.  Legislatures in Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky and a few other states are currently considering legislation that would recognize the rights of pharmacists not to engage in procedures that violate their consciences.

“People who call themselves “pro-choice” should especially understand the intent of this bill,” stated Peggy Hamill, Pro-Life Wisconsin state director.

 “Pharmacists should have the right to choose not to be complicit in the taking of innocent human life.”

Contact:   Peggy Hamill, State Director, or Katherine Ribnek, Communications Director   (262) 796-1111 (daytime phone) or (414) 416-0489 (cell phone)

Report Faults Pharmacists’ Ethics Committee

News Release

Protection of Conscience Project

A report released on Monday criticizes the Ethics Advisory Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia for publishing a prejudicial and unjustified attack on the integrity of conscientious objectors within the profession. The report identifies ‘ethical nepotism’ in the committee as a factor contributing to misunderstanding and intolerance.

At issue are statements made last year by the Ethics Advisory Committee in the College newsletter, the Bulletin, which were expanded upon and amplified in a later Journal article, written by a member of the Committee. Repeated requests that the allegations be substantiated or withdrawn were ignored.

An access to information request filed under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act resulted in the production of over 240 pages of documents, but no evidence to support the claims made in the published statements. Despite this, the Registrar of the College of Pharmacists refused to withdraw the statements or apologize.

The report makes a number of recommendations to the Council of the College of Pharmacists, among them the formulation of a policy to govern the Committee. At present, there is no policy on the selection of its members, who lack formal qualifications in ethics, philosophy, or related disciplines.

ACLJ Gets Legal Victory as Lawsuit Against K-Mart Involving Abortion Producing Drugs Moves Forward

News Release

American Center for Law and Justice

(Cincinnati, OH) — The American Center for Law and Justice, an international public interest law firm, said today a federal court has cleared the way for its lawsuit against Kmart on behalf of a pharmacist who was fired for refusing to dispense abortion producing drugs to move forward. A federal judge in the case refused to dismiss the suit and said that a pharmacist may sue her employer under a state conscience law which protects persons who refuse to perform or participate in medical procedures which result in abortion.

“This is a major victory for the rights of conscience,” said Francis J. Manion, Senior Counsel for the ACLJ who is suing Kmart on behalf of a pharmacist. “As long as abortion is legal in this country, there will be millions of citizens opposed to the practice on ethical and religious grounds. These people deserve legal protection to the fullest extent possible. No one should be forced to choose between their livelihood and their conscience. We look forward to moving forward with our case and the upcoming trial on this most critical issue.”

The case began in 1996 when Kmart fired Karen Brauer, an Indiana pharmacist, after she refused to dispense a drug called Micronor. Micronor, a progestin-only contraceptive, works in a significant number of patients by preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg. According to Brauer, this means Micronor and similar drugs, rather than preventing pregnancy; terminate a human life that has already begun. Brauer was fired from Kmart’s Hamilton, Ohio store when she refused to sign an agreement that she would dispense all lawfully prescribed medications regardless of her feelings or beliefs. The ACLJ filed suit against Kmart in U.S. District Court in Cincinnati in August 1999.

Kmart went to court in an effort to dismiss the suit. But in an opinion issued yesterday and released to the ACLJ today, U.S. District Court Judge Herman Weber disagreed with Kmart’s narrow reading of the state conscience statute ruling the statute “is obviously intended to allow an individual who morally or ethically opposes abortion . . . to follow the dictates of her conscience and refuse to participate in such procedures.” The court likewise rejected Kmart’’s arguments that the legislature did not intend the conscience law to apply to the dispensing of a drug that sometimes prevents implantation. Judge Weber said: “What is critical . . . is the undisputed fact that Micronor does prevent implantation of a fertilized egg in some cases and plaintiff’s asserted belief that this process results in abortion and is morally wrong.”

Manion says the court’s decision is an important step in protecting the rights of employees who hold religious beliefs. “This case has enormous implications for the growing practice of chemical or drug-induced abortions. So-called ‘emergency contraceptives’, ‘morning-after pills,’ and RU-486 all work – not by preventing pregnancy – but by ending a human life already in existence. With the court’s recognition of a pharmacist’s statutory exemption from participating in such procedures, pharmacists and others have gained the ability to protect themselves against recrimination for following the dictates of their consciences.”

Manion said the court’s ruling now clears the way for trial to begin in May. The suit seeks compensatory and punitive damages against Kmart and alleges that her firing violated both federal and state laws. At the same time, the suit contends that as a result of Brauer’s termination, she “has sustained and continues to sustain substantial losses in earnings, retirement benefits, and other employment benefits, and has suffered and continues to suffer damage with regard to her professional standing.”

The American Center for Law and Justice is an international public interest law firm that focuses on constitutional issues including pro-family and pro-life cases.