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 Repeated requests that the allegations be substantiated or withdrawn were ignored.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.

Nurse dismissed over ‘morning after pill’

The American Center for Law and Justice, an international public interest law firm, today filed suit in U.S. District Court in Riverside, California on behalf of a health care worker charging that she was fired from her job as a nurse for Riverside County, California after she refused to dispense medication known as a “morning-after” pill designed to end pregnancies. See the ACLJ news release for details.

 

Protection of Conscience Project one year old

News Release

Protection of Conscience Project

The Protection of Conscience Project was officially launched one year ago. The Project is a non-denominational, non-profit initiative that seeks laws to protect the freedom of conscience of health care workers and others, who have come under increasing pressure to participate in morally controversial procedures.

Over the first few months, the original board of advisors grew from three to seven; it now includes members from three continents, four countries and a number of academic disciplines.

During the year, submissions on freedom of conscience were made to the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution (Ireland), the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, and the National Association of Pharmacy Regulatory Authorities (Canada). The potential impact of the Access to Abortion Services Act (British Columbia) was examined in the first Project report, and efforts have been made to support conscientious objectors by facilitating communication, and by referrals and correspondence.

The Project website has been used by some legislators and others advocating for protection of conscience. Entry level pages in English and French are now available on the site. Posted documents are linked to a service that provides free translation of the gist of the text into six languages, with an option for more accurate, paid translation.

There have been over 800 visitors and 1,000 visits to the website since mid-February, 2000, an average of four visits per day. “The numbers aren’t large,”  comments Sean Murphy, the Project Administrator. “But word is slowly getting out to the people who need to hear about it. And comments from people in difficulty indicate that the work being done is appreciated.”

ACLJ files religious discrimination suit against Ca. health agency over “morning after” pill

News Release

American Center for Law and Justice

(Riverside, CA) – The American Center for Law and Justice, an international public interest law firm, today filed suit in U.S. District Court in Riverside, California on behalf of a health care worker charging that she was fired from her job as a nurse for Riverside County, California after she refused to dispense medication known as a “morning-after” pill designed to end  pregnancies.

“This case centers on the rights of our  client to hold religious beliefs and have those beliefs accommodated by her  employer,” said Frank Manion, Senior Regional Counsel of the ACLJ who is representing the nurse. “Our client did not want to dispense medication that she believes places her in a position to participate in an abortion. It is our position that her deeply held religious beliefs were ignored by her employer and it is our belief that she was wrongly fired because of those beliefs.”

The ACLJ filed suit today in U.S. District Court in Riverside on behalf of Michelle Diaz, who worked as a Clinic Health Nurse at the Riverside Neighborhood Health Center. The complaint contends that in March 1999, Diaz and other health professionals expressed their concerns to management about dispensing the so-called “morning-after” pill – medication designed to end pregnancies.  The lawsuit states that Diaz told her supervisor that her deeply held religious beliefs prevented her from distributing the medication because she believed she would be participating in an abortion.

The complaint contends that the Director of Public Health for Riverside County informed her that if she did not sign a document that required her to dispense what the county called “emergency contraception” which included the “morning-after” pill and other pregnancy-ending medications, she  would no longer be able to work at the clinic. Diaz did not sign the document and wrote a letter to the Director of Public Health explaining that her religious beliefs prevented her from doing so.

According to the suit, in June 1999, Diaz was contacted by news reporters concerning the “morning-after” pill controversy and explained her position to the media. The suit contends that on June 23, 1999 – just days after speaking with the media – she was told that she was being terminated.

“This case may represent a new kind of religious discrimination in the workplace as health care professionals strive to follow their consciences as they begin dispensing new pregnancy-ending drugs like RU-486,” said Manion. “A person’s religious beliefs must be respected and accommodated in the workplace. To do anything less is simply wrong and unconstitutional.”

The lawsuit contends that the action taken against Diaz violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution along with provisions in the California Constitution. The complaint contends the County violated her constitutional rights of free speech and violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by refusing to accommodate her religious beliefs and terminating her employment.

At the same time, the suit contends that Diaz has suffered and continues to suffer financial loss from the termination and damage to her  professional reputation. The suit requests that the court find the actions of the defendants illegal and unconstitutional and requests unspecified damages. The suit also requests a trial by jury.

The suit names as defendants the County of Riverside Health Services Agency, Kenneth Cohen, the Director of the Agency, and Dr. Gary Feldman, who serves as Director of Public Health and as the Public Health Officer for Riverside County.

The ACLJ is being assisted in this case by Robert Tyler of the firm, Tyler, Dorsa & Eldridge in Temecula, CA.

The American Center for Law and Justice is an  international public interest law firm that specializes in constitutional law and focuses on pro-life, pro-family, and pro-liberty issues. The ACLJ is headquartered in Virginia Beach, VA.