A Wisconsin appeals court upheld sanctions Tuesday against a pharmacist from Minnesota who refused to fill a college student's prescription for birth control pills because of religious objections.
Pharmacist Neil Noesen had refused to fill the prescription of a student at the University of Wisconsin-Stout while working as a substitute pharmacist at a Menomonie Kmart in 2002. Furthermore, he declined to refer the woman to another pharmacy.
The 34-year-old pharmacist told regulators that he is a devout Roman Catholic and acted like he did because he didn't want to commit a sin by "impairing the fertility of a human being," The Associated Press reported. The Roman Catholic Church is opposed to contraception.
In Tuesday’s ruling, the three-judge panel of 3rd District Court of Appeals said the punishment Noesen received from The Pharmacy Examining Board in a 2005 ruling did violate his "right of conscience" to religiously oppose birth control.
The court ruled that while Noesen had the right to refuse to provide the contraceptive, he was wrong to refuse to refer the woman to another pharmacy.
In 2005, the Pharmacy Examining Board had allowed Noesen to keep his license as long as he informs all future employers in writing of his objection to dispensing birth control pills and of steps he would take to refer the patient elsewhere. The board also ordered the pharmacist to attend ethics classes.
The appeals court, however, asked the board to reconsider its decision ordering Noesen to pay $20,000 in legal fees.
The issue of a pharmacist's "right to conscience" is also being taken up in other states. Two pharmacy owners in Illinois asked the State Supreme Court two weeks ago to overturn a rule that requires them to dispense an “emergency” contraception pill in spite of their moral objections. In Washington, a federal judge ruled last November that objecting pharmacists can refuse to dispense orders on the drug but must refer customers to another nearby source.
Thomas Brejcha, a Chicago lawyer who represented Noesen, said he expects to appeal the decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
RSS
It is impossible to treat such person with "$20k" to be take from his pocket just because of his belief. Respect people and their own decission. God bless you, Noesen and well done.
Pro-life: A Misnomer?
http://polemos.net/A%20Misnomer.html
The greatest sin in many parts of our corrupt society is doing anything which intereres with woman's right to choose to kill her unborn baby. The poor pharmacist was merely swept away by violating that sacred precept.
Note to the court: There is this thing, it's been around for quite a while, it's called a telephone book. If a person wants to find a pharmacy that will dispense birth control pills, all they have to do is look it up. So now the pharmacist has to know which pharmacy dispenses birth control pills and which ones don't. Common sense, justices. A little common sense, please.
Maybe next, some court somewhere will rule that an objecting pharmacist has to drive the customer to another pharmacy.
I found it disturbing that the pharmacist has to attend "ethics" classes. He did nothing unethical. There was no life threatening situation involved. The presciption had nothing to do with treating a physical illness. The customer may be inconvenienced for a few minutes - that's it. Jeesh.