« Ind. Decisions - "Only indigent entitled to court-paid interpreters " | Main | Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 0 today (and 2 NFP) »

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Ind. Law - "This bill puts a pharmacist's individual beliefs above a patient's needs" [Updated]

Lesley Stedman Weidenbener of the Louisville Courier Journal reports today on SB 3. Some quotes:

Pharmacists could refuse to dispense drugs they believe will be used to abort a pregnancy or commit suicide without fear of punishment by their employer under legislation that cleared the Senate Health Committee yesterday.

Sen. Jeff Drozda, R-Sheridan, said the proposal would give pharmacists the same ability to decline to participate in an abortion as state law gives doctors, nurses and other health-care providers.

But critics say Senate Bill 3 could go much further by allowing pharmacists to refuse to dispense emergency contraception and even birth-control bills.

"This bill puts a pharmacist's individual beliefs above a patient's needs," said Amy Jacobson, a lobbyist for Planned Parenthood of Indiana.

Drozda assured committee members repeatedly that was not his goal. If he had wanted to include the dispensing of contraception, he would have used those words, Drozda said. "Contraception is not covered," he said.

After the meeting, however, Drozda acknowledged that a pharmacist could interpret the legislation as protection for refusing to fill a prescription for birth-control pills. He said he intends for the bill to cover Plan B, the so-called morning-after contraceptive that's available to women at least 18 years old. * * *

Four states, including South Dakota, have passed so-called "pharmacist conscience clause" laws, and four others have refusal laws that don't specifically mention pharmacists but apply broadly to health-care providers.

For background see this ILB entry from 4/2/05 with a number of links to stories on pharmicists' refusals to fill prescriptions, and this entry from 9/4/05 which reports on how not only pharmicists, but some judges are opting out on "moral grounds."

[Updated] Niki Kelly of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette also reported today on yesterday's committee hearing. Some quotes:

Despite confusion over the intent and practical effect of a pharmacists’ conscience bill, a Senate panel approved the legislation Wednesday that critics said could impede access to contraceptive pills and devices.

“I don’t believe anyone on this committee believes we need to turn Indiana back to 1965,” said Sen. Vi Simpson, D-Bloomington, who voted against Senate Bill 3 along with her three Democratic colleagues and one Republican.

Six other Republicans voted “yes,” sending the legislation to the full Senate for amendments.

The bill, authored by Sen. Jeff Drozda, R-Carmel, said no pharmacist can be required to dispense a drug or medical device if the pharmacist believes it will be used for any of three reasons:

• To cause an abortion.

• To destroy an unborn child (which is undefined).

• To cause the death of a person by assisted suicide, euthanasia or a mercy killing.

A pharmacist who uses one of these sections to refuse service can’t be disciplined under the bill. If the employer does so anyway, the employer can be charged with a criminal offense.

Drozda could not give an example of a drug that would fall under the bill and could not explain the difference between the abortion section and the section involving an unborn child.

The Indiana Pharmacists’ Alliance said it has heard of no instances in which a pharmacist was disciplined for abiding by his religious or ethical beliefs. But Drozda said he has a constituent who was suspended for refusing to give out Plan B. * * *

The matter is complicated because the bill has no definition for unborn child and the Senate is considering a separate bill to define life as beginning when the egg is fertilized by a sperm. * * *

The next step for supporters and opponents is to try to find a definition that makes clear whether the bill covers dispensing contraceptives.

“We won’t agree on one,” Drozda said. “That’s been the battle before because it comes down to when you believe life begins.”

Posted by Marcia Oddi on January 10, 2008 07:46 AM
Posted to Indiana Law