So-called "conscience clauses" -- which allow pharmacists to refuse to dispense drugs for moral or religious reasons -- have now become the latest flashpoint between "right-to-life" advocates and those with a broader view of a pharmacist's responsibilities.
Indeed, both houses of the California legislature are now considering bills that would require pharmacists to fill contraception prescriptions, such as the morning after pill, even if the pharmacist considers them immoral.
Earlier this month, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich signed a 150-day emergency order similar to the proposed California law.
Both actions have prompted condemnations - and in one case, a legal challenge -- from those favoring a pharmacist's right not to dispense such medications.
With two dozen states now considering legislation that would somehow intrude on current practice, it is fitting that a panel discussion between future lawyers and future pharmacists should move center stage.
And on Tuesday, April 19, from 5 to 6:30 at the
University of San Francisco's Law School, 2130 Fulton St. (at Shrader/Parker), Room 101, that is precisely what organizers have in mind.
Moderated by second-year USF law student Christopher Chan, a member of Law Students for Choice, the panel will include UCSF School of Pharmacy experts
Shareen El-Ibiary and
Lorie Rice, who will explain the drugs in question and the range of personal choice now allowed pharmacists. Marsha Cohen, Hastings School of Law professor and author of the textbook"California Law for Pharmacists," will discuss existing laws and requirements. Pharmacy students Steven Aucello and Deanna Spounias will close the presentations with their personal - and opposing - ethical perspectives.
A question-and-answer period will follow. Attendance is free and open to the general public.
Look for a follow-up story on the panel discussion later this week.
Source: Jeff Miller
Related Links
Pharmacists Dispense with Conscience -- or Not?
Pharmacies May Be Forced to Dispense Birth Control (Reuters)
