Spokane7
59°
February 23, 2012 in Region
Required Plan B dispensing takes hit
Judge: Pharmacy rule singles out religious objections
Kevin Stormans, a store owner who sued over the pharmacy law, talks to reporters Wednesday.
(Full-size photo)
TACOMA – Washington state cannot force pharmacies to sell Plan B or other emergency contraceptives, a federal judge ruled Wednesday, saying the state’s true goal was to suppress religious objections by druggists – not to promote timely access to the medicines for people who need them.
U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton sided with a pharmacy and two pharmacists who said state rules requiring them to dispense Plan B violate their constitutional rights to freedom of religion because such drugs can destroy a fertilized egg, which they consider equal to abortion.
Washington’s rules require that pharmacies stock and dispense drugs for which there is a demand. The state adopted the dispensing regulations in 2007, following reports that some women had been denied access to Plan B, which has a high dose of medicine found in birth-control pills and is effective if a woman takes it within 72 hours of unprotected sex.
State lawyers argued that the requirements are legal because they apply neutrally to all medicines and pharmacies and because they promote a government interest – the timely delivery of medicine, including Plan B, which becomes less effective as time passes.
But Leighton ruled that the state allows all sorts of exemptions to the rules. Pharmacies can decline to stock a drug, such as certain painkillers, if it’s likely to increase the risk of theft, or if it requires an inordinate amount of paperwork, or if the drug is temporarily unavailable from suppliers, among other reasons.
“The most compelling evidence that the rules target religious conduct is the fact the rules contain numerous secular exemptions,” the judge said. “In sum, the rules exempt pharmacies and pharmacists from stocking and delivering lawfully prescribed drugs for an almost unlimited variety of secular reasons, but fail to provide exemptions for reasons of conscience.”
Leighton, in his decision Wednesday, did not strike down Washington’s rules but said that the way they were applied to the plaintiffs in this case was unconstitutional.
The state remains free to try to enforce the law against other pharmacies that violated the stocking and dispensing rules, whether for Plan B or other drugs; it remains unclear whether courts would reach a similar conclusion if pharmacies objected to selling other drugs for religious reasons.
“I remain concerned about the impacts on patients if pharmacies are allowed to refuse to dispense lawfully prescribed or lawful medications to patients,” said Gov. Chris Gregoire, who insisted on the dispensing rule’s adoption. “I am especially concerned about those living in rural areas, many of whom may have few alternatives and could suffer lengthy delays in receiving medication or go without entirely.”
The judge, an appointee of President George W. Bush, first blocked the state’s dispensing rule in 2007. But a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel overruled him, saying the rules did not target religious conduct. It sent the case back to Leighton, who held an 11-day trial before reaffirming his original decision.
Further appeals were expected, both from the state and from groups that intervened on the state’s behalf. Before taking more than an hour to read his 48-page opinion in court, Leighton acknowledged that he crafted it for the benefit of a “skeptical” appeals court.
The interveners included women who were denied timely access to Plan B when they needed it – one of whom cut short a vacation in central Washington to return home to Bellingham, where she knew she could obtain Plan B from her regular pharmacy – as well as HIV patients, who argued that if druggists could refuse to dispense Plan B for religious reasons, some might also refuse to dispense time-sensitive HIV medications.
“The question really is whether the patient’s rights come first or the pharmacist’s rights come first,” said Andrew Greene, a lawyer for the interveners.
Assistant Attorney General Rene Tomisser said Leighton’s ruling was “more detailed” but made the same mistake he made in 2007.
Margo Thelen, of Woodland, one of the pharmacists who sued over the rules, said she had to leave one job because she refused to dispense Plan B – and now she can continue working at her new job without fear of being fired.
“Speak to anyone who shops in a pharmacy,” she said. “Their product isn’t always available.”
© Copyright 2012 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Fifth victim dies in Seattle shooting 
greenlibertarian2nd on February 23 at 1:33 a.m.
Plan B requires NO prescription for older than 17 years people, male or female.
There’s NO reason it should be held hostage behind the counter at pharmacies, subject to anybody’s whim.
We’re talking about EMERGENCY contraception.
TIME is of the ultimate essence in using this product as intended.
If the ONLY pharmacy within 75 miles declines to stock the product, a woman needing such would have to have the time, and the means, to get to a pharmacy that DOES carry it.
The only other non-prescription medications kept behind the counter are there because of their potential for getting high and abuse addiction. PlanB has no such issue.
PlanB should be available in ANY store, subject to routine age verification, which already occurs thousands of times a day everywhere selling cancer sticks and alcohol.
JBlim on February 23 at 5:51 a.m.
The judge found that:
“state’s true goal was to suppress religious objections by druggists”
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/hbo/2012/feb/22/druggists-dont-have-sell-plan-b/#c415531
Well, doesn’t that sound like what an appointee of President George W. Bush would dream up in his delusional view of government? Bush stacked the courts with religious nut-cases, now we’re paying the price.
dfcalbreath on February 23 at 6:13 a.m.
If you read the judge’s findings (and not what S-R reports), you would see that Governor Gregoire was openly opposed to the position of the pharmacists and exerted tremendous pressure on the state pharmacy board to change the rules so that the pharmacists would have to sell Plan B. Some of what she did was probably illegal and in violation of Washington state law (RCW 48.43.065) which allows the exercise of freedom of conscience in these matters. So the S-R once again missed a major part of the story and also presented a very biased account of the issues..
RedCedar on February 23 at 8:37 a.m.
Thank you, dfcalbreath for the RCW citation (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=48.43.065). Its conflicting provisions appear to be “No individual health care provider, religiously sponsored health carrier, or health care facility may be required by law or contract in any circumstances to participate in the provision of or payment for a specific service if they object to so doing for reason of conscience or religion.” versus “The provisions of this section are not intended to result in an enrollee being denied timely access to any service included in the basic health plan services”. It does look like the Pharmacy board overstepped state law on this.
The federal judge, of course, could not rule on the state issues, but only on the constitutional civil rights aspect. Even if he had ruled that there was no infringement of the pharmacists religious rights, it seems like there would still be a strong case for challenging the administrative ruling in the state supreme court.
If the governor didn’t like the law regulating health care providers, she should have asked the legislature to change the law rather than pressuring the pharmacy board to issue a legally-shaky administrative ruling.
Arbeautis on February 23 at 8:42 a.m.
Plan B is not a contraceptive it is an abortifacient. This means that it causes a feritlized egg (person) to be aborted. No arguement, look it up
detroitdude on February 23 at 9:39 a.m.
“This means that it causes a feritlized egg (person) to be aborted.”
A fertilized egg is not a person. This collection of dividing cells does not even have a heart beat until week 5 of pregnancy, long after a woman would have used Plan B.
As for them not selling Plan B based on religious beliefs, whatever, they don’t have to sell anything they don’t want to. Most people will happily take their money elsewhere.
greenlibertarian2nd on February 23 at 3:52 p.m.
Arbeautis on February 23 at 8:42 a.m.
Plan B is not a contraceptive it is an abortifacient. This means that it causes a feritlized egg (person) to be aborted. No arguement, look it up
Asserting lies does not make them so. It only makes the person asserting such lies look foolish and dogmatic.
http://www.fda.gov/drugs/drugsafety/postmarketdrugsafetyinformationforpatientsandproviders/ucm109795.htm
If one wants to be taken seriously, one needs to avoid outright prevarication.
JBlim on February 23 at 5:26 p.m.
Folks of the religious view that life begins at conception must really hate the IUD then. But that’s been around forever.
misjustice on February 23 at 5:33 p.m.
I’m surprised by Judge Leighton’s ruling in this case, especially since he was the Judge that ordered the Pentagon to reinstate Major Margaret Witt.
detroitdude on February 23 at 6:03 p.m.
Should also add to my previous thought…Most people will happily take their money elsewhere, and likely never return to your business for any good or service you sell.