About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

12 DePaul J. Health Care L. 67 (2009)
When Two Fundamental Rights Collide at the Pharmacy: The Struggle to Balance the Consumer's Right to Access Contraception and the Pharmacist's Right of Conscience

handle is hein.journals/dephcl12 and id is 69 raw text is: WHEN TWO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS COLLIDE AT THE PHARMACY: THE STRUGGLE TO BALANCE THE CONSUMER'S RIGHT TO ACCESS CONTRACEPTION AND THE PHARMACIST'S RIGHT OF CONSCIENCE. By Suzanne Davis & Paul Lansing' I. INTRODUCTION The dangerous intersection between a pharmacist's right of moral belief and a woman's right of contraceptive use continues to be an important topic for debate across the nation. In fact, the area of contraceptive rights has been a controversial issue since the United States Supreme Court's decision in Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965, which recognized a constitutional right of privacy in family planning decisions implicit within the meaning of the Bill of Rights. Now, over forty years since this landmark decision, courts continue to grapple with the notion of women's rights and how contraceptive use should be protected. New developments in pharmaceutical research and technology have resulted in the formation of new legal and ethical issues. The most recent dilemma faced by both federal and state courts features women who desire a recently FDA approved contraceptive drug called Plan B and pharmacists who are morally opposed to the mode of action of the drug. This newfound ability to prevent birth using a drug taken after sexual activity presents a scenario the Griswold Court would have never anticipated. Nonetheless, the precedent beginning with Griswold has created a necessary collision between these two fundamental rights. Pharmacists are placed in a unique position in this controversy. Pharmacists are licensed by the state yet some believe that they cannot comply with state requirements due to their individual religious beliefs. As nearly all Americans are familiar, the right to religious belief has been protected since the drafting of the Bill of Rights in the First Amendment. Consequently, many pharmacists, who are opposed to Plan B, think the government should not be allowed to interfere with their business and ethical decision to refuse to dispense the drug. As Illinois State Senator and Pharmacist/Pharmacy Owner, Frank Watson, Suzanne Davis is an instructor at the school of business at Eastern Illinois University. Paul Lansing is a professor of business administration at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most