Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Religion & Law Blogs -> Constitutionally Correct

Religion & Law

: Constitutionally Correct

Does ?Emergency? Trump Conscience, Thus Drawing Another Line in the Sand for Pharmacists?

By Alliance Alert

Many articles take the perspective of the patient's rights, emphasizing the view that in the end the pharmacist must always do whatever the patient wants- thus ignoring the pharmacist's conscience. In being denied the right of conscience, however, the pharmacist loses the same right that women fought so hard to obtain. This Note discusses the pharmacist's right of conscience to refuse to fill a morning-after pill prescription, the history of this issue in Illinois, and the consequences of such laws. More specifically, it looks at the history of Illinois's law and the case Morr-Fitz, Inc. v. Blagojevich. In Part I, this Note considers the administrative rule (?Final Rule?), enacted based on Governor Blagojevich's Emergency Rule (?Emergency Rule?), and the amended rule (?Amended Rule?). Part II examines the specific facts of Morr-Fitz. Part III looks at two state laws that the Final Rule clearly violated. Lastly, Part IV notes the potential effect the Amended Rule will have on pharmacists, patients, the Illinois Legislature, and the Illinois Supreme Court.

Full post as published by Constitutionally Correct on January 22, 2009 (boomark / email).