Pharmacist refused due to his personal religious beliefs
By Barbara L. Jones
BridgeTower Media Newswires
MINNEAPOLIS, MN - In what appears to be the first lawsuit of its kind in the state, Andrea Anderson of McGregor, Minnesota, has sued two pharmacies for sex discrimination because pharmacists refused to fill a prescription for emergency contraception.
The mother of five and her partner were not planning more children the night a condom broke, so Anderson saw her doctor the next day, and received a prescription for ella, an emergency contraceptive.
But the pharmacist at Thrifty White Pharmacy said he wasn't comfortable filling the prescription due to his personal religious beliefs. He told her to try another pharmacy, but not Shopko because she would have the same problem. Later, the owner of the store told Anderson the pharmacist had refused to fill the contraceptive prescription for another woman. He had been told to find another pharmacist immediately to help the customer but did not. By way of apology, the owner gave Anderson a gift card for gasoline.
Next, the CVS pharmacy said it didn't carry ella and could not get it from the store's wholesaler but offered to call Walgreens. The CVS pharmacist reported that Walgreens was also out of the drug.
That wasn't true. Anderson called Walgreens and was told they could fill it. It was 50 miles away and a storm was coming. Anderson made the trip, blizzard and all. She did not get pregnant.
Anderson is represented by Jess Braverman and Christy Hall of Gender Justice in St. Paul.
Anderson's lawsuit is for sex discrimination by denying her service as a result of her pregnancy-related health care needs in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minn. Stat §§ 363A.01, et seq.
Her claims include denial of goods or services by a place of public accommodation because of sex; unfair refusal to do business with a person based on sex (which includes pregnancy); and aiding and abetting discrimination.
Her prayer for relief looks for a declaration of violation of the MHRA, a permanent mandatory injunction against the defendants requiring them to follow the MHRA, a civil penalty, compensatory damages, treble damages, punitive damages interest and attorney fees.
The lawsuit reflects similar controversies in other states.
The Trump administration has promulgated rules that allow providers to refuse to treat conditions or even refuse to provide information about alternative sources of care, according to the National Women's Law Center.
"Three federal courts struck down a Trump rule that is broader than pharmacy refusals. It would allow virtually anyone involved in patient care (including pharmacists) to refuse to do their job if they don't like the care the patient is receiving. For example, an ambulance driver could refuse to drive a patient with an ectopic pregnancy to a hospital for treatment, threatening her health and future fertility. The rule even allows health care providers to refuse to give patients basic information, including where the patient can actually get the care they need," said Rachel Easter of the National Women's Law Center at a press call announcing the lawsuit.
"That federal rule has been struck down by federal courts in the Southern District of New York, Eastern District of Washington, and Northern District of California," Easter said.
Published: Thu, Dec 19, 2019
