Aitkin County jury finds for pharmacist who declined to fill birth control prescription

[question everything]

Source: StarTribune

An Aitkin County jury found Friday that a pharmacist who declined to fill a birth control prescription because of his religious beliefs did not commit sex discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act. The case is believed to be the first in the nation to be brought to trial based on a claim of sex discrimination for refusing to dispense birth control.

However, the jury ordered pharmacist George Badeaux to pay Andrea Anderson of McGregor, Minn., $25,000 for emotional harm she suffered when he declined to fill her prescription for a morning-after pill in January 2019.

And the case may not be over. Gender Justice, the St. Paul advocacy group that provided legal representation to Anderson, said it will file a motion asking the judge to overturn the verdict, something that's allowed in civil cases. If that motion fails, the group said it plans to appeal to the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

(snip)

Badeaux testified that he believes the morning-after pill sought by Anderson, a drug called Ella, has the potential to change a woman's uterine lining and prevent a fertilized egg from implanting. In his view, that would end a life, he testified. Anderson's attorneys presented expert testimony that Ella works by delaying ovulation when taken after unprotected intercourse. The expert called Badeaux's interpretation "speculative and hypothetical."


Read more: https://www.startribune.com/aitkin-county-jury-rules-for-pharmacist-who-declined-to-fill-birth-control-prescription/600196146/

[msongs]

1. my sincerely held religous belief says if u dont do what your told I can fire u nt

[Ocelot II]

2. Aitkin County is deep in Trumpistan, so the verdict isn't that surprising.

They did award her damages for emotional distress, though.

[turbinetree]

27. I use to live in the 8th Congressional District and Jim Oberstar was my representative

It was very blue until about ten to fifteen years ago, after the mines starting cutting back and closing down they fell into the right wing trap of promises, and the person running around in that district now is anti-worker and anti woman, but Oberstar believed abortion should be allowed if the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape or when the life of the woman is endangered.

[BOSSHOG]

3. Hey, let's do away with the separation of church and state

Let’s make religious “beliefs” a “liability.” The Catholic crime family has no respect for the separation, so let’s turn loose the assessors.

Just a thought. I’m a recovering Catholic and the thought of those criminals is hard on my blood pressure. I don’t care what religion the pharmacist is, his fucking religious beliefs are irrelevant to his job.

If we don’t fight like hell we’re not gonna have a country.

[NullTuples]

6. Remember; belief and opinion are synonyms

[BOSSHOG]

8. Religious beliefs should not be tax exempt assets used to harm at will

And people who have religious beliefs do not consider them opinions. They consider them chiseled in stone and far superior then the quaint concept of liberty and Justice for all. If you wanna destroy the fabric of democracy, give a religious sect, any sect, unbridled freedom to impose whatever belief on whomever. Like thou shalt not get an abortion because that’s what we believe.

[IrishAfricanAmerican]

19. Hear, hear!

[Rhiannon12866]

20. Not to mention, his customers don't share his "religious" beliefs

His job is not to proselytize, it's to fill prescriptions prescribed by the doctors who know their patients. If he can't do that without imposing his personal beliefs on strangers, he needs to be replaced.

[pazzyanne]

22. Amen! nt

[Ferrets are Cool]

4. What would happen to a cashier if they declined to check out a person

because they had beer, or wanted to buy cigarettes or hell, even Coke because it went against their "religious beliefs"?
IMO, they would be fired.

This is the most disgusting thing. These people are fucking nuts. And the stores who allow it are just as much a problem.

[Buzz cook]

14. Or refused to sell alcohol and tobacco

To Baptist and other xtians whose religious beliefs forbade them.

"I can't sell this to you because its against your religion".
And the bible forbids a ton of stuff.

[sop]

23. "I can't sell this to you because it's against MY religion."

[azureblue]

47. more

"You have a tattoo! My religion says that is a sin, so I refuse to do business with a person who has a tattoo."
Also repeat for pork. And 2 types of cloth worn at the same time.

This is easy to turn around on them if we push back. Like ask the refusing pharmacist what religion he or she is, then declare. "I refuse to even speak with a person from xxx religion. My religion says they are tools of Satan, liars and intentionally ignorant. And they could be intending to harm me by refusing to fill or to mis fill my prescription. I don't knwo what's in that bottle, but since they are refusing to fill my prescription, they could just as easily be putting fake pills in the bottle."

For OTC meds they refuse to to sell, simply put the money on teh counter, take a photo of it, and walk out. If they call the cops, then you can say that you suspected to Pharma was going to pocket the money, because he refused to ring up a sale. You paid for it, in full, and here is a picture of the money on the counter..

[Demovictory9]

54. I'm vegan... no beef jerky for you!

[ShazzieB]

16. The stores who allow thus are even worse.

"And the stores who allow it are just as much a problem."

I think they're an even bigger problem. Store clerks, pharmacists, etc. would not pull this crap if they knew they would be fired for it. The stores need to quit letting employees get away with it.

[Ferrets are Cool]

21. +1

[sop]

25. Imagine a gun store clerk who refused to sell a man self-defense ammunition because it might

go against a belief in the Sixth Commandment. That employee would be summarily fired, and the courts would never find the gun store owner legally liable for violating the clerk's religious beliefs. In contrast, women are subjected to this sort of religious belief BS by pharmacists, insurance companies and even governments, yet employers and the courts see nothing wrong with it.

[azureblue]

48. the law says

they pharmacist must, instead, go find another person to sell you the prescription.

[MurrayDelph]

32. How fervently would they protect

a Muslim clerk who refused to sell Pork Rinds?

[dchill]

58. Pretty sure that doesn't happen.

THEIR religion just won't let them eat pork rinds.

[question everything]

56. Several years ago taxi drivers at the Minneapolis St. Paul airport refused passengers

carrying alcoholic beverage bottles because it was (still is) against their religion (Muslims). Shortly after, when Target added groceries, some cashiers refused to scan packaged pork for the same reason.

In both cases they were given an ultimatum: do your job or you are out of this job.

[Irish_Dem]

5. Does he deny men viagra?

Of course not.

Only women are targets.

[Novara]

40. Hence, sex discrimination

Isn't this the case where he also didn't tell her where she could get her prescription filled, as is required by law? Or is that a different case?

[Irish_Dem]

42. Yes it is discrimination pure and simple, to subjugate women.

This is what it was like in the old days.

[Novara]

43. It has nothing to do with "life" or babies; it never did.

It has always had everything to do with punishing women for making our own decisions about our own bodies.

Men STILL think women are THEIR property.

[Irish_Dem]

44. Yes. GOP leaders care nothing about the abortion issue. This is about controlling women.

They all get abortions at the drop of a hat for the women close to them.

It is red meat to their base and a way to subjugate women.

When women started graduating from college in larger numbers than men, the GOP decided enough was enough. Time to put women back in their place.

Demoralize, subjugate, terrorize women.
That is the goal.

[Novara]

45. And in large part they are succeeding

[Irish_Dem]

46. Oh yes, they are going to put women through hell again.

Until we become docile and compliant like in the old days.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

51. From a religious perspective Viagra and Ella are quite different

Viagra is basically the opposite of contraception.

I mean, obviously, this dude is a dick, and I DESPISE this crap.

But you are kinda comparing apples to oranges here.

Denying people from buying condoms would be a more apt comparison.

Which, to your point ... I'd guess he'd never do.

Nor should he.

Nor should have he denied this woman her legal contraception.

[ck4829]

52. But from a religious perspective, isn't ED of God's will?

Pregnancy is an act of God or God's will but NOT erectile dysfunction?

Why is that?

What is up with that?

http://cococo.pbworks.com/w/page/150007992/Pregnancy%20is%20an%20act%20of%20God%20or%20God%27s%20will%20but%20NOT%20erectile%20dysfunction

[Hugh_Lebowski]

53. If he'd proffered an excuse along those lines I'd see your point

But he didn't, he used the 'I might be participating in a murder' excuse.

You know me ... I'm a militant atheist and I HATE HATE HATE this kinda crap.

But I still don't think Viagra is a good comparison. Giving someone Viagra is clearly not even arguably 'participating in a murder'.



If he HAD made the 'pregnancy is God's Will' excuse he'd have been a laughing stock as a pharmacist. Why are you handing out ANY medications then? Aren't all maladies God's Will? Why do you give out insulin, isn't diabetes God's Will?

Etc, Etc, Etc.

[Irish_Dem]

57. 100% disagree. It is about male gender privilege, 100%.

Male sex organs are off limits, women's are fair game.

Men will never be regulated. Even male phallic toys, guns, won't be regulated.

I am an older female and seen it all before, women are second class citizens.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

59. Hmmm ... so how come men need an Rx for Viagra?

Seems to me, making a drug like sildenafil as Rx-only is actually a case of 'male sex organ regulation'.

Also note that my insurance company only allows me 6 per month on their dime.

Yet you're saying my dick will never be regulated.

Seems ... paradoxical

I'm also wondering, when a female bible-thumping pharmacist pulls this exact crap (which will eventually occur), is that still going to be your argument? She did so because male gender privilege?

I'm also wondering, if a female bible-thumping pharmacist pulls similar crap and refuses to sell a male condoms (I would bet that'll happen, too), what will you say then?

All I'm getting at here is I think you're a little hyperbolic with the 100% thing. There's going to be SOME people where the motivation is ... exactly as you say. But there's others for whom it's an actual deeply-held religious belief that abortion is tantamount to murder, that avoiding babies thru contraception is morally wrong, etc.

I think it's garbage and think people need to just do their damn job, but I really don't think there's a 100% universal answer behind EVERYONE'S motivation to ban abortion, deny Plan-B, or whatever.

[SunSeeker]

7. Insanity. If his religion prevents him from filling a prescription, he can't be a pharmacist.

He is simply unqualified to be a pharmacist. Maybe he should be a preacher.

[ShazzieB]

15. EXACTLY!

If he is uncomfortable dispensing certain perfectly legal, commonly used drugs, he needs to be in a line of work that does not involve dispensing drugs, period, full stop.

I hate holier than thou jerks like this who think their religious beliefs entitle them to dictate what others are allowed to have access to. It's so incredibly presumptuous!

I once belonged to a religion whose adherents were expected to abstain from using alcohol. You know what I did NOT do? Go out and get a job as a bartender and then refuse to serve alcohol to customers, because that would have obviously been very stupid.

[zanana1]

31. He certainly enjoys the power to preach.

The right wing has emboldened these people.

[royable]

9. What if it was my personal religious belief that I'm justified in thrashing the pharmacist

to within an inch of his life if he doesn't fill my prescription?

I just don't understand how some unlawful actions can be justified due to personal religious belief and other actions aren't.

Perhaps it all boils down to IOKIYAR.

[sakabatou]

10. How many more cases of this happening will it be before

the vast majority of the US are sick of it.

[Skittles]

11. pharmacies need to STOP HIRING PEOPLE WHO CANNOT DO THE JOB

having sanctimonious delusions is one thing, inflicting them on customers is ENTIRELY ANOTHER

[keithbvadu2]

12. Aren't they required to refer the patient to another pharmacist who will fill the prescription?

Aren't they required to refer the patient to another pharmacist who will fill the prescription?

[question everything]

35. Yes, he "offered" to send it to another pharmacy 100 miles away (we are talking rural area)

Angry, she declined and had the prescription transferred herself and then drove, in wintry weather.

[3Hotdogs]

13. Still, he's gotta fill a lot'a pill jars to make up for $25,000.

[rpannier]

38. The right wing Go Fund Me equivalent will raise the money

Peter Thiel will likely kick in 25k himself

[childfreebychoice]

17. Even more egregious, a pharmacist who doesn't understand how the script he

Is refusing to fill, works. What about ppl in areas where there is only one pharmacy, and going somewhere else would require transportation, travel time? An aside, heard of any pharmacist refusing to fill Viagra?

[mwb970]

18. I just don't understand these people.

If you can't do the job you were hired to do, for whatever reason, you should be fired. There are lots of jobs you can do. Go do one of those.

[mpcamb]

24. Logically , it would seem when hiring asking pointed questions about religious

beliefs held would be fair game then.

[jayschool2013]

26. An idea

What if Quakers bought every gun shop in the U.S., and then, because of their deeply held religious commitment to pacifism, refused to actually sell any guns? It's a bad business model, of course, but it would save lives.

[Ocelot II]

28. What if Old Order Amish people bought all the car dealerships and electronics stores,

Muslims bought all the liquor stores, and Jainists bought all the butcher shops? No cars, TVs, computers, booze or meat. Then there'd be hell to pay. But as long as the God-botherers are just causing problems for women, it's no big deal...

[jayschool2013]

49. LOL!!

Perfect. Just grind the wheels of commerce to a halt because we all hold jobs at which we can force our religious beliefs on others!

What a country!

Of course, we already have an entire set of right-wing media that purport to be truth-seekers but feed people only lies, so there's that. And it makes shitloads of money.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

55. Two girls I was with in my younger days had abortions

Where I was presumably the father.

I wanted them to have abortions even more than they did. They did see the wisdom of it eventually, however.

This idea that this Hobbs decision ONLY screws things up for women is kinda bullshit, no offense.

It begins with a false presumption about how men think about babies. Like 'if a man causes a pregnancy, they WANT her to have that baby, always!'. That is SO FAR from true.

In fact, I'd bet that in the large majority of abortions, the sperm-contributors input on the subject plays a major role in the ovum-contributors decision to terminate.

Personally I think it's unhelpful to The Cause to present the argument that 'only women are inconvenienced'. I think it's better to say ANYONE can be. XX persons obviously can suffer more acutely than XY's, but making this out to be *purely* a XX's issue ... can limit the audience, so to speak.

MHO.

[Ocelot II]

29. Great LTTE about this case this morning:

The front-page headline in Monday's paper "Morning-after pill denied; suit follows" baffled me. How can a valid prescription be denied? But as I read the details of that article and the follow-up articles throughout the week, I went from baffled to angry. Andrea Anderson's request never should have been denied. The fact that her suit against the pharmacist resulted in a jury trial costing Minnesota taxpayers money should make us all angry, but more importantly the fact that her sexual history and her personal/confidential therapy records were brought up as part of the defense is outrageous and should scare every one of us no matter where your reproductive opinions lie.

Here is what matters: Is Ella a legal/approved drug? Yes. Was the prescription written by an authorized/licensed provider? Yes. Is Thrifty White in the business of filling prescriptions? Yes. Did Thrifty White hire George Badeaux as a pharmacist whose responsibilities include filling valid prescriptions? Yes. Did Badeaux fulfill his responsibility by filling Anderson's valid prescription? No. Case closed.

How Badeaux felt about the actual drugs or the effects of the prescriptions presented to him was irrelevant. If he applied for and accepted a job as a pharmacist, he needed to fulfill all of the job, not just the parts he liked. No one was making him take this job. If it didn't align with his beliefs, he could have chosen another line of work. And if Thrifty White wanted to support Badeaux's decision to not fill certain legal/valid prescriptions, as a condition of operating as a pharmacy, it should be required to have another pharmacist on duty at all times to fill the prescriptions that Badeaux refuses to. They too had a responsibility to fulfill here.

Badeaux stated that he is a Christian and respects every human being. The only human being on the other side of this case is Anderson, and Badeaux did not respect her or her right to obtain a legal, validly prescribed medication.

https://www.startribune.com/readers-write-contraceptives-abortion-inflation/600196139/

[csziggy]

33. That is a wonderful letter!

Too bad Ms Anderson's lawyers could not have been as clear in their case to the jury - or the jury was too stupid to understand such a clear argument.

This is the part I don't get: why the pharmacist's beliefs - whether about the drug or an imaginary sky being - should override a legitimate prescription by a real doctor. When did this pharmacist get a medical degree and become licensed to practice medicine in his state?

[Ocelot II]

34. The problem was that the case was based on the state's human rights statute,

and the jury could have concluded that while the pharmacist's actions were wrong (they did award her compensation for emotional distress), they didn't violate that particular law, which says:

(a) It is an unfair discriminatory practice:
(1) to deny any person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation because of race, color, creed, religion, disability, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or sex...

"Sex" includes, but is not limited to, pregnancy, childbirth, and disabilities related to pregnancy or childbirth...

"Place of public accommodation" means a business, accommodation, refreshment, entertainment, recreation, or transportation facility of any kind, whether licensed or not, whose goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations are extended, offered, sold, or otherwise made available to the public...

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/363A

I don't know how the arguments for and against were presented at trial, but it's possible that the pharmacist's lawyer argued that the provisions relating to pregnancy and childbirth were intended to protect pregnant women from being discriminated against in housing and employment situations, not the purchase of birth control drugs; and that if a woman's husband/male partner had tried to get the prescription filled the pharmacist wouldn't have filled it for him either, therefore there was no gender-based discrimination. I don't buy those arguments myself, but maybe they were made and maybe the jury accepted them. I think the statute needs to be amended to include these situations.

[Novara]

41. Wait -

"Sex" includes, but is not limited to, pregnancy, childbirth, and disabilities related to pregnancy or childbirth...

Is that written in the statute? Because sex means male or female. And if he is denying women prescriptions but filling prescriptions for men - each prescription specific to the sex of the person - then that IS sex discrimination.

If that is written in the law, then fully ignorant people wrote that law. "Sex" means male or female and has nothing to do with the reproductive STATE of either.

[malthaussen]

30. And this is why jury trials are not always the best. n/t

[Marthe48]

36. It is not his business

His views aren't what keeps him employed.

MYOB, ass.

[Deuxcents]

39. Agree

[The Jungle 1]

37. Why does he hate freedom?

[SouthernDem4ever]

50. It's just as stupid as people using so-called "religious beliefs"

to avoid taking a vaccine.