Media Releases
- July - December, 2005-

"The government shouldn't force pro-life medical professionals to participate in abortions against their conscience," said Casey Mattox, litigation counsel with the CLS Center for Law & Religious Freedom.

Brief can be read at

Together, ADF, America's largest legal alliance, and CLS, America's premier membership organization of Christian legal professionals, defend religious liberty, human life, marriage, and the family.  

Testimony of Pharmacist Noesen

Disciplinary Proceedings
Against Neil Noesen, RPH
Final Decision and Order

Neil Noesen v Department of
 Regulation and Licensing 
& Pharmacy Examining Board-
Appeal Brief

Neil Noesen, the Wisconsin pharmacist disciplined earlier this year by the Wisconsin State Pharmacy Examining Board has filed an opposing brief November 1^st in Barron County Circuit Court. 

The brief argues that Noesen fulfilled the standard of care in his fair disclosure to his employer and in his professional service to the patient’s health, safety, and well-being.  Furthermore, it is argued that Board’s standard of care is unconstitutional and that the Board made a critical omission of law in failing to prudently examine Wisconsin State Statute Chapter 941.

In July 2002, Noesen conscientiously objected to cooperate with the filling of an order for a patient to use Loestrin FE 1/20 as a contraceptive agent.  The Board admits that Loestrin FE 1/20 may decrease the likelihood of implantation.

-30-

The bold and important decision of Dr Joseph Hassan to cease prescribing contraceptives to his patients is to be praised

Catholic pro-life and family organisation, Family Life International, commends the stand taken by Nelson GP, Dr Joseph Hassan, to stop prescribing contraceptives to his patients.

In July of this year the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a division of the World Health Organization (WHO), declared that they rate the combined estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives as a Group 1 carcinogen.

A Group 1 rating is the highest classification of carcinogenicity, used only "when there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in humans." (Emphasis theirs)

Combined estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives are the most commonly prescribed forms of contraceptives. According to the IARC "worldwide, more than 100 million women - about 10% of all women of reproductive age - currently use combined hormonal contraceptives."

It has also been well documented that most oral contraceptives are abortifacient in nature, which means that they actually chemically abort a newly conceived child rather that preventing the conception of a child from occurring.

Dr Hassan is to be praised for his bold and important action, which shows true respect and holistic concern for the health and wellbeing of his female patients and a great respect for the sanctity of all human life.

Our hope is that other medical professionals will be encouraged by the example of Dr Hassan, and take a stand to cease promoting contraception to their patients as well.

Their Choice vs. That Other Choice

Legal commentary

Susan Armacost, Legislative Director
Cell: 414-840-2097
 

News Release

Yet More Pharmacists Who Don’t Understand Ethics:

Submission on
Model Code of Ethics for
 Canadian Pharmacists

Canadian Medical Association
Joint Statement on Preventing and Resolving Ethical Conflicts, I.16

Canadian Medical Association Position on Induced Abortion

Pharmacy Colleges Quash Conscientious Objection

Project Report 2001-01

A Narrow and Totalitarian View of Professional Practice

An “invitation only” focus group will meet in Windsor, Ontario, on 20 September to consider a proposal that includes a draft code of ethics for Ontario’s pharmacists. Its response may determine how far the Ontario College of Pharmacists (OCP) can go in suppressing freedom of conscience.

The draft code obliges pharmacists and technicians to respect human rights and avoid discrimination. But Principle 4 goes on: “No patient shall be deprived of pharmaceutical services because of the personal convictions or religious beliefs of a pharmacist or pharmacy technician.”

“This would authorize persecution of any pharmacist who refuses to dispense drugs for reasons of conscience,” says Sean Murphy, Administrator of the Protection of Conscience Project. “This is alarming, especially since professional and regulatory authorities have been markedly hostile to freedom of conscience in the profession.”

Reporting his discovery of the draft code, Iain Benson of Canada’s Centre for Cultural Renewal protested what he called the “narrow and frankly totalitarian view of professional practice” that prevails among pharmacists. He added that “this blunt and unfair kind of principle” would not be endorsed by the Canadian Medical Association.

Murphy points out that the CMA, the Canadian Health Association and the Canadian Nurses Association agree that health care providers should not be expected to act contrary to their conscientious convictions, nor should they be discriminated against for acting upon their beliefs.

Murphy is disturbed that the Ontario Health Professions Regulatory Advisory Council is seeking the endorsement of anonymous, invitation-only ‘focus groups’ to abrogate a fundamental freedom recognized by the Charter of Rights. He is also troubled that representatives of conscientious objectors were excluded from the process that produced the controversial draft.

“By the time they heard about the proposal, the deadline for submissions had already passed,” he said. “The Project has asked the HPRAC to extend the deadline. I am waiting for an answer.”

Their Choice vs. That Other Choice

Legal commentary

Armacost said that a number of physicians, nurses, and medical students will be testifying in support of AB 207  at tomorrow's hearing.  The legislation would protect medical professionals, medical students, health care facilities and medical schools from being forced to participate in abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, the deliberate destruction of human embryos for research and the use of the body parts of aborted babies. 

The major opposition to AB 207 is coming from pro-abortion organizations who continue to make a number of false claims regarding the legislation.  The following is a memo sent to Committee members from Susan Armacost that addresses a number of the fabrications being circulated by Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion organizations.  

Contact: Susan Armacost, Legislative Director, Wisconsin Right to Life, 414-778-5780 

Attack on freedom of
 conscience in US House of
 Representatives

CMA Executive Director Dr. David Stevens said, "For years now, ACOG has tried to promote abortion on demand as a matter of free choice. We've always known that abortion affords no choice or rights to a developing baby. Now we learn that ACOG would also strip choice and rights away from the very physicians it claims to represent. This is not only the height of hypocrisy; it is also a sure-fire way to lose more physician members who value their constitutional and professional rights of conscience."

In an Aug. 30 letter to U.S. senators from ACOG president Dr. Michael T. Mennuti, ACOG asserted, "Doctors who morally object to abortion should be required to refer patients to other physicians who will provide the appropriate care." In his letter, Mennuti advocated that the Abortion Non-Discrimination Act  , which Congress passed to protect the conscience rights of healthcare professionals and institutions, be changed to force physicians to refer patients for abortions.[See

Stevens noted, "If a physician is morally opposed to abortion, why would that same physician violate his or her conscience by referring a patient to an abortionist to end the baby's life? And what kind of nation would force its physicians to violate their consciences and their Hippocratic oath by mandating participation in abortions?"

CMA Associate Executive Director Dr. Gene Rudd, an obstetrician and gynecologist, observed, "For years, many of us who have belonged to ACOG have hoped to change the organization from within, hoping that reason and Hippocratic values would prevail over the organization's strident and inappropriate abortion advocacy. It has become clear that in the blind pursuit of abortion at any cost, the ACOG leadership is ready to sell out its own membership by advocating laws that remove the rights of physicians. With more and more physicians morally opposed to abortions, this move for mandates simply shows the desperation of abortion advocates to enforce their agenda by any and all means."

To schedule an interview, please contact Margie Shealy at (423) 844-1047 or by e-mail: margie.shealy@cmda.org. The Christian Medical Association is equipped with Ku Band Digital Uplink satellite and ISDN lines.

(WASHINGTON) House Small Business Committee Chairman Don Manzullo (R-IL) today said pharmacists in several states face fines and possibly the loss of their business if they refuse to dispense certain birth control drugs that are against their beliefs.

Manzullo, who held a full committee hearing on the issue today, said five states currently require pharmacists to dispense the morning-after pill even if they oppose it on moral or religious grounds. At least two bills have been introduced in Congress to carry the mandate throughout the nation, even though several other states have specifically given pharmacists the right to refuse to dispense medication if they oppose it on moral or religious grounds.

Failure to comply with the proposed federal legislation and the state mandates could cost pharmacists heavy fines and even revocation of their licenses.

“Pharmacists shouldn’t be forced to choose between their business and their beliefs,” Manzullo said.

Instead of creating rules to punish pharmacists and put their businesses at risk, the states should seek ways to diffuse the confrontation between pharmacists and their customers. Manzullo suggested creating a list of pharmacists who will fill certain prescriptions that doctors can share with their patients before they try to have their prescriptions filled.

“The confrontation could be avoided completely if a patient knew for sure that a certain pharmacist would fill his or her prescription,” Manzullo said.  

(END)

The Islamic Medical Association of North America (www.imana.org) is opposed to the use of physicians for torture of inmates irrespective of their faith, race, gender, nationality or alleged crime. Thus IMANA recommends that its members and all Muslim physicians not participate in the delivery of inhumane treatment, lethal injection, non-surgical amputation or torture of inmates by any means when ordered by their employers, government or private agencies or on their own. When asked to do so, not only they should refuse to comply but also notify Human Rights organizations such as Physicians for Human Rights. 

Muslim physicians are reminded that they are to uphold the sanctity and dignity of human life and be instrument of God’s healing and compassion. They are further reminded that they will be held accountable to God for their actions in this life.

Islamic Medical Association of North America
101 West 22^nd Street, Suite 106
Lombard, IL 60148
630-932-2000, 630-932-2005(fax)