HOUSE VOTES AGAINST PHARMACISTS IN ETHICAL, RELIGIOUS CASE

* Critics say HB2010 could make it hard for women in rural areas to
get emergency contraception drugs

SALEM -- As opponents argued that it could hurt access by women to
"morning after" contraception drugs, the Oregon House voted down a
bill Monday aimed at allowing pharmacists to refuse to fill some kinds
of prescriptions on religious or ethical grounds.

Critics said the measure could have made it particularly hard for
women in small towns and rural areas to get access to emergency
contraception drugs that must be taken within 72 hours of sexual
intercourse.

House Bill 2010 was sought by the Oregon State Pharmacists
Association, which wanted to give its members broader rights to refuse
to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception and for RU-486, the
abortion drug that may be on the U.S. market by year's end.

The measure also would have reiterated pharmacists' right to refuse to
provide drugs used in Oregon's assisted-suicide law, which already
allows health care providers to refuse to participate in a person's
suicide.

The pharmacists' association brought the bill to the Legislature after
Fred Meyer fired a pharmacist late last year in a dispute about a
prescription for Preven, a new emergency contraception drug. Fred
Meyer and other large pharmacies allow pharmacists to decline to fill
some prescriptions, but they are supposed to make sure someone else
does.

Several legislators said they objected because the bill didn't ensure
that pharmacists who declined to fill a prescription would actively
work to find another pharmacist who would.

Rep. Rob Patridge, R-Medford, said he thought it was a basic
obligation of professionals to make sure a customer's needs are met,
even if they can't do so themselves for moral reasons.

But Rep. Bill Witt, R-Cedar Mill, said it could be a mortal sin for a
member of the Catholic Church to even assist a patient in finding a
pharmacist to fill a prescription for a drug that caused an abortion.
Opponents of abortion oppose emergency contraception drugs because
they can prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg.

The measure also ran into trouble because some critics said the
wording was ambiguous enough to allow pharmacists to refuse to fill
any prescription -- such as birth-control pills -- on moral grounds.
Tom Holt, a pharmacists' association lobbyist, said that was not the
legislation's intent.

Activists on both sides of the abortion debate heavily lobbied the
House.

Gayle Atteberry of Oregon Right to Life said that by voting down the
bill, the House was saying "not only is it legal (to use these drugs),
but people who morally object to it may be forced to. . . . That is
not what America is about."

She scoffed at the idea that some women may not have access to
emergency contraception, saying that no one in Oregon "is farther away
than 72 hours to a drugstore that would fill this."

Maura Roche, a Planned Parenthood lobbyist, countered that the bill
could have caused real access problems to women who may not see a
doctor for a day or so after unprotected sex.

"They might end up having to drive a great distance and get into a
real time crunch," she said. "It's especially horrible when you think
about cases of rape and incest."

Initially, the measure failed on a 33-27 vote. Witt and Rep. Mark
Simmons, R-Elgin, then changed to the winning side so they could try
to bring the bill back up today. Reps. Jackie Winters, R-Salem, and
Jerry Krummel, R-Wilsonville, also changed to vote against the bill
after it was clear the bill had lost.

Holt, the pharmacists' lobbyist, said he did not know whether
proponents would try to revive the bill today, either to send it back
to committee for more work or to see whether they could drum up enough
votes to get it passed.

You can reach Jeff Mapes at 503-221-8209 or by e-mail at
jeffmapes@news.oregonian.com.