Abstract
“Emergency contraception” case law from the state of Washington is reviewed and analyzed. Important legal, social policy, and professional ethical questions are considered with focus on professional and institutional conscientious objection to participating in this therapy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.FDA News Release ; June 20 , 2013 . www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/Press/Announcements/ucm358082.htm. Accessed July 27, 2013.
2.
Tummino v. Hamburg
, 2013 WL 1348656 (April 5, 2013) .
3.
Tummino v. Hamburg
, 2013 WL 2631163 (June 12, 2013) .
4.FDA’s Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations ; July 22, 2013 .http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/ob/docs/patexclnew.cfm?Appl_No=021998&Product_No=001&table1=OB_OTC. Accessed on August 20, 2013 .
5.
Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky
, 854 F.Supp.2d 925 , W.D. Wash . (2012 ).
6.Cited in decision on preliminary injunction at 524 F . Supp. 2d 1245 (2007 ).
7.
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah
, 508 US 520 (1993 ).
8.The case referred to in the opinion is Bray v. Alexandria Women's Clinic, 506 U.S . 263 , 271 –74 , 113S. Ct. 753, 122L. Ed. 2d 34 (1993 ).
9.APhA Code of Ethics for Pharmacists (1994 ).