Refusal Provisions
In the News
Many states have or are considering laws that allow health providers to refuse to provide certain medical services that violate their moral or religious beliefs. Although these laws originally focused primarily on abortion and sterilization services, in recent years they have been expanding. States have passed laws to allow pharmacists to refuse to provide emergency contraception to women who need it, and current efforts have focused on allowing medical professionals to deny access to contraception and other medical care with which they disagree. These provisions put women’s health at risk, and are especially dangerous for women in rural areas or small towns where there are few medical providers or pharmacies.
|
Hawaii Gov. Signs Bill To Ensure Emergency Contraception Access at Hospitals |
|
Editorial Criticizes Mo. Bill That Could Hinder Emergency Contraception Access |
|
Mo. Attorney General Declines To Appeal Ruling on State Contraceptive Coverage Law |
|
Mo. Senate Approves Bill Allowing Pharmacies To Refuse To Carry Emergency Contraception |
|
Mo. Attorney General Requests Clarification in Ruling on State Contraceptive Coverage Law |
Expand to view all articles on Refusal Provisions.
IN THE COURTS
This section provides a brief overview of significant cases impacting reproductive rights and health related to Refusal Provisions.
|
Stormans. Inc. v. Mary Selecky and Judith Billings |
|
Morr-Fitz, Inc. v. Quinn |
MORE INFORMATION
For more information, visit one of these helpful sites or resources:
AT-A-GLANCE
Issues
State by State
ABOUT REPRO WATCH
Repro Health Watch — an exciting new edition of the Women’s Health Policy Report — compiles and distributes media coverage of proposed and enacted state laws and ballot initiatives affecting women's access to comprehensive reproductive health care, as well as litigation in response to those provisions.
