California Supreme Court To Hear Case Involving Physicians Who Refused To Perform IVF Because Of Religious Beliefs

Main Category: Litigation / Medical Malpractice
Also Included In: Fertility;  Women's Health / Gynecology
Article Date: 07 Aug 2007 - 3:00 PST

email to a friend   printer friendly   view / write opinions   rate article

The California Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a case involving two physicians who refused to perform in vitro fertilization for a woman because of their religious beliefs, USA Today reports. According to USA Today, the case, which is "one of the most controversial" the Supreme Court has heard in "years," will decide how to "accommodate" physicians' religious beliefs "without violating" the state's anti-discrimination laws.

The case started in 2000 when the physicians, Christine Brody and Douglas Fenton, refused to perform IVF for Guadalupe Benitez, a lesbian who lives with her partner in an area north of San Diego. Benitez in 2001 sued the physicians, claiming that they violated California's anti-discrimination laws that protect gays and lesbians. According to Jill Morrison, legal counsel to the National Women's Law Center, the distinguishing factor in the case is that Brody and Fenton refused to perform IVF for one patient, even though they provide the procedure to other women. "Usually, providers who object to certain services object to them for everyone," Morrison said, adding, "In this case, they don't object to the service, just the patient."

Kenneth Pedroza, an attorney for Brody and Fenton, said that an "all-or-nothing" rule will cause physicians to refuse to practice certain specialties. Brody and Fenton have said that they refused to perform IVF on Benitez because she is unmarried. Benitez says that the physicians originally told her the issue was her sexual orientation and then changed their reason, USA Today reports.

An appeals court in 2005 ruled that Brody and Fenton have the right at trial to cite religious freedom to defend themselves. Benitez appealed the ruling, and the Supreme Court in 2006 agreed to hear the case. The Supreme Court has not yet set a date to hear it, USA Today reports. The case will go to trial following the court's ruling.

According to USA Today, more than 40 groups supporting both Benitez and the physicians have filed briefs with the Supreme Court. About two dozen gay and civil-rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, are arguing that anti-discrimination laws prohibit physicians from refusing to provide services to certain patients. About 16 conservative law centers and religious organizations, including the Foundation for Free Expression, have written briefs in support of the physicians, USA Today reports (Parker [1], USA Today, 8/3).

USA Today on Friday also examined how physicians are becoming "more assertive in refusing to treat patients for religious reasons." According to USA Today, physicians have refused to provide abortions and IVF; to use fetal tissue; or to prescribe certain drugs, including Viagra. According to USA Today, the "shift" is "prompting a new round of debate in courts and state legislatures over the balance between protecting" physicians' constitutional right to religious freedom and upholding anti-discrimination laws (Parker [2], USA Today, 8/3).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.