An adminstrative law judge issued a controversial reprimand Monday to a pharmacist who refused to refill or transfer a birth control prescription to another pharmacy because of religious concerns.

Pharmacist Neil T. Noesen has stirred debate among birth control supporters and opponents, with stark opposition from both sides concerning what penalties Noesen should face.

The reprimand issued by the judge suggested the revocation and limitation of his license. The Pharmacy Examining Board will determine a course of action April 13.

Ohio-based Pharmacists for Life International supports the right of Noesen to refuse to refill the prescription based on his religious beliefs and believes the judge’s decision was flawed.

“[Noesen] is carrying out his duties as a pharmacist the best he can … he has knowledge about drugs that others do not know, lie about or refuse to believe,” said Karen Brauer, President of Pharmacists for Life International.

The decision the judge made is not based on actual, existing, pharmacy regulations. There is no law against refusal to refer or to transfer, according to Brauer.

“We are the ones with the knowledge of these drugs. It is a pharmacists’ duty to protect the client from drugs that can be harmful,” Brauer said.

A number of groups have voiced their support of the judge’s decision to reprimand Noesen and believe he acted inappropriately.

Few people have encountered a pharmacist who refused to transfer, Chris Taylor, political director of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Wisconsin, said. Noesen should have been aware of what type of conduct other pharmacists are practicing, what types of behavior are acceptable and what actions are atypical, according to Taylor.

“Wisconsin does have a code of ethics that establishes that this practice must be patient centered,” Taylor said.

NARAL, a pro-choice organization, also supports the judge’s suggestion to reprimand Noesen.

“It is not acceptable for any health-care professional to put his or her own personal belief above the patient,” Kelda Helen Roys, executive director of NARAL Wisconsin, said.

Last year, 19 states, including Wisconsin, considered measures allowing pharmacists to refuse to dispense medication on the basis of religious beliefs.

State Rep. Carol Owens, R-Oshkosh, is currently composing a bill protecting pharmacists from jeopardizing their jobs on the basis of beliefs. The bill will likely be introduced this spring.

“[The bill] says you can’t be fired for refusing to do something against your moral belief,” Owens said.

First-year pharmacy student Emily Doll said Noesen’s concern is about the mechanism of action of birth control, which, secondary to preventing ovulation, prevents a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus.

“What it comes down to is whether you believe a fertilized egg is life or not, and if you believe it is life, then it’s no longer a [matter] of opinions; it’s a matter of defending a group of people that don’t have a voice of their own.”

Those in support of and opposition to abortion are using this event as a catalyst for the major argument between duty and moral belief. This includes newly introduced legislation on the Birth Control Ban launched by State Rep. Scott Suder, R-Abbotsford, and Sen. Joe Leibham, R-Sheboygan.

The bill was referred to the State Affairs Committee Tuesday.