California: doctors cannot discriminate against lesbians on the basis of religion

California: doctors cannot discriminate against lesbians on the basis of religion

Justice Joyce Kennard
The California Supreme Court has ruled unanimously, in a decision written by Justice Joyce Kennard, in Benitez v. North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group [PDF file], that doctors of the North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group cannot deny medical treatment to people based on their sexual orientation. In 1999, that Group refused to provide fertility treatments to Lupita Benitez because Benitez was a lesbian in a same-sex relationship. In its historic decision, the court ruled that California law prohibited such discrimination and rejected the doctors’ argument that their religious beliefs should enable them to deny treatment based on their religious objections to serving lesbian patients.

History of the case

The trial court rejected the doctors’ defence. The doctors, unhappy with the result, appealed to the Court of Appeal. That court held that the doctors had to be given an opportunity to demonstrate that their refusal to treat Lupita Benitez was not based on her sexual orientation. Lupita Benitez then appealed to the California Supreme Court.

The California Supreme Court said:

Do the rights of religious freedom and free speech, as guaranteed in both
the federal and the California Constitutions, exempt a medical clinic’s physicians
from complying with the California Unruh Civil Rights Act’s prohibition against
discrimination based on a person’s sexual orientation? Our answer is no.

Request an Appointment
Fill in the form below to find out if you have a claim.
Request an Appointment - Stephen Page
Things to Read, Watch & Listen

3 Countries You Should Never Use for Surrogacy

When intended parents consider international surrogacy, the legal and ethical landscape can be treacherous. One government has taken a blunt but pragmatic approach: rather than issuing a blanket prohibition on overseas commercial surrogacy, it has published a short list of specific countries where surrogacy arrangements will almost certainly jeopardise a child’s legal status. That list… Read More »3 Countries You Should Never Use for Surrogacy

Self-Represented Litigant in Family Court Australia: What You NEED to Know First

Representing yourself in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia is increasingly common. Cost pressures, the perceived simplicity of some disputes and a desire to stay hands-on drive many people to act without a lawyer. That can work in certain circumstances, but there are important legal and practical limits to be aware of —… Read More »Self-Represented Litigant in Family Court Australia: What You NEED to Know First

My Surrogacy Reform Wish List for Australia

Australia’s surrogacy framework is fragmented, outdated and producing avoidable harm for intended parents, surrogates and, most importantly, children. A clearer, fairer and nationally consistent approach to surrogacy law reform would reduce cost, stress and legal uncertainty while better protecting human rights and minimising exploitation. Below is a practical wish list for reform that focuses on… Read More »My Surrogacy Reform Wish List for Australia

Family Law Section Law Council of Australia Award
Member of Queensland law society
Family law Practitioners Association
International Academy of Family Lawyers - IAFL
Mediator Standards Board