From Mr A. J. Hilton, MRPharmS
SIR,—I thought that I no longer cared enough to write to The Journal but a couple of items in the issue of January 22 call for some comment.
In her reply to Mr Phillips, we have Council member Mrs Helen Remington reminding us (p131), as if we did not know only too well, that the Society has long since abandoned one of the original reasons for its formation as listed in the Charter, ie, "the protection of those who carry on the business of chemists and druggists". Mrs Remington makes it clear that it is now "the business of others to put forward the financial interests of pharmacists" and that the Society now sees itself as an arm of the Consumers Association in that "all battles which we [the Society] choose to fight must have the public at the core". So the Society seeks only to protect "the public" from those wicked and mercenary pharmacists who dare to expect to make a decent living out of serving them. And we are paying for this!
Then we have Dr Steven Kayne (p154) going on about "pharmaceutical care" as if this is some revolutionary new concept of which most of us are blissfully unaware. What do the proponents of "pharmaceutical care" think that pharmacists have been offering their clients for the past 150 years? The only difference is that, in days gone by, we made a good living out of it, but now we are expected to take on additional work for the sheer "professional" joy of it.
Dr Kayne sees a multitude of opportunities for community pharmacy, but only if "the profession demonstrates the financial savings to be made". In other words we must continue with the mistakes of the past 30 years and show our political paymasters that we are ever ready to take on more and more work for less and less pay.
I give thanks daily to the company which arrived, like the 7th Cavalry, just in time to purchase my business while it was still worth something and ensure that I no longer depend upon the profession of pharmacy for my living.
Tony Hilton
Peterborough, Cambridgeshire