The Pharmaceutical Journal Vol 267 No 7178 849-854
15 December 2001

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

  Remuneration
  GSK
  CPD
  Hospital pharmacy
  Patient packs
  Community pharmacy
  Holistic medicine
  The profession
  The Society

Letters to the Editor

The profession (2 letters)

What I feel about the future of pharmacy

From Mr M. Goldin, MRPharmS

The picture of a crystal ball on the cover of last week's issue of The Pharmaceutical Journal reminds me of something our Lincolnshire general practitioner said to my wife many years ago. She had called him out one Sunday to see our son. After the consultation my wife, distrustful of doctors, subjected him to a series of difficult questions about his diagnosis, treatment and prognosis.

The poor man, not used to such interrogations, listened patiently and, unable to answer her questions, said that he had a terrible accident that morning. Clearly upset, my wife asked him what had happened and expressed her hope that everything was all right. What had happened, he said, was that he had dropped his crystal ball and it had shattered into a thousand pieces and as a result he was not able to answer all her questions. Why do I feel the same way about the future of our profession? Whither pharmacy or wither pharmacy?

Monty Goldin
London NW11

Let us have a trade union

From Mr B. J. Hewitt, MRPharmS

Peter Robinson's letter (PJ, November 24, p748), demonstrates resentment to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society membership fee increase.

If the President, Marshall Davies, were to go "back to the floor" and experience the reality of present-day community pharmacy, I think his views on enforcing compulsory continuing professional development in pharmacists' own time would change.

I am all in favour of CPD but it should be done on company time because, in the long run, employers will gain as the public receives better health services. For the locum pharmacist, completed CPD exercises could be rewarded by decreases in the annual retention fee.

In my view the Society has done nothing to justify an increase in the money we pay for membership. It seems members are merely funding their own watchdog and arming it with more teeth.

Is it any wonder that pharmacists leave?

To add to this, in recent weeks I have read a report on "medicine information technicians". In the new age of pharmacy, it should be pharmacists taking these roles — this is another cost-cutting exercise that undermines the pharmacist. Medicines information was to represent the backbone of our new role, yet steps are already in place to remove this from the membership.

It seems that the Department of Health and the Society see a golden new age where pharmacists do not exist, and all our roles will be filled by the cheaper alternatives — technicians. Also, the dispensing fee falls more than 10 per cent as the squeeze is put on pharmacy.

I would gladly pay the membership fee, even increased as it is by nearly a third, if the Society stood up for the hundreds of pharmacists working 45 to 50 hour weeks, with no breaks and no lunch. However, it does not. This extra money should be used to give the membership a proper trade union to stand up for our working rights.

Ben Hewitt
Bristol

Back to Top

Previous Topic (Holistic medicine)

Next Topic (The Society)
Send your letter to The Editor