The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 268 No 7200 p781-786
1 June 2002

This article
Reprint
Photocopy

Branch Representatives' meeting summary

Simpler, clearer MEP wanted

A motion calling for 'Medicines, ethics and practice: a guide for pharmacists' to be written in simple and clear English and provided with a more comprehensive index met the approval of the meeting.

MEL SMITH (Hull), proposing the motion, said that the proof of the dysfunctional nature of the MEP could be demonstrated by comparing it with similar documents from the General Medical Council. He then proceeded to compare various statements in the Code of Ethics (MEP, July 2001 edition, pp83-92) with their equivalent in the GMC standards document. He concluded: "If being verbose is a requirement for good pharmacy practice, then the MEP should win a prize."

PAUL McGORRY (Hull), seconding the motion, said that the MEP was long-winded, full of dense legalistic prose and difficult to use. The Code of Ethics could be better presented and more approachable.