The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 270 No 7245 p548
19 April 2003

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

PDF* 90K

  New Charter
  Community pharmacy
  Pharmacist prescribing
  Qualified persons
  Drug misuse services
  Homoeopathy
  Dispensary design
  NPSA project
  Tuberculosis
  The Society
  CPD
  Titles

Letters to the Editor

Titles

Let us consider the title "consociate pharmacist"?

From Ms S. M. Miller, MRPharmS

I agree with Dr John Hunt, that the term "inactive pharmacist", with all the passivity it implies, should be avoided (PJ, 5 April, p478). However, in addition, I find "non-practising pharmacist" bland, and "emeritus pharmacist" confusing. As for "associate pharmacist", it seems to be a suitable title, but investigation of its etymology leads me to support an alternative: "consociate pharmacist".

The common use of the word "associate" means "not having full membership of a society or institution" (Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, 1996). The word comes from the Latin associare, from ad (to) and socius (united). But the Greek prefix a- means a negative, a prefix signifying not, without, or opposite to, for example, amoral, anaemia, anhydrous. I believe many people have not chosen the title "associate" because it feels negative, even if they have not considered the Greek versus Latin roots (only 3.7 per cent of initial respondents chose "associate pharmacist"; PJ 29 March, p457); see PDF (55K)

Alternatively, the title "consociate" sits better. The latin prefix con- is derived from cum (together with), and the meaning is "with" or "together". In addition we have the Latin words: consociatio (n), "a union, connection"; consociare (vb), "to unite, connect, share"; and consociatus (adj), "united, harmonious".

Shian Miller
Glasgow

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (CPD)