The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 271 No 7259 p120
26 July 2003

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

PDF* 100K

  New contract
  Patient information
  Packaging
  Drug administration
  Research governance
  CPD
  The President
  The Society

Letters to the Editor

The Society

Avant-garde streak is lacking

From Mr G. Burke

It is clear from your letters pages that many pharmacists are disgruntled and dissatisfied. This situation is by no means new and the problems with pharmacy today largely echo those that existed five years ago. To mention a few: limited roles in community pharmacy, under-used skills, the apparent low status of pharmacists and poor progress with existing innovations such as pharmacist prescribing.

Although I must be careful not to bite the feeding hand, I think that not enough is being done by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society to address these ongoing concerns and to champion the interests of pharmacists. The Society is well-placed to advance the status of the profession. However, it seems to lack an avant-garde streak to the detriment of its dutiful and increasingly melancholic members. Unless these issues and others are resolved, I fear an increasing number of young pharmacists will leave the profession and use their pharmacy degree as a sign of aptitude to enter into other professions, graduate schemes and jobs.

Although I might appear to have a pessimistic view, I remain an apologist for pharmacy, and would like nothing more than to be proud of the profession and the Society (which I am, in part). However, I believe the body that represents pharmacy has to do right by its members' expectations.

Gareth Burke
Preregistration Trainee
London

Should we drop the adjective “royal”?

From Mr E. P. Crabtree, MRPharmS

The Royal Pharmaceutical Society was not always "royal" (PJ, 12 July, p44). It became "royal" in 1988, not long before we celebrated the sesquicentenary of the Society. No one asked the members if they wanted this change, and as far as I remember this fait accompli was imposed after little if any discussion even in the Council. The net result of this has been, in my opinion, nil; neither the Society nor the individual members have gained any increase in prestige or anything else.

I suggest any change of name should drop the redundant adjective "royal". We could follow the American example and become the British Pharmacists Association (except that pharmacists employed by Boots seem to have a prior claim to the initials BPA). Perhaps we could be the British Pharmacists Society or the Society of British Pharmacists. But any proposed name change should be ratified by a referendum of the membership.

 E. P. Crabtree
Huddersfield

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (The President)