Pharmacist was victim of deliberate deception by Shipman
A pharmacist who dispensed prescriptions for diamorphine written by Harold Shipman was the “victim of a deliberate deception by an accomplished liar”, according to the fourth
report of the Shipman Inquiry, published last week. Ghislaine Brant worked in the pharmacy next door to Shipman's surgery in Hyde.
However, the report also criticises Mrs Brant. Making a press statement
in Manchester Town Hall last week, Dame Janet Smith, chairman of the
inquiry, alleged that Mrs Brant had not fulfilled her professional obligations
to scrutinise the prescriptions to ensure they were appropriate for the
patient or to watch out for signs that a doctor might be prescribing
unlawfully or irresponsibly.
In particular, in 1993, Shipman wrote 14 prescriptions in the names of
13 patients, each for a single 30mg ampoule of diamorphine. Dame Janet
described these prescriptions as “extremely unusual: it is far
too much to administer to a patient who is suffering from the acute pain
of a heart attack and too little to prescribe for a patient who has chronic
pain caused by cancer”. Cancer patients normally need to be prescribed
several ampoules. In fact, none of these 13 patients had cancer and some
were dead.
Shipman may have explained the prescriptions as being for patients suffering
the acute pain of a heart attack, but a 5mg dose is usual for such an
indication. Mrs Brant had told the inquiry she believed that Shipman
would administer the appropriate amount and throw the remainder away.
Mrs Brant should have been aware that this pattern of prescribing was
unusual and been concerned that Shipman always collected the drugs, the
report says. Moreover, had Mrs Brant brought this to the attention of
the proper authorities, some lives might have been saved, Dame Janet
said. Criticism of Mrs Brant is mitigated, however, because Shipman deliberately
set out to win her trust and to erode such professional objectivity as
she had towards him.
Mandie Lavin, director of fitness to practise and legal affairs, Royal
Pharmaceutical Society, said: “The Society is currently carefully
considering the content of the report with regards to the individual
pharmacist Mrs Brant and the other information that has been placed in
the public domain. The Society will, in due course, have to consider
whether any action should be taken.”
Mrs Brant was unavailable to comment, but her employer, Mayfair Chemists
(Hyde) Ltd, maintains that she is a conscientious and experienced pharmacist.
It says that the prescriptions written by Shipman were all correctly
dispensed and Mrs Brant believed that the medicine was to be used by
him for the good of his patients. The careful record keeping of the pharmacists
and the evidence given by Mrs Brant at the trial of Shipman, were instrumental
in his conviction, Mayfair added. |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal
Acrobat
Reader