Home > PJ (current issue) > Letters | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 274 No 7338 p235
26 February 2005

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 80K, Acrobat Reader

Letters

· Workforce
· The Society (2)
· Statutory Committee (3)
· Council election
· Overseas pharmacists
· The profession (2)


Letters to the Editor

Overseas pharmacists

British registration has no relevance to overseas practice

From Mr Y. Cass, FRPharmS

As the second most senior pharmacist in Israel and the most senior with British registration, I wish to comment on your editorial (PJ, 5 February, p134) and the Broad spectrum article in the same issue (p144).

Nearly all of the GB-registered pharmacists working in Israel as licensed Israeli pharmacists consulted me before filling in their Royal Pharmaceutical Society retention fee for 2005. Without hesitation I told them to register as non-practising members.

There is no question in my mind that pharmaceutical activities undertaken in Israel by pharmacists who are legally licensed to practise here has no relevance on their registration with the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. One can practise as a pharmacist in this country with or without membership of the Society and, more importantly, membership of the Society is not a prerequisite to practise pharmacy here nor does it allow one to do so in itself.

However, it is quite clear that should I wish to practise pharmacy in Britain then I have to fulfil all the conditions for that laid down by the Society.

Yaakov Cass
Regional Pharmacist
Israel Ministry of Health
Jerusalem, Israel

 

ANN LEWIS, Secretary and Registrar, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, replies:

There are relatively few pharmacists on our Register in Israel but currently about half have registered as practising pharmacists. It is most unfortunate that a senior pharmacist appears to have given incorrect advice to his colleagues. If a pharmacist resident and working overseas chooses to register with the Society, the registration and continuing professional development requirements apply. They are not affected by the geographical location of the pharmacist or the local regulatory arrangements. This gives them a right to practise in Great Britain (and certain other locations) and a recognised status. With rights come responsibilities and accountabilities. The requirements for practice in Israel are a matter for the competent authority in Israel. However, those pharmacists who choose to maintain their right to practise in Great Britain may exercise that right at any time and must comply with the requirements for practice of the Society, which is the competent authority in Great Britain. Colleagues who have acted on Mr Cass’s advice and who are, in fact, practising are strongly advised to review their position.

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Council election)
Next Topic (The profession)

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal