| · Prescribing (2)
· Compliance (2)
· Residential care
· Metered dosage systems
· Reciprocity
· Proton pump inhibitors
· Registration examination
· The Society (3)
· New pharmacy contract
Letters to the Editor
|
Registration examination
From the perspective of a failed examinee
From Mrs R. Gardner
I am a “failed” preregistration trainee and I beg to differ
with the opinion of the “confused” Sonal
Ganatra (PJ, 20 August,
p226). I applaud Farah
Zaidi’s succinctness (PJ, 13 August, p193),
and believe that she is merely trying to point out that she would rather
register a marginally failed modern-day graduate over one who has been
practising for 30 years and is averse to continuing professional development.
It is arrogant of Miss Ganatra to comment about a situation that she herself,
or somebody that she knows, has never been in. The examination is a race
against time, completely unrealistic in day-to-day practice. It is also
only a “snapshot” of one’s performance under pressure
and does not reflect the entire picture. There are many knowledgeable pharmacists
who cannot communicate with patients, as there are pharmacists who know
little clinical pharmacy, but know all about increasing their profit margin.
Miss Ganatra’s outlook is extremely backward and naive. As she herself
admits she is hardly a model pharmacist, and has gaps in her own knowledge.
What gives her the right to pass judgement on failed graduates by making
sweeping generalisations about other people’s circumstances?
Unlike Miss Ganatra, I found my finals easier than the registration examination
as they were pertinent to real life. The examination does not test your
knowledge on situations like being sprayed in the face with pepper spray
while locking up the shop, using an Epipen in an emergency or how to help
bomb victims.
Why not use the examination as a retraining exercise for those pharmacists
who have been reprimanded or struck off for various offences? We prove
ourselves once by obtaining the degree (all that is required for doctors,
dentists and veterinary surgeons), yet those who fail are condemned, without
having had the opportunity to prove themselves to be otherwise responsible
pillars of the community. The “system” is unfair.
In six years my degree has not benefited me as I am considered either over-qualified
to be a dispenser or health care assistant (for which GCSEs will suffice),
or under-qualified for any decent professional job. “Listening
friend” (PJ,
20 August, p226) may be sympathetic towards our plight but that does not
help matters. The Royal Pharmaceutical Society should be more proactive
in protecting the wellbeing of trainees rather than concentrating solely
on “protecting the public” since before 1993, “public
protection” was not a priority.
The Society should enter the 21st century instead of languishing in the
dark ages.
Rachael Gardner
Oxford |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal