Membership/registration do not need to be linked
Link between Society membership and registration is not necessary,
says NPA |
Registration as a practising pharmacist and membership of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society do not need to be linked, members of the National Pharmacy Association's board have argued.
Debating the association’s draft response to the Department of
Health’s consultation on the planned Section 60 Order that will
reform the regulation of pharmacy, board members said at their monthly
meeting that registration as a practising pharmacist is all that is needed
to ensure a safe and quality service and that Society membership adds
nothing to this. However, they also wanted there to be both practising
and non-practising registers and a wider definition of a practising pharmacist
than the draft Order proposed. Board members were concerned that the
proposed definition failed to include pharmacists in management, administration,
marketing and public relations or journalism.
Compulsory registration of pharmacy technicians was not a proposal that
found favour during the discussion. But board members took the view that
both practising pharmacists and technicians should have to be able to
show that their knowledge is up to date by keeping continuing professional
development portfolios.
There was also concern over the proposal that the attitude and behaviour
of potential pharmacists should be included in the preregistration process.
This would entail a subjective judgement and applicants with any extreme
views — professional or otherwise — could be excluded. Board
members wanted there to be an objective scorecard or some other approach
that excluded bias or prejudice before they could support this
proposal.
The planned fitness-to-practise procedures caused further concern, with
board members expressing the view that they gave the Society too much
power. They were also worried about the cost of the new regulatory regime
to Society members. |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal
Acrobat
Reader