No pharmacist should control more than one pharmacy, says BRM
No pharmacist should be in personal control of more than one pharmacy, the branch
representatives' meeting decided.
Gavin Miller (West Metropolitan) moved: “That one pharmacist should
always remain legally responsible for the professional activities of
only one pharmacy, but certain professional duties can be delegated to
suitably trained staff for a specified period of time.”
He said that managing directors of large multiple chains of pharmacies
may be rubbing their hands at the possibility of regulations allowing
a pharmacist to look after more than one pharmacy. Although
this might benefit large chains and their shareholders, it would not
be in the best interests of patients and could be potentially dangerous
for them.
The emphasis of the motion was on one pharmacist and one pharmacy. No
pharmacist should ever be allowed to be responsible, to supervise or
to be in personal control of more than one pharmacy at any one time.
Allowing a pharmacist to be responsible for more than one pharmacy would
reduce public access to community pharmacists.
Mr Miller added that the second part of the motion, on the delegation
of professional duties, was intentionally vague. Exact details of which
professional duties might be delegated and for how long would need to
be decided.
Paresh Modasia (West Metropolitan), seconding, said that the branch envisaged
only short absences from the pharmacy and only on professional activity.
During such absence suitably accredited members of the staff should be
able to look after the pharmacy adequately.
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal