CCA criticises vocabulary used in new FTP rules
Vague and imprecise language in proposed procedures for registering pharmacists and technicians, and judging their fitness to practise, has been criticised by the Company Chemists' Association. The proposals are also criticised for being excessively punitive and offering little by way of rehabilitation.
In its response to a Royal Pharmaceutical Society consultation
on planned new registration and fitness-to-practise procedures, the CCA takes issue
with the Society’s use of words and phrases, such as recency, insight,
characteristic behaviour, large and short, because they can mean different
things to different people and in different circumstances.
Recency, in the context of unacceptable behaviour, implies that the effect
of an episode of behaviour fades until such time has passed that it effectively
lapses, the CCA says. It points out that, for a young registrant, adolescent
behaviour may be recent, but that changes in perception and personality
since adolescence may make repetition unlikely. It adds that insight,
or the ability to understand the sequence of events leading to an episode
of unacceptable behaviour does not necessarily result in contrition,
nor does contrition necessarily require cognisance of the root of an
offence.
Criticising another section of the proposals, the CCA suggests that fast-tracking
disciplinary cases involving the death or serious injury of a patient
is motivated by a desire to manage the profession’s image.
“The same error may go unnoticed in one individual and cause death
in another,” the CCA warns. “In the new roles that pharmacists
may undertake — particularly prescribing — death or injury
may be an unforeseeable outcome of what may otherwise be the accepted
and normal treatment for a condition.”
Overall, the CCA takes the view that insufficient attention has been
given to the process by which people may be restored to the register
after being struck off.
“The fitness-to-practise regulations pay great attention to the
criteria and process by which someone may be removed, but pay little
regard to
their restoration,” the CCA says.
It warns: “Registrants who recognise they are struggling to maintain
fitness to practise appear to be offered little assistance in rectifying
any shortfalls or improving their practice. Indeed there are considerable
disincentives for a registrant to consult the Society in such cases as
there appears little room for leniency and it appears that any such consultation
may be used as evidence against them in an investigation.”
Furthermore, it points out that individuals who have been removed from
the register will be denied access to the resources
necessary for professional updating before restoration.
However, parts of the plan are not without merit in the CCA’s eye.
These include a
proposed definition of good character, an
associated assessment framework and the planned use of aggravating factors
that will automatically result in misconduct being deemed serious. |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal
Acrobat
Reader