The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 279 No 7460 p44
14 July 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 60K, Acrobat Reader

• White Paper
• Pfizer (2)
• Supervision (2)
• Community pharmacy (2)
• Antimicrobials
• Dispensing errors
• Recalls
• Onlooker
• CPPE
• Recycling
• Retention fee

Letters to the Editor

Supervision

A caveat to the Society's Council

From Mr J. A. Tweed, MRPharmS

I think that the Royal Pharmaceutical Society should be suspicious of the current Government and its plans for pharmacists. The Government seems hell-bent on spending as little money as possible rather than obtaining best value for money and protecting patient safety. We need to be careful that we are not cast aside at its whim. For example:

• We have just heard that in maternity services, non-qualified staff are performing duties outside their training.

• The Crown Prosecution Service is, I believe, allowing its dedicated case workers (who are not lawyers) to prosecute in the magistrates’ courts.

• Policing relies on community support officers, not real policemen.

If we allow remote supervision, how long before the Government decides that technicians can replace pharmacists, to save money? This is not an attack on technicians, but merely a caveat to the Society’s Council.

I hope that the Council will be sure to safeguard the profession of pharmacy.

J. A. Tweed
Nottingham

A right to expect a pharmacist in a pharmacy

From Mrs E. E. T. H. Hopkins, MRPharmS, and others

We wish to express our concerns over the “responsible pharmacist” debate which seems to be being kept secret from many of the profession. But it concerns every pharmacist wherever they work.

The Health Act refers to “responsible pharmacists” but the term “responsible pharmacist” awaits a full definition. When one visits a GP surgery one expects to have a doctor around. Surely the public have a similar right to expect a pharmacist in a pharmacy, not a pharmacy team without the depth of knowledge that is expected of pharmacists to whom they may be referred. Yes, we wish to provide other services, but getting the right medicines and advice to patients is essential.

We hope that the Royal Pharmaceutical Society gives longer time for consultation. In the meantime we urge all “responsible pharmacists” to get involved in the debate for the sake of the profession and the public, who have a right to a top-rate service.

Ewa Hopkins
Alun Hopkins
Marion Garner-Patel
Rajni Garner-Patel
Harrow, Middlesex

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Pfizer)
Next Topic (Community pharmacy)