The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 279 No 7481 p654
8 December 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 50K, Acrobat Reader

• Controlled drugs
• Locum pharmacy
• Medicines distribution
• Retention fees (2)
• Premises fees
• Supervision
• The profession
• Postgraduate education

Letters to the Editor

Supervision

We will be breaking eggs but not necessarily creating an omelette

From Mr J. A. S. Buisson, MRPharmS

Once again, it seems that it is the reality of community pharmacy practice that is at fault, when it comes to the responsible pharmacist, rather than the Department of Health’s proposals.

The ambiguities between the here-and-now and ongoing roles of the responsible pharmacist have been present since the drafting of the Health Bill (now the Health Act 2006).

However, it is not, as Richard Schmidt suggests (PJ, 17 November, p563), “muddled thinking within the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s Health Act Working Group” which has led me to suggest that the single concept of a responsible pharmacist defined in the Act has more than one interpretation, it is continuing discussions with pharmacists and colleagues across the profession.

A major part of the problem is that the DoH has decided to separate what the responsible pharmacist is from what he or she will do, ie, supervision. It is this discussion of eggs without chickens that is causing widespread confusion across pharmacy. Trying to interpret one without the other will end up breaking the eggs but not necessarily creating an omelette.

Jonathan Buisson
Member of Council
Royal Pharmaceutical Society

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Premises fees)
Next Topic (The profession)