The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 280 No 7485 p53
19 January 2008

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 70K, Acrobat Reader

• Industrial pharmacists (4)
• Community pharmacy
• Responsible pharmacist (2)
• Package design
• The profession (2)
• The Society (3)
• Registration (2)
• Statins
• Retirement (2)
• Onlooker
• Caption competition

Letters to the Editor

Registration

Alice does not just reside in Wonderland

From Mr I. M. Caldwell, FRPharmS

I have today signed the declaration on the retention application form for 2008 claiming non-practising status. I have no idea whether or not I have misled the Royal Pharmaceutical Society when I state that I will not advise or work on the practice of pharmacy or the provision of healthcare, because these two broad phrases are meaningless, since they are not defined either on the form or in the Order Number 289, from which they are drawn. If I have a problem with this just imagine how big a dilemma the Society will face if there is complaint of a breach of these conditions.

I have been informed by the Society that it is the responsibility of the individual member to reach his or her own conclusions as to what constitutes practice and provision and that no guidance is available. In most cases members will operate within widely agreed spheres but those who are in administration, consultancy, public interest groups and councils or are connected with other health professional bodies may find clear definitions nor merely desirable but essential if they are to avoid inadvertent offence.

The mere drafting of a form has created the possibility of an offence without defining what the offences are or what constitutes a breach of the declaration. The pantomime season may be in full swing but it is clear that Alice does not just reside in Wonderland.

I. M. Caldwell
Larkhall, South Lanarkshire

Non-practising members offering advice

From Mr G. B. Green, MRPharmS

I was interested to read Andrew Gardner’s comments on the topic of non-practising members offering advice on matters of medicines and other health-related affairs (PJ, 1 December 2007, p621). It might help those of us who are contemplating reverting to the non-practising Register to know the sanctions the Society could apply to any non-practising member.

If we ignore Mr Gardner’s advice and still choose to comment on those banned subjects once we have opted for the non-practising status what could the Society do? Removal from the Register would appear to be the highest level of punishment the Society could levy for such misdemeanours which simply means that it would lose even more of its annual registration income. I somehow doubt even our Society officials could be that daft.

Perhaps we should also strike out the parts of the sentence on the back of the re-registration form that tell us that by signing we will not presume to give advice on any medical matters. We should do this just to make sure those same officials in Lambeth know where we stand on this issue.

G. B. Green
Lewes, East Sussex

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (The Society)
Next Topic (Statins)