Society accused of putting itself before the public
The Royal Pharmaceutical Society was this week accused of putting self-interest ahead of the needs of the public by the Pharmacists’ Defence Association, an accusation disputed by the Society.
The PDA criticism (PDF 330K) was in response to the Society’s
consultation (PDF 380K) on
proposals that cases of one-off dispensing errors should no longer be
routinely referred to its disciplinary system (PJ,
9 February 2008, centre pull-out). The PDA said it was sceptical that
the change
was being proposed
in the interests of the profession and the public.
Its chairman, Mark Koziol, said: “The plain fact of the matter
is that the Society simply may have decided that it cannot afford to
continue to operate in this way and is getting swamped by the quantity
of cases, the length of time each investigation is taking and the committee
processes that are required to comply with the fitness-to-practise rules
which the Society itself has written.”
The PDA wants to see a screening committee established to sift out complaints
that it considers do not warrant any disciplinary action and wants discretionary
powers given to Society inspectors so that cases can be resolved at a
local level rather than being referred on to the Society.
Other proposals include the creation of a new fitness-to-practise outcome
of “no case to answer”.
The Society has been consulting on its plans to redefine the kind of
cases that should automatically be referred to the Society’s investigating
committee.
According to the consultation document, between July and December 2007
27 cases of one-off dispensing errors were considered by the Society.
Each
took an average of 11 weeks to resolve following a complaint.
Mandie Lavin, the Society’s director of fitness to practise and
legal affairs, responded: “We would like to reassure the profession
that these steps are being taken in the public interest and for no other
reason. The fitness-to-practise rules are part of the statutory framework
and not Society guidance.
“Any developments in implementing the criteria and the arrangements
for non-referral will be subject to audit and scrutiny. These are part
of
the critical path towards ensuring that the Society in the short-term
and the General Pharmaceutical Council going forward are in the best
possible position to regulate in the public interest.”
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal
Acrobat
Reader