Soon, you might be saying goodbye to having a real pharmacy, or a real pharmacist. The worst thing about this? The public won't even know it.
The government recently unveiled its proposal to allow pharmacy technicians to supervise the running of a pharmacy in the absence of a pharmacist. Why is this such a bad thing?
First of all, I value the contribution made by technicians in the workplace. Without them, many pharmacies wouldn't function properly. However, the short sight proposal would place them in charge of pharmacies dispensing prescription drugs without a pharmacist being present. There's talk of pharmacists supervising (and even talking to patients) through webcams. It's all a bit hazy, much like the thinking behind the proposal.
It's dangerous. The average pharmacy dispenses 4000 prescription drugs a month. It may not sound like a big deal, but it is. Behind every occupation that provides a regulated public service are trained professionals exercising their skill, knowledge and experience acquired over years of study. My services are in turn overseen by a regulatory body set up to make sure people like me practice to a high standard.
There's talk of pharmacists supervising (and even talking to patients) through webcams. It's all a bit hazy, much like the thinking behind the proposal.
I'm not just paid to be a pharmacist. I'm paid to keep people safe, bear the burden of responsiblity and to be held accountable if and when something goes wrong.
The government would like to remove this safeguard. It will do nothing but give big pharmacy chains an excuse to do away with as many employed pharmacists as they can get away with, and replace most of them with technicians who'll do the same job but be paid a fraction of their salary. It's all about cutting costs. No other country in Europe has or wants to do anything like this.
Basically, they want to do Pharmacy on the cheap.
Basically, they want to do Pharmacy on the cheap.
If there are any technicians out there who think this is good for them, ask yourself this: why would you work for a little above minimum wage and bear the responsiblity of a pharmacist? Don't think performance review time will be easy either. The big chains are known for giving their employees bad performance reviews based on flimsy evidence. It happens to pharmacists and the same thing will happen to technicians.
The government would like to remove this safeguard. It will do nothing but give big pharmacy chains an excuse to do away with as many employed pharmacists as they can get away with...
To the unsuspecting public, it'll be dressed up to be the best thing since sliced bread. Troubling, because the allure of better access, convenience and shorter waiting times is all it takes. Like fast food or the supermarket, people want their prescriptions fast and your Boots chemist delivers this. But that's only because patient safety takes a backseat.
Also troubling is how the proposals were decided behind closed doors, with key bodies such as the PDA excluded from the meeting.
So, back to my original point. Would you care if you didn't have a real pharmacist?
Comments