Cookie policy: This site uses cookies (small files stored on your computer) to simplify and improve your experience of this website. Cookies are small text files stored on the device you are using to access this website. For more information please take a look at our terms and conditions. Some parts of the site may not work properly if you choose not to accept cookies.


Subscribe or Register

Existing user? Login

Fitness to practise

Pharmacy regulator to blind fitness-to-practise investigations against racial bias

The General Pharmaceutical Council will trial redacting any information that might identify a pharmacist’s ethnicity from documents that are seen by fitness-to-practise investigating committees.

General Pharmaceutical Council

Source: General Pharmaceutical Council

The General Pharmaceutical Council will trial redacting information that might identify race or ethnicity during FTP investigations

The pharmacy regulator is to introduce blind reviews during its fitness-to-practise (FTP) investigations in an attempt to remove bias from the system.

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) will trial redacting any information that might identify a pharmacist’s race and/or ethnicity from documents that are seen by FTP investigating committees.

Cases are referred to the investigating committee if an FTP allegation meets the threshold criteria, and it can then refer the case on to a FTP committee. The investigating committee does not hear oral evidence, but it can admit written representations.

The GPhC pilot will begin in September 2020 and run until March 2021.

Data released by the GPhC to The Pharmaceutical Journal in 2019, following a Freedom of Information Act request, showed that almost half (47%) of the 200 pharmacists suspended or removed from the pharmacy register between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2018, were black, Asian or from an ethnic minority (BAME). If pharmacists who did not provide their ethnicity are removed from the data, 57% of those suspended or removed were BAME.

Of the pharmacists on the GPhC register, 45% identify as BAME, 45% identify as white and 10% give no ethnicity.

Mohammed Hussain, senior clinical lead for NHS Digital and a former GPhC investigating council member, described the regulator’s pilot as “a major step forward in redesigning systems to remove systematic bias”.

“We know that unconscious bias has a subtle but powerful effect, and we know that blinding of personal details on applications, for example, can and does reduce bias,” he said.

“This is long overdue and something I had pushed for following my own experiences of sitting as a panel member for the investigating committee. There were rare, but clear, examples of a panellist airing assumptions about an individual based on their presumed belonging to a certain group.”

A spokesperson for the GPhC said: “There have been many reports that the BAME community have been over-represented at FTP proceedings by health regulators for many years.

“At the GPhC, the adjudication services team has committed to delivering a project to scope unbiased investigating committee decisions along with help from the equality, diversity and inclusion team. This project will be part of a broader approach aimed at delivering effective, consistent and fair pharmacy regulation.” 

Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal DOI: 10.1211/PJ.2020.20208179

Have your say

For commenting, please login or register as a user and agree to our Community Guidelines. You will be re-directed back to this page where you will have the ability to comment.

Recommended from Pharmaceutical Press

  • Print
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Save
  • Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Jobs you might like

Newsletter Sign-up

Want to keep up with the latest news, comment and CPD articles in pharmacy and science? Subscribe to our free alerts.