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.

Join

Subscribe or Register

Existing user? Login

A change in approach

Pharmacy is no longer synonymous with pharmacists. Pharmacy now includes a range of support staff. Pharmacy technicians are qualified team members regulated by the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC). The Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) needs to decide whether its remit is to promote pharmacy or pharmacists.

If it represents pharmacy then it makes sense to allow pharmacy technicians and accredited checking technicians to join the RPS, whose current roles are indispensable and whose future roles will be greater. Why are pharmaceutical scientists allowed to be members when they are not regulated by the GPhC and do not have any direct patient-facing healthcare role? This anomaly needs to be addressed urgently.

Also, being feeble in defending and promoting the working conditions and remuneration of pharmacists is wrong. If the RPS does not feel up to tackling these controversial issues head on, then it should be solely a contractor association and not a pharmacist-funded one. This is the number one reason cited by many of my community pharmacist colleagues for not joining the RPS. The RPS must be strong enough to make a stand. If it does not or cannot then it needs to take a long hard look at itself in terms of why it expects pharmacists to fork out £192 per year.

I expect future national pharmacy board members to advocate vigorously for a change in approach by the RPS reflecting one of the above positions.

Samir Vohra

Election candidate

English Pharmacy Board

Royal Pharmaceutical Society

Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal DOI: 10.1211/PJ.2015.20068388

Readers' comments (1)

  • Samir asks 'Why are pharmaceutical scientists allowed to be members when they are not regulated by the GPhC and do not have any direct patient-facing healthcare role? '
    Our pharmaceutical pharmacist colleagues are welcome to be members, because the pharmacists of the RPSGB were asked, took a vote and the majority wanted them to be members. SImple!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

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

Search an extensive range of the world’s most trusted resources

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

Newsletter Sign-up

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