Pharmacy Technicians the new Healthcare professionals

[Rafael]

What has how long uni got to do with it?
the degree was mentioned when comparing a pharmacist with a degree with a dispenser without a degree! not when comparing 2 pharmacists.

obtaining a degree means you are EXPECTED to be competent clinically/ethically about any aspect of the Mpharm course ( 4 years).
applying what you been taught in real life scenarios through WORK EXPERIENCE(i.e summer placements during your degree or once you become a qualified pharmacist) builds on your way to professionalism.

no matter how someone works hard, he/she is not seen as a professional unless he/she has obtain a DEGREE.

[kemzero]

How long is the Btec. In some places they won't let you work as a tech without a Btec in addition to a NVQ. This I believe is the way it should be. In many countriesto be a pharm tech you need to get a dilpoma before you start on the job training. Some of these pharmacy tech are professionals as much anyone else with a degree and on the job training. If as Raol says you can be taught to be a professional in 4 or 5 yeara. By the way are the older pharmacists here less professional because they only went to uni for three or less years?

What has how long uni got to do with it?
.

Personally I all qualified & registered techs should pass a Btech exam/foundation degree whilst counter assistants and dispensers should have a NVQ level 3...this might raise standards.
Scotland is proposing that all pharmacy techs should be qualified to degree level ( foundation /pharmaceutical sciences) if pharmacy is to move forward ei.e in new extended roles

[paul2008]

no matter how someone works hard, he/she is not seen as a professional unless he/she has obtain a DEGREE.

Lets go back to what a profession is IIRC:

1. Members have specialised know body of knowledge
2. There is some sort of control of entry.
3. Self regulation.
4. Usually a monopoly in provision of a service.

I don't see DEGREE here, knowledge requirements amnd control of entry can and have been met by aprenticeships or even diplomas.

Pharmacy technicians are not necessarily dispensers and dispensing is only part of their role. There is no need for a dispenser to have a degree, as one of my lectures used to say you could train a monkey to do it.

I agree with you Kemzero, when I first came to this country I thought about becoming a technicial but the NVQ put me off because I thought it was like the diploma course for technicians that many other countries have, now that I know it is almost the same for a tire changing factory and a pharmacy and that the supervisors are interchangeable, I am not so sure. Perhaps I exagerate.

[dizzyb23]

Having a degree means the person has worked hard for a number of years and earned their piece of paper. They then go into the work environment and learn the ropes backed up by their hard earned knowledge. Experience then provides the rest.
Am I right in saying that some think you can't be a "professional" until you have been to Uni for ex amount of years and hold a degree???

[Rafael]

if your circumstances allow you to make a move, then complete your NVQ3 and move to a hospital( a lot of technicians are doing it).
or if you are even more ambitious about your future, apply for pharmacy course, apply for a student loan and get a pharmacy degree in 4 years.
Best of luck

[paul2008]

if your circumstances allow you to make a move, then complete your NVQ3 and move to a hospital( a lot of technicians are doing it).
or if you are even more ambitious about your future, apply for pharmacy course, apply for a student loan and get a pharmacy degree in 4 years.
Best of luck

Not sure where you live Raoul, many hospitals only want techs with a Btec in addition to the NVQ or overseas pharmacists. the NVQ is only for retail and RPSGB (to keep overseas pharmacists and wealthy bussiness partners out?). I have never done an NVQ, I just watch. If I had become a technician it would have been under the grandparent clause. I hope you are looking forward to your pre-reg: its not that different from the structure of the NVQ: in that you have to collect a lot of random evidence.

My basic point is that a a degree is just part of your training and if a 4 year degree plus pre-reg makes you a professional what then of some one who does a Btec degree and then a supervised training period of atleast a year. You may argue that you have an Masters but American pharmacists have doctrates: are you less professional than them?

I do think that pharmacy technicians should have basic underpining knowledge and on the job training. So in my opinion the NVQ alone is not sufficent. So in the Uk some technicians are on a professional level, others will just have a piece of paper but like the pharmacy degree it will just get tougher and tougher until an acceptable standard is reached.

As I have probably mentioned elsewhere I am an overseas pharmacist and although to some extent I resent technicians and others taking over pharmacist roles, I think often pharmacists shoot themsselves in the foot but saying I did four hard years at uni and I am a professional, I deserve this or that.

[johnep]

Agreed, going to uni does not in itself mean you are entitled to high standard of living. However, a degree is needed to show you have reached a certain standard which enables you to enter a protected profession which normally does enjoy a high standard of living.
johnep

[TangoFiver]

obtaining a degree means you are EXPECTED to be competent clinically/ethically about any aspect of the Mpharm course ( 4 years).
applying what you been taught in real life scenarios through WORK EXPERIENCE(i.e summer placements during your degree or once you become a qualified pharmacist) builds on your way to professionalism.

no matter how someone works hard, he/she is not seen as a professional unless he/she has obtain a DEGREE.

Hmm, i'm a trainee technician, but I have a degree in an unrelated field, does that make me a 'professional'?

[dizzyb23]

Just to clear up a few points:
I've been a qualified Tech (NVQ3) for two years now but have many other qualifications from other "professions" i've worked hard to attain. I'm currently doing my ACT AND the Technicians degree at London Birkbeck Uni.
But I have to work full time as I have a family to support and unless I win the lottery, the Pharmacists course is currently NOT an option.

I have a ton of respect for anyone that works hard and study's hard to better themselves. I've been lucky enough to have worked the majority of my pharmacy career with the most amazing Pharmacists. And unlucky enough to have come across two of the most unprofessional Pharmacists in the last six months. Believe me.............these two were and are an absolute danger to society.
Anyway, enough debating. All opinions are valid blah, blah, blah..............

[Jen the 3rd]

So did pharmacists only become professional when it became a degree only profession? Remember that until the 70's pharmacists could qualify with a PhC, a pharmacy diploma as well as the BSc. Also, nursing only became a degree only profession relatively recently, and with it came the grudging admission that nursing is a true profession rather than a doctor's assistant. With nursing, recognition as a profession also came with the divergence between their roles and doctors, in that a nurse will almost exclusively carry out certain nursing procedures. As the pharmacists and techs roles grow further apart and the complexity of medicines formulation and dispensing increases, e.g. pharmacogenomics, gene therapy, the tech will become recognised as a profession allied to pharmacy, in the same way that nursing is a profession allied to medicine. And Tangofiver, well done on your degree, but I could also ask, I have a PhD, does that mean I'm a doctor? Well yes, but I'm not allowed to use this title when I'm practicing as a pharmacist!