Rpsgb & Gmc

[gaby]

Why is it that if a Dr. drinks on the job, the GMC still let him work.

but if a pharmacist did something inappropriate he/she would be struck off the register by the RPSGB???


My old doctor is still working even though he was suspended for drinking on the job. IS it because he hasnt made a mistake?

He regularly told my aunt she was imagining pain in her chest, which later turned out to be that she needed a by-pass. Maybe if he'd listened to her first complaints of pain in chest it may not have become so serious. But years of being told she is imagining it, is it because he knew she wouldnt complain? As she doesnt know much english and secondly she wouldnt know who to complain to.

[Steve G]

GMC is really just a medics club. Its run by doctors and has a reputation for being extremely soft in its disciplinary processes. This is despite the fact that the GMC is supposed to be solely concerned with the regulation of Doctors. The RPSGB on the other hand has a much more rigourous disciplinary system, with an independent statutory committee. It has a much better record and reputation as a regulator than the GMC even though the RPSGB is both a representative and regulatory body.

Some people have the view that the Stat Com goes a bit far, however I think if you look at its decisions it is reasonably balanced. People do not get struck off just for dispensing errors (on the whole). They get struck off because off the way the deal (or rather don't deal) with the error, or for other things, like reusing patient returned stock.

[Jeff]

The GMC has a tradition of "rehabilitating" doctors. The Stat Com has a tradition of finding a scapegoat. (Here I go again)

Both are (unfortunately) prone to political needs.

An example of each.

Stat Comm and the peppermint water case.
Pharmacist wasn't on the register long enough to have a pre-reg student
Pre-reg student had complained to head office about placement.
No action taken by stat com against the company involved.

GMC
And it hunt for Professor Roy Meadows - it's even going to the appeal court.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5157972.stm

Jeff

[Linnear]

The thing about that case that gets me is that because one student obviously made an error in reading conc Chloroform water for 2x strength chlorform water all pharmacists are told that they're incapable of making anything themselves.

And the whole profession allowed that!


Imagine the uproar if the Drs were told that because of Shipman all CD Rxs would have to be sountersigned by another medic! I bet they'd just say "OK, no problem!"
I don't think. And that b*stard possibly killed 200 people!

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by Linnear

The thing about that case that gets me is that because one student obviously made an error in reading conc Chloroform water for 2x strength chlorform water all pharmacists are told that they're incapable of making anything themselves.

Er no - most pharmacists just realised that in the event of an error both our Society and our employers would use us as scapegoats.

And the whole profession allowed that!

Individually we are still allowed to extemp disp aren't we? However the profit we can make from using specials manufacturer is spectacular - and pharmacy is still a business.

Jeff

[johnep]

As more pharmacists take out personal insurance, you can expect the multiples will try to blame the individual and pass any financial consequences to the PDA. The recent case published in the PDA mag illustrates the dangers of preprinting labels days before dispensing. Yet common practice in all busy pharmacies.
johnep