Are you going to re-join the Royal Pharmaceutical Society in 2011?

[cymru72]

Are You Going to renew your membership to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society in 2011?

[johannes]

Yes, says the pharmacist.


...
The bad news is, time flies. The good news is, you're the pilot!

[Dorothy Drury]

I only want to join a professional body for pharmacists. The pharmacy technicians quite rightly have their own APTuk and the Scientists have APS so just why is it that we can't have our own professional body? If it becomes an organisation for pharmacy then it is not a professional body. If non-pharmacists are allowed to join then it is a multi-disciplinary body and therefore will be trying to be, something to everybody and end up being nothing to anybody.
Of course this would not exclude retired pharmacists and we could also have a student corpus for those training to be pharmacists. We could also have formal links with pharmacy support staff. pharmaeutical scientists and other health professionals but they should be represented by their own organisations.

[faz11A]

I only want to join a professional body for pharmacists. The pharmacy technicians quite rightly have their own APTuk and the Scientists have APS so just why is it that we can't have our own professional body? If it becomes an organisation for pharmacy then it is not a professional body. If non-pharmacists are allowed to join then it is a multi-disciplinary body and therefore will be trying to be, something to everybody and end up being nothing to anybody.
Of course this would not exclude retired pharmacists and we could also have a student corpus for those training to be pharmacists. We could also have formal links with pharmacy support staff. pharmaeutical scientists and other health professionals but they should be represented by their own organisations.

-------------------------------
This seems to make eminent sense.
On a connected point I hope-It might just be my paranoia, but I think we need to guard against the following- There seems to be a move afoot, whether sponsored by the powers that be in government or the lobbying of retail multiples to try and 'dilute down' the status of a Pharmacist under the pretext of 'freeing up' the clinical element of Pharmacy.
I welcome MUR's and our heightened clinical profile- but the dispensing process is also our remit and we cannot be too far removed from it. If needed, there should be 2 pharmacists on site in a busy retail environment.

We need a strong, independant body that has some sort of 'teeth' to protect our beloved profession -and inspect and enforce standards (and moreover protect patients themselves) against the erosive action of penny-pinching government ministers and profit-greedy multiples.
There should be no muddle between what entails a pharmacist and Pharmacy Service and what entails a Pharmacy technician. If not, then just scrap the Pharmacy degree- You cannot have it both ways.
There needs to be a guard agianst this muddling of the two and its potential for future abuse of the Pharmacy profession- I agree that this is a potential threat.

But I hope the combined efforts of the PDA and RPS effectively guard against deteriorating standards in the profession. They are our only hope. I enjoin everyone to become members of the pda and the RPS. The RPS- whatever its history or state at the moment is just the same a traditional channel of communication with Parliament and our NHS Governers. It must be cajoled in the direction we want it to take and modified by our combined voices and our combined pressure. Morover, every Pharmacist must make their voice heard individually on this issue and others in any way they see fit.

[Dorothy Drury]

I agree that this freeing up of pharmacists for clinical duties is a bit of an exuse to downgrade pharmacists. If we are to supervise pharmacies then we must be in a position to intervene and so we cannot be out of the pharmacy. However, the GPhC may be our friend on this, as it has to put public safety first. The professional body on the other hand may get diluted out with non-pharmacists and mark my word they will have their own agenda. Also if the new professional body is funded by business then we will have another dynamic pulling pharmacists away from professional issues to financial ones.

[faz11A]

Yes Dorothy- I resonate strongly with your reply here-
I just hope the majority of Pharmacists and especially those just entering the profession realise that it is their important duty to uphold professional standards as well and as assertively as they see fit in their workplace.

Very interesting about your incisive comments- Can you expand (I realise the limitations of an open forum) on the possible RPS's agenda that might 'divert' from promoting highest standards in Pharmacy Practice?

I agree that this freeing up of pharmacists for clinical duties is a bit of an exuse to downgrade pharmacists. If we are to supervise pharmacies then we must be in a position to intervene and so we cannot be out of the pharmacy. However, the GPhC may be our friend on this, as it has to put public safety first. The professional body on the other hand may get diluted out with non-pharmacists and mark my word they will have their own agenda. Also if the new professional body is funded by business then we will have another dynamic pulling pharmacists away from professional issues to financial ones.

[Dorothy Drury]

I would like to see the RPS look after all the existing members that it has. There are many pharmacists from different sectors who would like a more dynamic professional body. There are concerns from our hospital pharmacists as well as those major issues that have cropped up in community.

[Web Ferret]

21 votes in and I'm in the majority! Interesting.

[admin]

I agree that this freeing up of pharmacists for clinical duties is a bit of an exuse to downgrade pharmacists. If we are to supervise pharmacies then we must be in a position to intervene and so we cannot be out of the pharmacy. However, the GPhC may be our friend on this, as it has to put public safety first. The professional body on the other hand may get diluted out with non-pharmacists and mark my word they will have their own agenda. Also if the new professional body is funded by business then we will have another dynamic pulling pharmacists away from professional issues to financial ones.

Hi Guys

I know this won't be very popular (especially from the creator of this site) but I honestly feel that pharmacy is a dying profession. If I had done say a HNC/HND in pharmacy I would be quite happy with my job and salary, but having done a degree I feel it was a waste of my time.

In any society jobs come and go with time. Who would have ever imagined 50 years ago that we would have this thing called the internet and you could become a multi-millionaire for having a good idea? Or how about earning a good living designing web sites etc?

I know we all believe that clinical pharmacy etc is a good thing, but I don't believe it is valued by anyone but us to be honest. I don't think MUR's are valued, interventions, clinical checks - nothing that we value as being worthwhile is valued by anyone except us.

The public treat us like we are dirt - there to be shouted at for something we have no control over. GP receptionists sneer at us, and talk down to us. If you can get a GP to speak to you they treat you with contempt. Store managers in large chains have no value for us except as dispensing machines.

The PJ isn't a "real" scientific journal. I used to subscribe to the BMJ on-line and it has links to every journal you can think of - except the PJ of course. Would you rather get published in Nature, New Scientist or the PJ - answers on a postcard.

I have been doing this job for over 15 years. Some things have always been the same. It has always been an "exciting time" to work in pharmacy. In truth is it never has. It's just a drudge through every day, wading through a mountain of scripts that need picking, checking and boxing.

I look forward to retiring. I can't wait until my mortgage is paid off and I can work less then I have to do now. I'd feel as happy with my job working in a sausage factory. At least then my head wouldn't be constantly on the block.

I have never got anything worthwhile from the RPSGB since I joined. In fact the year I joined I was ripped off from the start. I had to pay for a full years membership in July, and then another year the following January. When I sent for my certificate I paid for a posh frame with a gold plate at the bottom. The frame was cheap, crappy and fell apart the first time a cleaner dusted it. The name plate didn't have my name on it - it had RPSBG on it and was glued wonkly onto the frame - that quickly fell off too.

Today I checked my CPPE and paid my GPharmC fees - because I have to. I have done 14 CPPE courses this year that took me 88 hours. Fortunately, for the first time since I started down this pharmacy path, I don't have to join the society. How amazing it is to be getting nice letters and ads in the PJ telling us what they are going to do for us. In the past I've rang them several times for advice and have got a civil person about 20% of the time. The other times they couldn't wait to get rid of me - with no decent advice - just a "you're the professional, you make the decision" speech.

So, unless they come up with something amazing they aren't getting one single penny from me for the rest of my life. After I stop working I'm not going near another pharmacy to the day I die.

Just my humble opinion.......

[Pharmanaut]

Will give them a year to see if they can collect themselves into some kind of organisation that represents pharmacists.
However, they must get away from the 'how pharmacists can help with...' and start looking at representing us properly. Most of the profession are employees at the sharp end of patient care. This takes all our time and energy.
We need someone we can trust to watch our backs and to promote us properly.
We also need a strong organisation to tell employers the score when it comes to juggling terms and conditions. That's why we need to be in the PDA as well.