Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

[kemzero]

The PDA, pharmacist-solictors and other lawyers have voiced their concerns about how strict the section 60 order is coupled with the fact that "Fitness to practice" procedures are alive and kicking.
I have also stumbled across quite a few websites dealing with pharmacist/pharmacy dispensing errors urging patients to put in claims for wrong labels,wrong patient identity,wrong dose or meds ....some even offer no win no fee representations...
as a pharmacist I find these situations extremely worrying and wonder how this is likely to affect the future of pharmacy e.g remote supervison as the pharmacist will still be repsonsible (even for OTC advice) how can the profession progress with fitness to practice etc hanging over its head....it'll be difficult to delegate or trust staff you don't really know, if you work as a locum, even those you know can make a mistake...what then....Its just too scary , and now that I might have to pay close to £600 a year for both indemnity insurance and the pleasure of MRPharmS..I am beginning to wonder whether its worth it...comments please

[Pharmanaut]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

The PDA, pharmacist-solictors and other lawyers have voiced their concerns about how strict the section 60 order is coupled with the fact that "Fitness to practice" procedures are alive and kicking.
I have also stumbled across quite a few websites dealing with pharmacist/pharmacy dispensing errors urging patients to put in claims for wrong labels,wrong patient identity,wrong dose or meds ....some even offer no win no fee representations...

There's an awful scenario for a pharmacist, that I don't want to write about here in case it puts ideas into people's heads to try it, but the result is a "dispensing error" that you have no defence against, apart from using the same scenario as an antagonistic defence.

We take on unlimited liability for a dispensing fee of less than a quid.

[johnep]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

Apparently one of the reasons that lloyds use a high tack label is to stop 'swapping' by the pts.
johnep

[Zoggite]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

Not just by the patients, but also by some staff with evil intentions... (or so I've been told...).
Why is it that these labels stick on everything EXCEPT on Rx bags that you're trying to seal with them?!?

[Pharmanaut]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

Not just by the patients, but also by some staff with evil intentions... (or so I've been told...).
Why is it that these labels stick on everything EXCEPT on Rx bags that you're trying to seal with them?!?

There's a case for tamper-evident labels that break down if someone tries to peel them off?

[kemzero]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

[QUOTE=Zoggite;7200]Not just by the patients, but also by some staff with evil intentions...

Evil intentions against who pharmacist or company...scary business

[Mr.P.Harms]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

The PDA, pharmacist-solictors and other lawyers have voiced their concerns about how strict the section 60 order is coupled with the fact that "Fitness to practice" procedures are alive and kicking.
I have also stumbled across quite a few websites dealing with pharmacist/pharmacy dispensing errors urging patients to put in claims for wrong labels,wrong patient identity,wrong dose or meds ....some even offer no win no fee representations...
as a pharmacist I find these situations extremely worrying and wonder how this is likely to affect the future of pharmacy e.g remote supervison as the pharmacist will still be repsonsible (even for OTC advice) how can the profession progress with fitness to practice etc hanging over its head....it'll be difficult to delegate or trust staff you don't really know, if you work as a locum, even those you know can make a mistake...what then....Its just too scary , and now that I might have to pay close to £600 a year for both indemnity insurance and the pleasure of MRPharmS..I am beginning to wonder whether its worth it...comments please

I would be interested to see some of these websites, could you give me a link to them?

[johnep]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

On utube is an american news item re dispensing error by Walgreens.
johnep

[johnep]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

Harding Evans Solicitors - Your first choice for local legal expertise - Newport, South Wales - News - full story
Here is a link from google. looks as though Zoggite could be at risk as solicitors are welsh!.
johnep

[Mr.P.Harms]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

Harding Evans Solicitors - Your first choice for local legal expertise - Newport, South Wales - News - full story
Here is a link from google. looks as though Zoggite could be at risk as solicitors are welsh!.
johnep

Scary stuff! Makes you want to set up a firm suing lawyers for any mistakes they make in their daily practice

[kemzero]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

Russell Jones
Ashton Morton Slack
Bond Pearce etc

Not to mention the firm that secured a £1.5m payout from the Lloyds Pharmacy dexamethasone saga!

[Web Ferret]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

Three words: PDA
- Have you joined yet?

[johnep]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

Except that in the end lloyds did not have to pay as a judge decided pt had secured enough damages already from the Dr.
johnep

[Pharmanaut]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

Scary stuff! Makes you want to set up a firm suing lawyers for any mistakes they make in their daily practice

...this makes a case for packing in pharmacy and training to be a solicitor.

[Web Ferret]

Re: Fitness to practice ,the Section 60 order and remote supervison

...this makes a case for packing in pharmacy and training to be a solicitor.

Yes I'm sure you could make quite a living defending us poor pharmacists!!