I am confused by the wording in the Herald of December 13, on what the doctors propose for the health centre for the Sid Valley.
In paragraph two, they want to run their own pharmacy from the hub, while in the paragraph under Dr Hall’s photograph it would be an independent pharmacy.
Should it be owned by the doctors, it would not be financially independent since they would write the prescriptions and would be paid by the ministry.
I did not see any mention of a pharmacist in the pharmacy to supervise the dispensing by the receptionists - who would presumably not be qualified- leaving the doctors solely responsible.
Are they not busy enough already?
You may also want to watch:
It is recommended that doctors should do the prescribing and pharmacists the dispensing.
It has annoyed pharmacists for a long time that doctors are paid more than they are for doing the dispensing and they are not qualified in pharmacy.
- 1 Stephen's not afraid to get hands-on to keep business moving forward
- 2 Two Sidmouth gardens set to open to the public this bank holiday
- 3 Ottery Brownie leader set to run London Marathon
- 4 Donkeys look forward to welcoming families back
- 5 Plenty of case work picked up on campaign trail, but I'm happy to help
- 6 General Buller's statue in Exeter stay or go?
- 7 New team on frontline for mental health care and support
- 8 Arboreturm volunteers make final plans for eventful tree week
- 9 College launches two new fundraising appeals
- 10 Here come the Red Arrows! Things are looking up for town
No wonder they want the job!
Anybody wishing to open a pharmacy would be wiser to research whether it would be allowed to open in the place they proposed.
Legislation has been introduced to stop the leap-frogging which occurs.
It is thought that there are enough pharmacies locally to cover the requirements but if one of them felt the community would be better served elsewhere, they could ask to transfer the licence to premises which are suitable and agreeable.