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 Fire service warns against stockpiling petrol at home
- 2 Town's garden efforts on display at Chelsea Flower Show
- 3 Judges announced for town champions awards
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.