Open
Letter to the Seattle
Times
*********************************************************************************************
There
is a reason that newspaper sales are plummeting. It might be
interesting to see if advertisers will give the same treatment to the
Seattle Times as they did to the errant radio host, Don
Imus, for general stupidity.
The invisible author of the
editorial praising the newest pharmacy regulations has revealed
ignorance of the regulations themselves, as well as ignorance of the
practice of pharmacy. There really is no need to pay
money for material written by people who do no research and have no
understanding of a topic.
It is the regulations themselves
which gut the essential elements of pharmacy practice, with the real
target of forcing pharmacists to dispense Plan B to any male or
female over 18 years of age.
Witness
some realistically probable scenarios:
These
regulations do not specify plan B, but they do prohibit a pharmacist
from supposedly "intimidating" a patient, or delaying the
dispensing of potentially harmful drugs. This means that pharmacists
can be held responsible for the feelings of patients who receive
information about drugs treating various disease states.
If the pharmacist presents information (no matter how true) that the
patient dislikes, the pharmacist has "intimidated"
the patient. If the pharmacist refuses to dispense a drug
combination which could kill the patient, but the patient trusts the
physician more, and contests the pharmacist's conclusion (no matter
how correct) the pharmacist now has to let the Washington patient
suffer the adverse consequences, visit the emergency department, or
die.
I would not practice in Washington state, because many
things I have done to help patients, and to save patient lives are
now prohibited there. This is effected by the new pharmacy board,
which is more interested in legitimizing their profiteering from Plan
B, by involving everyone, than they are in the health, safety and
lives of patients.
The legitimacy of Plan B is held sacred
above all things, and any facts or opinions to the contrary are to be
suppressed and purged, using sweeping draconian measures, which in
this case has converted the profession of pharmacy to insurance
clerks.
A note concerning those who doctor-shop and buy
prescription drugs for resale: the black market drug
industry will have gotten a lot easier come June 2007, when these
regulations take effect. The combination of HIPAA
regulations and Washington regulations mean that there not
likely be any challenge from pharmacists to drug procuring efforts.
There is only a need for the procurers to pay cash to
bypass the checks by the pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs).
The
risk of possibly causing a patient to feel intimidated, and losing
the license to practice is certainly too great to warrant any effort
to regulate the flow of narcotics and benzodiazepines for
illegitimate use and resale.
Karen Brauer,
MS, RPh
Lawrenceburg,
IN