DECEMBER, Edition # 39, 2001

Click on the Newsletter Reader's Forum link to access a forum from which you can express your comment or viewpoint on this article.
The author values your input, so please take the time to register your details, and participate in the only free debate on the future of Australian pharmacy.
Registration is free, and required once only, for permanent access.
You do not need to register if you only wish to view comments.

I read with great interest Jon Aldous' last article dealing with a seemingly supreme lack of knowledge by pharmacists on all matters IT.
Jon provides an extremely valid point: pharmacy will not survive based merely on drug information alone, further knowledge about other areas is required to be a success.
The Victorian College of Pharmacy introduced a Pharmacy/Economics double degree in 1998 (and then were kind enough to not offer me a place!).
Why?
Because it was noted that pharmacists who opened their first pharmacy had a high rate of failure.
Lack of fiscal knowledge was blamed.
Management is another area which pharmacy owners require.
Hence the set up of the AIPM, and the integration of management courses into four year degree programs.
It is also compulsory that students undertaking their graduate year have undertaken some sort of management course.
The basics were taught in the second semester of fourth year to me.
I found the course to be quite interesting and enjoyable, and above all, potentially useful.
Clinical Information Technology was another subject utilised to encourage IT growth in pharmacy students, and it worked to some degree.
These "non-science" based courses were interesting to most, but proclaimed "non-sense" based courses by others, and I can understand why.
What role does management play in those who decide that their vocational calling is within the hospital setting?
What would be the use in a hospital pharmacist undertaking an extra two years to gain economics skills if they were to not utilise them in a community setting? These two statements may draw the ire of hospital pharmacists, and I do apologise.
I am basing these comments on my knowledge of the role of pharmacists in the hospital setting.
If I am making incorrect assumptions, please correct them.
Essentially, by introducing the double degree, you are suggesting to pharmacy students that they are to become community pharmacists.
Personally, when I entered university, I was unaware that pharmacists had a role in hospitals, industry, marketing and management.
Enrolling students in this double degree without exposing them to aspects of all lines of pharmacy work could draw them away from other career options.
An increase in graduate diplomas or other forms of specialized education (e.g. DMMR) would allow pharmacists to decide their level of knowledge and area of specialty.
We are seeing more and more of these being introduced, and I think more will be seen in the future.
Hopefully, one of them will be a graduate diploma in naturopathy.
While this will be my last article on student issues, I excitedly look forward to the challenges faced by pharmacists everyday.
While I will no longer receive half price train fares, spend less weekends undertaking hepatotoxic activities, and slowly come to realize that there is a seven o'clock in the morning, I am confident that I will never cease to learn new things about pharmacy.

A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all. I will be back in 2002 Simon Rudderham

Ends

Previous Article

Next Article

Back to Article Index
Newsletter Reader's Forum