The last state I practiced in, this inequity was eliminated somehow --
possibly by the Board. The reasoning was that it is noncompetitive and
violated antitrust laws. However, when I moved to my present state a
few years ago, I found the situation you described. If it truly was
antitrust, you'd think this would be less common than I'm finding out
after making further inquiries.

A few years ago, I gave my wife $80 to have her Rx filled at an
independent when I could have gotten it for free from the only chain
that the hospital I worked for had a contract with. Nothing personal
against chains in general, but this one I had absolutely no use for.

DRWilliams, R.Ph.
rx4spd@austin.rr.com

I had been feeling under the weather and visited my dr last Wednesday.
She wanted me to start an antibiotic. I wasn't scheduled to work until
the following Monday (tomorrow) so I walked across the street to get
my medicine at a grocery pharmacy.

They had no idea that I was a pharmacist, so I received no special
treatment. But I was 100 percent pleased with the service; they were
very professional, and I was out the door with my medicine in about 20
minutes.

It appeared that they had a Kirby Lester, and I signed on an
electronic signature pad--two things we don't have at the independent
where I work. Maybe I should have asked for an application...

It's time to face the music.  It all comes down to money.
The only people we can count on to protect the future of our
profession is ourselves.  We must face the fact that the chain drug
stores that we work for and the NACDS is not on our side.

Does anyone honestly think that if the chain drug stores had a chance
to legislate pharmacists out of the equation, they would not take it?
Let's face the facts: the current job of a pharmacist is distributive
and technical.  Most of us have gone through 5-6+ years of college
just to put pills in a bottle to follow FDA regulations.  This is
partly because we have become accustomed to this environment; we were
trained to do this technical work as a student.  There are little
pharmacists out in the community that perform "clinical" work per se.

The fact that insurance companies are pushing mail order is a
premonition of what the future of retail pharmacy will be like if we
continue on this path.  The average mail order pharmacist, because of
technology, is able to fill more prescriptions per hour than a retail
pharmacist.  This technology will inevitably be translated into the
retail setting to make the retail pharmacist more efficient.  That
being said, what do you think this will do to the pharmacist shortage?
We are increasingly graduating more pharmacists because of this
shortage.  What happens when technology becomes so efficient so that 1
pharmacist can now fulfill the duties of 10 current pharmacist?

However, there is hope.  Pharmacists today are too content in
performing these techinical duties of relabeling.  However, it is the
clinical aspect that will be our salvation.  EVERY pharmacist at one
point has practiced clinically.  Have you ever counseled a patient?
That is being clinical.

That being said, technology cannot replace the clinical/counseling
work of a pharmacist.  I beleive the future of retail pharmacy will
divulge into 2 tracks.  On the one hand, some will focus on
distribution and automation...and that's fine.  We need pharmacists to
make sure that medications are dispensed properly.  However, these
pharmacists will need to be highly trained and be able to offer more
to their company than just the regular "lick, stick, and pour"
routine.  On the other hand, there will be "clinical" pharmacists that
perform mostly clinic duties such as medication, hypertension, lipid,
diabetes, or another disease state management.  Some pharmacists are
doing this now, but the infrastructure is not there to accomodate
billing and reimbursement.  The good news is, ACCP and ASHP are
working hard to make sure this happens.

In conclusion, we have to face the facts that we cannot depend on the
chain drug stores to create better working environments for us.  I bet
that they are working on technology right now that makes a pharmacist
more efficient so that they will need less pharmacists.  They have
also tried to push for legislature that would allow a train
"pharmacist assisstant" to be able to dispense medications, but that
was shot down.

Pharmacists overall need to be more active in national societies so
that our voice can be heard and prevent the chain drug stores from
forcing pharmacists into a completely techinical role.

_____________________________________
This message was not edited before posting.  Any errors found within
the text are a result of pure laziness.