This bears reference to a very well anticipated write-up entitled, “Their demand, your verdict” (GK dt. 16th Feb., 2005) published in response to my earlier article dt. Mar., 3rd, 2005. At the outset I wish to clarify that there was absolutely nothing wrong in my verdict on the demands of the agitating govt. pharmacists as can be ascertained from the series of press statements issued by JKGPA (GK dt. Jan 12, Jan 16, Feb 26 & Mar 22). In all these statements they have unequivocally been demanding their rank promotions on the posts of senior and chief pharmacists. Though in a welcome move, author of the above-mentioned write-up had sullenly and astoundingly renounced this demand and expressed his willingness to stay contended with the designations of medical assistants Grade I, II, III & IV, which was by no means objectionable, his counterparts at Jammu are still pressing for this demand at the corridors of power (GK dt. Mar. 22nd).
In my previous article, I had substantiated my comments and remarks in light of the reports and recommendations of Hathi Committee (1975), Standing Parliamentary Committee (2001), National Human Rights Commission (1999) and the guidelines put forth by Medical/Pharmacy Council of India from time to time. There is little scope for contesting these recommendations/guidelines since they are framed and finalized after marathon debate and discussions with a host of experts in the field. Either the author has not comprehended these guidelines well or has deliberately chosen to ignore the same. Contrary to the claims made in the said write-up, I doubt whether even a single practical instance can be cited by the author where any class fourth orderly has risen to the level of a Chief Secretary or a Divisional Commissioner, any police constable has been able to carve himself out as a Director General of Police or any draftsman has been able to occupy the chair of a Chief Engineer merely on the basis of his service length. Even if there is any stray case, whose chances are very remote albeit, that cannot be used as a justification by them for their indiscriminate promotions on the posts of chief pharmacists without even possessing a diploma in pharmacy. Ironically first the author has ascribed the proximity of aspirants with the men in power as one of the reasons for such hitherto unknown promotions and then in a self-contradictory and non-sequitur fashion called such elevations “sheer fruits of their mettle and dedication”.
In order to maintain some quality standards in technical and professional fields, I feel it is essential to keep some qualification barriers for higher-rung posts. In this respect, govt. pharmacists are not the only pebbles on the beach. I mean it does not apply to them alone but to other professionals too in an equitable manner. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. An MBBS graduate is not promoted on an Asstt. Professor’s post in absence of a masters degree, a university lecturer is denied Readership unless he possesses a doctorate, a pharmacy or nursing graduate cannot dream of becoming a lecturer without post-graduation and so on. Nevertheless, there could be some exceptional cases with some extra-ordinary grounds. Barring such unusual cases, mere experience can’t work any wonders in mass promotions. In my article I had duly advocated a progressive hike in the pay scales of govt. pharmacists in accordance with their length of service. However their upgradation on the posts of senior or chief pharmacists without mandatory qualification shall always remain unacceptable to the pharmacy graduates. So far as their demand of being accorded “Registered Medical Practitioner” certification is concerned, it is for the physicians to express their willingness or dismay, whatever they deem appropriate, over the issue. However, at a time when a virtual war is being waged against quackery, fake, under- and unqualified medical practitioners, I wonder how pragmatic and advisable would this kind of a move be that is fraught with many other service-related connotations too. RMP certification means conferring a legal authority upon them to consult patients prescribe drugs and practice medicine in a full-fledged manner, be it during duty hours only. I wish to throw an open question. How many of our readers would like to be treated for their ailments by practitioners possessing one year para-medical training course certificates? Whether they flash stethoscopes or aprons over their shoulders or not is immaterial. So-called harassment at the hands of police or other agencies does not lend sufficient ground towards their en-masse declaration as registered medical practitioners.
Author has tried to use the scenario involving improper storage and handling of tetanus toxoid injections, polio vaccines or life-saving antibiotics as a tool to justify his assertion of maintaining status-quo in our prevailing, miserably pathetic drug and healthcare delivery system. If injections or vaccines are not transported or handled in compliance with standard conditions, does that mean we should never even think of scientific storage and modern dispensing techniques. If anyone dares to talk about implementing good pharmacy practices of W.H.O., reports and recommendations of various technical committees and guidelines put forth by MCI or PCI in our hospital and clinical pharmacy settings, why should he be considered unrealistic and unreasonable? What makes people think it is unattainable and “fairytale” stuff. The problem perhaps lies in our thinking, vision and congenital reluctance to progress and change. As a result, people can be seen putting up stiff resistance to any sincere efforts aimed at bringing out modernization, advancement, sophistication and development in such an important walk of life concerning the well-being of community at large. Describing scientific storage and modern dispensing techniques of commodities none other than drugs and pharmaceuticals that have got the potential to decide on the life and death of a consumer as “fairytale” fantasies aptly reflects the degree of mediocrity in our professional conduct, our unprogressive approach and our unenterprising and poignant attitudes.
The author has resorted to an uncalled for exuberance, acrimony and impudence in his language and has tried to draw parallels between an ordinary person who is free to express his views and ideas in a democratic set-up, and the likes of Mohammad Tughlaq. This only depicts the nature of professionalism, mannerism and decency prevailing in the community. Instead of rising to the bait, I would rather prefer to abstain from indulging in this kind of a retaliatory lingo. We are living in an era that is blessed with full freedom of thought and expression, occasional attempts made by certain power centers to subvert or thwart this freedom notwithstanding. Any reservations or differences of opinion can be expressed vide a healthy and meaningful debate without abhorring the dissenters. No degree of excoriation can however deter me from raising genuine issues related to the basic healthcare of common masses and legitimate interests of my fellow professionals, since I myself am one amongst them. So far as the question whether govt. needs advisors or not, I would rather leave it to the readers to draw their opinion. Yet one fact beyond any doubt is that every govt. does require “eye-openers”, a role that is very commendably being played by our fourth estate and to which people like me contribute occasionally in a very small and humble way and the same shall continue in future too, no matter what others feel or say about it. The very fact that there is no Drug Policy in our state, no legal provisions to regulate the sale, storage or distribution of ayurvedic, unani or homeopathic drugs, no education regulations to govern our basic health and pharmacy education, no Pharmacy Act (central) in place in spite of over fifty years of its enforcement in other states, explains the constant need for such fact-reminders and conscience-shakers.
I had made it amply clear in my previous article that I am not averse to the genuine demands of govt. pharmacists, but I am and shall always be concerned about my fellow professionals who spend three or four years of their precious youth in undergoing hard professional training only to find a square peg in a round hole at their aspired and well-deserved positions. Further in my opinion, it does not behoove the president of an association to describe the job responsibilities assigned to him that include the most vital and emerging concepts of drug storage and dispensing as “ a very petty task” and thereby undermine the dignity of his own job profile and designation. To my perception, no job done with full zeal, zest and dedication can ever be termed as “petty”. Moreover, had he been aware of the recent advancements made in these areas in rest of the world, I am sure he would have desisted from using such misnomers. Nevertheless, author is right in saying that the concerned agencies in the govt. have not shown adequate interest in conducting regular quality improvement and continuing education programmes for in-service pharmacists and other health workers in order to apprise and educate them of the latest happenings and recent trends in these areas. Therefore govt. pharmacists could very well include this as one of their demands.
My intention was never to show the govt. pharmacists down by way of my article or to assail them in any manner. I have absolutely no intention to enter into an indecorous and insalubrious squabbling spree with them. Pharmacy graduates have nothing to do with their agitation or demands as long as any attempt is not made to usurp their rights or transgress their jurisdiction. They have their own distinctly discernible role to play and we have ours. No grudges, no hostility. With these remarks, I hope entire controversy will be put to an end and they will give up their demand for their rank promotions on the posts of senior or chief pharmacists. I once again reiterate that I have no objection to the rest of their demands excluding RMP certification.
No comments:
Post a Comment