What is General Pharmaceutical fitness to practise?
To remain on the General Pharmaceutical Council’s (GPhC) register, pharmacists must be “fit to practise”. The GPhC defines fitness to practise as pharmacy professionals:
“having the skills, knowledge, character and health necessary to do their job safely and effectively, act professionally and meet the principles of good practice set out in our various standards, guidance and advice.”
The GPhC will investigate concerns which suggest that a pharmacists’ fitness to practise may be impaired. A pharmacists’ fitness to practise can be impaired for a number of reasons, including misconduct, lack of competence, not having the necessary knowledge of English, ill-health or a conviction or caution for a criminal offence.
When making this decision, the committee will apply the following test:
“Against the backdrop of the overarching objective (to protect the public, maintain confidence in the profession & maintaining professional standards), is the applicant concerned fit to practise.”
To decide if the applicant is fit to practise and whether restoration will meet our overriding objective, the committee will take into account a range of factors:
-
- The circumstances that led to the removal
- The reasons given by the original committee for the decision to remove
- The pharmacist’s response to the findings of the committee at the original hearing
- The likelihood of the pharmacist repeating the conduct that led to their removal from the register
- Evidence of learning activities designed to keep skills and knowledge up to date, and to keep up with developments in practice
- The lapse of time since the applicant was removed
- Evidence demonstrating insight & remediation
Insight & Remediation
When you apply for restoration, a pharmacist will be required to “provide sufficient evidence” to demonstrate their fitness to practise. The ‘burden of proof’ is on the pharmacist. This means that it is for the pharmacist to satisfy the committee that they should be restored – it is not for the GPhC to prove or to provide evidence to the contrary.
When the committee considers evidence of insight, it will consider:
- Does the applicant understand what went wrong and accept that they should have behaved differently?
- Has the applicant demonstrated that they appreciate the impact or potential impact that their wrongdoing had or could have had on patients and members of the public, for example by showing remorse?
- Is the applicant empathetic to any individuals involved in the original concern, for example by apologising?
- Has the applicant identified how they will act differently in the future to avoid similar issues arising?
It is important to remember that a restoration hearing is not an opportunity to challenge the findings of the fitness to practise committee which removed the pharmacist’s name from the register, or about the severity of that original decision. A committee considering an application for restoration is bound by the original findings and decision.
Kings View Barristers
With over 30 years combined experience, Kings View Chambers have established itself as one of the best when it comes to fitness to practise defence. We fully understand that fitness to practise defence is not merely about processes and procedures. We also understand that we are working with people who are anxious and worried about what investigations might mean for them, their professions and the reputations.
We are proud to be rated ‘excellent’ by our clients. Our commitment to client care is genuine in both seeking the very best outcomes for our clients, but also ensuring we do what we can to support them through the process.