Are you guys scared of Pharmacy Robberies?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I didn't ask what the legal department would say. I asked what you would say. Would you tell your boss he is guilty of theft? Would you report him?

Yes, I'd report him. It's theft and bad judgment.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Yes, I'd report him. It's theft and bad judgment.

I can respect that, though I disagree. At least you stick to your principles.

"Gee boss I have a headache today"
"Here, take some Tylenol."
"It's been nice working with you Boss, sorry you turned out to be a theft" *Calling 911*

Give me a break. :rolleyes:
 
I can respect that, though I disagree. At least you stick to your principles.

"Gee boss I have a headache today"
"Here, take some Tylenol."
"It's been nice working with you Boss, sorry you turned out to be a theft" *Calling 911*

Give me a break. :rolleyes:

I feel that your boss has the authority to hand out meds as they see fit, although any evidence of abuse should be reported. Every one of my pharmacists at CVS and the pharmacy manager of the target I interviewed at said they have done it for a tech (ibuprofen here, APAP there, etc.) because it falls within a pharmacist's judgement to do so. They are hired by their company to be a custodian of the drugs behind the counter and they are able to make the decision for emergency scripts, continuation pills (2-3) pills, etc.
However, they said they would only do it for non-controlled's and only if the tech is working and in obvious pain. Tramadol was viewed by most of the pharmacists as (why isn't this a controlled?) so they probably wouldn't give it away. They would also not hand out a brand name drug or expensive generic like imitrex or treximet unless they absolutely HAD to (1 tech since the rest called out, etc.)

So yeah, a pharmacist is supposed to have the authority to make these decisions, just like how a manager may choose to refund an item to a customer they have no authority refunding, or providing gift cards for upset customers as mentioned. These decisions make the overall business workflow or customer base smooth and beneficial in the long run. I'm pretty sure the BOP wouldn't close down a pharmacy because the pharmacist gave an ibuprofen 800 to a tech or an imitrex if they were the weekend tech.

Just my thoughts any way.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I feel that your boss has the authority to hand out meds as they see fit, although any evidence of abuse should be reported. Every one of my pharmacists at CVS and the pharmacy manager of the target I interviewed at said they have done it for a tech (ibuprofen here, APAP there, etc.) because it falls within a pharmacist's judgement to do so. They are hired by their company to be a custodian of the drugs behind the counter and they are able to make the decision for emergency scripts, continuation pills (2-3) pills, etc.
However, they said they would only do it for non-controlled's and only if the tech is working and in obvious pain. Tramadol was viewed by most of the pharmacists as (why isn't this a controlled?) so they probably wouldn't give it away. They would also not hand out a brand name drug or expensive generic like imitrex or treximet unless they absolutely HAD to (1 tech since the rest called out, etc.)

So yeah, a pharmacist is supposed to have the authority to make these decisions, just like how a manager may choose to refund an item to a customer they have no authority refunding, or providing gift cards for upset customers as mentioned. These decisions make the overall business workflow or customer base smooth and beneficial in the long run. I'm pretty sure the BOP wouldn't close down a pharmacy because the pharmacist gave an ibuprofen 800 to a tech or an imitrex if they were the weekend tech.

Just my thoughts any way.


I agree it seems odd that tramadol is not a control, but it does demonstrate less abuse potential than other drugs in its class. I am not arguing for or against making trimodal a control, only pointing out that it is not completely indefensible to leave it uncontrolled, as there is evidence to support that decision.
 
I agree it seems odd that tramadol is not a control, but it does demonstrate less abuse potential than other drugs in its class. I am not arguing for or against making trimodal a control, only pointing out that it is not completely indefensible to leave it uncontrolled, as there is evidence to support that decision.

Tramadol is controlled in some states.
 
Tramadol is controlled in some states.

I can't find that info. Micromedex only lists it as "RX" and I don't see any kind of info about it's schedule on CP. Is there an easy way to check for this sort of thing or is it one of those "be familiar with the laws in your area" kind of thing?

Thanks!
 
I can't find that info. Micromedex only lists it as "RX" and I don't see any kind of info about it's schedule on CP. Is there an easy way to check for this sort of thing or is it one of those "be familiar with the laws in your area" kind of thing?

Thanks!

I think it's a "know your state law" kinda thing. If you are making a list... I will tell ya it's CIV in Kentucky.
 
I can't find that info. Micromedex only lists it as "RX" and I don't see any kind of info about it's schedule on CP. Is there an easy way to check for this sort of thing or is it one of those "be familiar with the laws in your area" kind of thing?

Thanks!

Unfortunately this is one of those "know your state laws" situations. States can make medications a lower (more controlled) schedule than they are federally. Tramadol, cyclobenzaprine, and fioricet (I think.. I always forget which is controlled and which isn't) are some examples of drugs that aren't controlled federally but are by some states. It can make things interesting when you study for the MPJE!
 
I think it's a "know your state law" kinda thing. If you are making a list... I will tell ya it's CIV in Kentucky.

I am not making a list, but thanks for the reply. :)

Unfortunately this is one of those "know your state laws" situations. States can make medications a lower (more controlled) schedule than they are federally. Tramadol, cyclobenzaprine, and fioricet (I think.. I always forget which is controlled and which isn't) are some examples of drugs that aren't controlled federally but are by some states. It can make things interesting when you study for the MPJE!

You read my mind! That's exactly what I was thinking/worrying about. :laugh:
 
Maybe you should! :D

Soma is also controlled in some states but not in others.

A quick search of my state's BOP website tells me it is a CIV here! Actually I already knew that, but I was not aware that it was by Florida law, not federal. Cool beans. That was fun. On an unrelated note, I am a dork.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Maybe you should! :D

Soma is also controlled in some states but not in others.

In some states Viagra is a controlled substance as well.


So yeah, the intent of my post was NOT to discuss variances in controlled substances but I guess it works ^_^

And yeah if it isn't known by now I'm in NC. We basically don't have any special restrictions on controlled substances as far as I know. So tramadol, soma, etc. aren't controlled in the least.
 
Source? I've never heard of this. Are the other drugs in the same class controlled as well?

That was something a RA pharmacist told me when I was doing CPhT training. I don't quite remember the state it was in, and as we established before there isn't really an easy way to find out what is controlled in different states. I guess we can chalk mine up to anecdotal evidence.

But yeah the pharmacist said it was all of them. Levitra, cialis, etc.
 
Last edited:
So if your techs are having a headache/knee ache or whatever, you're gonna tell them to go buy a whole bottle of Ibuprofen instead of giving them one from the inventory?

Dam Sparda we did a pretty good job of derailing this thing. :mad: You wanna go back to talking about theft? :p

And actually what he is saying is much worse than that. Not only would he not give out ibuprofen himself, he would report his boss (or presumably partner) for doing so. :thumbdown:

The only good I can see in such a hard line approch is at least he sticks to his guns. I wonder if he would really do it IRL though. I can't imagine anyone reporting their boss for offering them APAP or ibuprofen.
 
That was something a RA pharmacist told me when I was doing CPhT training. I don't quite remember the state it was in, and as we established before there isn't really an easy way to find out what is controlled in different states. I guess we can chalk mine up to anecdotal evidence.

But yeah the pharmacist said it was all of them. Levitra, cialis, etc.

I tried to substantiate your claim with Google but couldn't find anything. Wondered if you knew something we didn't.
 
I tried to substantiate your claim with Google but couldn't find anything. Wondered if you knew something we didn't.

Yeah he probably just did what I did and took it for fact without researching it himself. And this is how rumors and inaccuracies are spread...
 
Yeah he probably just did what I did and took it for fact without researching it himself. And this is how rumors and inaccuracies are spread...

It could be true. I've just never heard of that. We do keep it locked in our narc vault at work... but that's just to prevent theft.
 
It could be true. I've just never heard of that. We do keep it locked in our narc vault at work... but that's just to prevent theft.

Well I'm inclined to believe you because I've been running google searches as well and it was easy to verify tramadol and soma but couldn't for sildenafil. And I just don't feel like going through every state list of controlled substances.

We always kept ours on the shelf, it we were getting robbed then it didn't really matter where we put them. And employee theft wasn't too much of a risk since we only kept a bottle of it at a time.
 
It could be true. I've just never heard of that. We do keep it locked in our narc vault at work... but that's just to prevent theft.

It is not on our formulary at the hospital. It was not kept in our vault at my CVS. One of my favorite labels to fill actually. Pretty easy to count to 3-4. :laugh:
 
In some states Viagra is a controlled substance as well.

I find this EXTREMELY hard to believe (no pun intended). Testosterone is certainly a controlled substance (C-III here) but that's because it's an anabolic steroid.

Viagra was the only one in that class that was available when I last worked in retail, and we would keep the empty bottles because they are very popular gag bridal shower and birthday gifts.

One of our techs, who is now a pharmacist but I'm not sure where, asked me, "Why do you always put a 'Do Not Drink Alcohol' sticker on Viagra?" and I replied, "Renders it worthless." She said, "Oh, yeah, that's right." I don't think she'd ever had a boyfriend at that time.
 
I find this EXTREMELY hard to believe (no pun intended). Testosterone is certainly a controlled substance (C-III here) but that's because it's an anabolic steroid.

Viagra was the only one in that class that was available when I last worked in retail, and we would keep the empty bottles because they are very popular gag bridal shower and birthday gifts.

One of our techs, who is now a pharmacist but I'm not sure where, asked me, "Why do you always put a 'Do Not Drink Alcohol' sticker on Viagra?" and I replied, "Renders it worthless." She said, "Oh, yeah, that's right." I don't think she'd ever had a boyfriend at that time.

Yeah we had established that I heard it from a pharmacist and I never checked the sources. I heard and thought it was believable strictly for the fact that it was easily abusable for the people who purchase it and could cause issues in people who abuse it like too low blood pressure and etc.

Dunno, I kinda don't believe it until I find the state that restricts it. It was just one of those things where he didn't check a source and believed it and then I did the same (I think anyway)
 
Yeah we had established that I heard it from a pharmacist and I never checked the sources. I heard and thought it was believable strictly for the fact that it was easily abusable for the people who purchase it and could cause issues in people who abuse it like too low blood pressure and etc.

Dunno, I kinda don't believe it until I find the state that restricts it. It was just one of those things where he didn't check a source and believed it and then I did the same (I think anyway)

It does require a prescription. Sure, there are herbal and placebo knockoffs with names like "Niagara" but these drugs are extremely dangerous when used by the wrong people.
 
The Big Chain I work at has a policy that you cannot attempt to be a hero in a robbery situation. Don't make eye contact, just give them what they want, and let the police handle it. Plus all the controls have the store name and number permanent-markered on the bottom of the bottle for tracing purposes. I could only see having the gun-under-the-counter situation at an independent where it's their prerogative to allow that, despite it putting the staff at major risk. I don't know if I'd want to risk death over a few bottles of brand Percocet and some cash.
 
It could be true. I've just never heard of that. We do keep it locked in our narc vault at work... but that's just to prevent theft.

At the hospital where I work, we treat it exactly like a control (kept in the narc room, individual pocket in pyxis, inventoried by nurses daily, etc.) but it's not officially classified as such. It's treated just like any other non-control at my retail job.
 
I think everyone should carry a gun. An armed society is a polite society. Why should the bad guys be the only ones who carry gun?

So uh... we're you in the cold war generation? :smuggrin:

I kid (and agree with you)
 
I have been through five armed robberies over my career. Yes I am afraid of being robbed at gunpoint because I am not sure I will survive another one. Whether you comply or not does not guarantee your safety.
The armed thugs have the advantage of suprise on there side and usually things go down very fast.
I complied fully the first four times and survived. The fifth time only my use of a firearm kept myself and my wife alive. I had no choice, they were intent on harming us. It was a good day for us that day. It was not so good for the two armed robbers that day.
We owned an inner city pharmacy so we were well armed. Now that I work for someone else I do not have the luxury of having a firearm present. I still think about that day and it has been 20 years.
Regards,
Kirson
 
perhaps we should just tax and sell opioids like cigarettes and alcohol, then at least pharmacies would only be robbed for money like liquor stores
 
Im sad, I was up at soho when I saw a lady with a newspaper saying "4 dead, pharmacy" I live in nyc, so Im pretty close to long island... the girl was just 17 years old...
 
Some news sources have reported that no one in the pharmacy resisted, but he killed them all anyway.

The pharmacy had been robbed in the past, and it seems that the pharmacy simply handed over the drugs without resistance in each case.

Since Walgreens and most other chains discourage their pharmacists from being armed and expect the pharmacists to simply hand over the drugs--even though such a strategy DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK, as this tragic case has shown--I'd like to hear from someone high up at Walgreens and other such anti-gun chains why they continue such a policy.

Walgreens recently fired a pharmacist who defended himself against an attacker who was trying to stab him with a knife.

Does Walgreens actually *want* its pharmacists to die? If not, why continue a policy that clearly contributes to their being murdered?

This is a great example of why a pharmacist union would be helpful, to push for policy changes like this.
 
Give me 1 report in which a pharmacy worker was shot or killed by a robber. I couldn't find any.

4 killed in Pharmacy Shooting in Medford, NY. Terrible tragedy. The Pharmacist, a technician, and 2 customers. Shot and killed. And the pharmacist was filling in for the owner pharmacist, who almost had a heart attack when he found out.

Very scary.
 
Walgreens recently fired a pharmacist who defended himself against an attacker who was trying to stab him with a knife.

Does Walgreens actually *want* its pharmacists to die? If not, why continue a policy that clearly contributes to their being murdered?

This is a great example of why a pharmacist union would be helpful, to push for policy changes like this.

Yeah...gonna need a source on that one. I had heard about them firing a pharmacist who had a gun, and firing one who opened fire on a robber, but defending from a knife? I think a source would ab appropriate.

Complying with a robbers demands is almost always a good idea...when you can then easily get away. If your life is in danger compliance might not save you. I highly recommend that if you are concerned look for a self defense class in your area. Make sure it is true self defense, not a martial arts school that does a little defense on the side. I've been doing self defense focused jujutsu for ~6 years now and am pretty confident that a gun pointed at me is not a huge threat. Either they are far enough away that they are very unlikely to make a killing shot (mifght be in the hospital for a while) or they are close enough that their weapon will be removed from them.

tl;dr
1.) comply with demands unless in fear for life
2.) take self defense class
 
Oldtimer?? Is this one of the business men you speak of? The one where you comply and no one gets hurt?
 
Is everyone robbed at gunpoint? Has anyone had a guy just ask for the drugs with a note? What would you do then? I feel like I'd need to see a decent sized knife, at least.
 
Is everyone robbed at gunpoint? Has anyone had a guy just ask for the drugs with a note? What would you do then? I feel like I'd need to see a decent sized knife, at least.

So if someone tells you that they have a weapon but you don't SEE it, or if the weapon is not "decent sized" you are going to resist?
 
Is everyone robbed at gunpoint? Has anyone had a guy just ask for the drugs with a note? What would you do then? I feel like I'd need to see a decent sized knife, at least.

I don't care, I'm giving it to them. Clearly people will blow your head off with no provocation, so why provoke them?
 
Maybe I was misunderstood. I'm saying if a guy came up to you and said, "give me Oxy!", without any indication of a weapon or him hiding a hand in his jacket, would you do it?

So he's trying to rob you unarmed.
 
Maybe I was misunderstood. I'm saying if a guy came up to you and said, "give me Oxy!", without any indication of a weapon or him hiding a hand in his jacket, would you do it?

So he's trying to rob you unarmed.


Yes. I don't give a crap about the Oxy. I would not assume he was unarmed.
 
Top