Thanks for the response; I'll go check out the Topics section for more. ;-)
Now then- was my "huge assumption" about the earlier responses any huge-r of an assumption that my question wasn't worth answering? We all make asusmptions, we all make judgments in out daily life. I understand that pharmacists work in dangerous situations, but I would counter that with a lot of other workers in a lot of other fields, many of them considerably dirtier and less prestigious or financially appealing than pharmacy in particular and healthcare in general. Reference mining in the past week or so.....
I would say that a lot of fields have changed considerably over the past 20 years. Really, the fields that don't change with the times are often overrun by up-and-coming technology (for example, how many pay phones now compared to 20 years ago?). People who don't change with the industry are quickly identified as dinosaurs at best, or become molasses in the works and actually hinder the facility/company/corporation/field.
But yeah, I understand this isn't the right place for this discussion, so I'll meander over to the Topics section.
I do appreciate your thoughts on this, though. Have a good day. 🙂
You're very welcome!
And - yes....your "huge" assumption was huge-r (sic) than the assumption that the question was not worth answering simply because most of us come here with some perspective on the field. You, admittedly, don't.
If you want to contribute something - great - contribute. Your opinion as a consumer is certainly as valid as any other consumer. We appreciate your input as a consumer. But, if you're here to ask a question, which might have been addressed a number of times - either here or on other forums...then, yes....the assumption becomes a bit disconcerting. I've often suggested someone use the search function to get an answer to a previously asked question. I honestly don't understand how choosing not to educate you on the complicated ins and outs of politics, PBMs, corporate influences, MACs, AWPs, AMPs, etc....could be interpreted by you as "dangerous".
There have been many, many topics on this forum about the problems pharmacists have with staffing, external pressures, laws, restrictions - it goes on and on.
I'm not sure what your reference to changing with technology has to do with this topic. Pharmacy has undergone many, many changes most of which you'd have absolutely no knowledge of & it would be beyond this thread to go into the detail.
You reference to miners has no bearing here - we are not miners nor do we compare our jobs nor our job risk to miners. This is not a matter of how "dirty, prestigious or finanacially appealing" the job is. The point originally made was the influence large corporations have had - not just the practice of pharmacy, but the inroads they are making into medicine. It is a professinal argument Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Probably neither. There are certainly arguments to be made for all sides & there will ultimately be some kind of "place" for them - just as there are for any kind of alternative care.
However....if you have no knowledge of any of the political & professional factors which influence how we feel, but are interested for your daughter's sake - just lurk and read more threads. Don't get bent out of shape because we don't want to go over the same road we've traveled many times before.
As you've seen....there are many, many opinions within the professional community - and....they're all valid!!! You've got opinions from young pharmacists, who as Mountain has said have taken this thread on one direction - a valid one - pressure put on independent decision making of a pharmacist by a coporate supervisor to override an on-the-spot decision.
Then - you have the opinion of Old Timer who has a long history of an independent, with his perspective on the political pressures of the 80's & 90's & the developments of the PBMs. Again, one to be respected.
My history is as long as Old Timer's but different as I've been (& still am) in the practice of both inpt & outpt....so, I'm more of the opinion that the system is broken so the clinics offer a "place" for those who can't find the resources to get care - someone mentioned that earlier.
But, that does not negate the influence, which, IMO, will always be negative - the influence the large corporations will have on independent medical decisions. That is one of the basic reasons why a century ago it was decided that a physician could not own a pharmacy.
Now.....one wonders - why can a pharmacy "own" a medical clinic??????
This is an extremely complicated & difficult problem within healthcare & one in which many of us who are in the business have a hard time sorting out and certainly it is widely debated within the political realm.
Forgive us for not wanting to spend the time to go over the extensive history.
