|
Looking back at the history of the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI), I believe some of the present weaknesses of the pharmacy profession can be traced to structural and functional mistakes in the way professional regulation and leadership evolved. Hence, this effort to create awareness among the present generation of pharmacists to learn from the past mistakes and ensure that the same mistakes are not followed.
Academy domination without adequate professional representation
Pharmacy regulation became predominantly academic in character. Teachers and academic institutions naturally have an important role in pharmacy education, but practising professionals from community pharmacy, hospitals, industry, clinical practice and regulatory services were not given adequate space in shaping the profession.
Lobbying to be on the Council has been to ensure approval and continuity of approval and seat matrix.
The result was an excessive focus on education, examinations, qualifications and institutional norms, without equivalent attention to how pharmacists actually practise and how the profession should evolve.
Representation without sufficient professional assertiveness
Ex-officio and nominated members occupy positions of considerable responsibility. Yet, in my view, there has often been inadequate willingness to question, discuss, debate and defend the profession before the health sector and the government.
Many may have lobbied actively to obtain these positions. But securing a seat is only the beginning. The real test is what one does after getting there.
A professional representative must be prepared to ask difficult questions, challenge inappropriate policy, present evidence, demand professional space and place the legitimate interests of pharmacy before government and other health professions.
No effective leadership pipeline
One of the most disturbing historical gaps is that even students approaching their final year often did not know:
- What Pharmacy Council of India actually does;
- How Council members are elected, nominated or appointed;
- What responsibilities a Council member carries;
- How a pharmacist can eventually participate in professional governance; or
- How professional leadership can be developed.
Students were trained to pass examinations and obtain qualifications, but not adequately prepared to understand, participate in or lead their profession.
The consequence - entrenched leadership
When young professionals are neither informed nor encouraged to participate in professional governance, leadership naturally remains concentrated among established groups - the “old bulls” of the profession.
The issue is not age. Experience is valuable. The problem is lack of leadership renewal, succession planning and meaningful participation by younger practising professionals.
A profession cannot remain healthy when its future leaders are not even aware of how their profession is governed.
Education became a proxy for professional competence
Pharmacy Council of India's historical emphasis on minimum educational standards, examinations and institutional approvals did not always translate into corresponding professional competence.
Marks and qualifications became visible measures of success, while professional judgement, practical competence, medication management, clinical responsibility, patient safety and accountability received comparatively least emphasis. Evaluation, eligibility and approval of colleges have been compliance based on physical parameters like Census count but the outcome and its quality has never been considered.
Expansion without proportional professional development
The enormous expansion of pharmacy education produced a large number of qualified persons, but professional opportunities, responsibilities, autonomy and recognition within the healthcare system did not develop proportionately.
We therefore created numbers without creating sufficient professional space.
Failure to anticipate the changing role of the pharmacist
Pharmacy has moved far beyond dispensing and product handling. Modern healthcare requires pharmacists to contribute to medication safety, pharmacovigilance, clinical pharmacy, therapeutic monitoring, medication review and multidisciplinary patient care.
Regulation should have anticipated this transition and actively created the professional architecture necessary for it.
Failure to give importance to language and communication
Virtually not giving importance to ‘language and communication’ in pharmacy education either directly or through demonstratively is another historical negligence, despite communication being the backbone of the profession. A pharmacist must communicate accurately with patients, physicians, nurses, regulators, industry, colleagues and the public. In both healthcare and industry, the ability to explain, document, interpret, negotiate and communicate professionally is as important as technical knowledge.
By neglecting this foundation, pharmacy education produced graduates who may possess pharmaceutical knowledge but are often inadequately prepared to express professional judgement, defend their decisions, counsel patients, participate in multidisciplinary discussions, prepare regulatory and technical documents, or represent the profession before the health sector and government. This is not merely an educational gap - it is a professional competency gap.
Approval and compliance versus outcomes
Regulation can become excessively focused on whether institutions satisfy prescribed requirements rather than whether they actually produce competent, ethical and accountable professionals.
The ultimate question should not merely be:
“Does the institution comply?”
It should be:
“What kind of profession does this institution produce?”
The deeper historical failure
In my view, the fundamental problem was not merely teacher domination, nor merely the presence of old leadership. It was the absence of a strong culture of professional governance and professional courage.
A mature professional regulator requires a balanced ecosystem of academics, practising pharmacists, clinicians, industry professionals, regulators, young professionals and public-interest representatives.
More importantly, those representatives must have the knowledge, independence and courage to speak.
They must be willing to discuss, debate and, when necessary, disagree with the health sector and government - not merely remain comfortable within the system.
A Council seat is not an honour to occupy. It is a mandate to represent, question, debate and defend the profession.
If representatives lobby hard to obtain a position but hesitate to use that position when the profession needs a voice, representation becomes a privilege rather than a responsibility.
The historical lesson for Pharmacy Council of India is therefore clear.
We did reasonably well in creating pharmacy qualifications. We did far less well in creating a strong, self-confident, professionally represented and continuously renewing pharmacy profession.
The future requires a different approach - less institutional entitlement, more professional accountability; less passive representation; more constructive debate; less protection of positions; more protection of the profession; and, above all, deliberate preparation of the next generation to lead pharmacy.
A profession that does not teach its young members how to govern, represent and defend their profession should not be surprised when professional leadership becomes permanently entrenched.
(Author is Pharmacy Reforms Advocate, Mentor cum Advisor to AIPDA & former registrar, KSPC and Retd. deputy director (Pharmacy),
HFW Dept Karnataka)
|