Pharmacist sued for confiscating patient’s prescription
https://www.pharmacytoday.org/article/S1042-0991(20)30963-4/fulltext#relatedArticles
Judicial opinions can be frustrating when the judge authoring the opinion has not provided sufficient factual information. That is particularly true of this month’s case. The court’s description of the facts may lead one to believe, and actually hope, that an important fact has been left out of the opinion. It is difficult to imagine that a pharmacist would confiscate a patient’s prescription under the circumstances presented in this case.
Background
The patient was a veteran who allegedly was “suffering from chronic pain associated with a defective hip implant.” He also suffered from other medical conditions and was “not a candidate for surgery.” He was prescribed an extended-release (ER) morphine product that he had “successfully taken for years,” and he faced “substantial medical risks associated with dose reduction.
The patient alleged that he presented his ER morphine prescription at the defendant pharmacy; that the pharmacist “called the prescriber and verified the legitimacy of the prescription;” yet the pharmacist “refused to fill the prescription and confiscated his prescription document, preventing him from filling it elsewhere.
The patient allegedly suffered “severe pain and several days of opioid withdrawal symptoms.” He “was able to see his doctor six days later for a new prescription and was able to fill that prescription at a different pharmacy.
The patient sued the pharmacy based on several legal theories, the most significant of which were professional negligence and conversion. The pharmacy moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the pharmacist “did nothing more than act within his professional obligations and judgment.
Rationale
The court evaluated the four elements of a negligence claim (duty owed, breach of duty, causation, and damages) and concluded that the patient had alleged sufficient facts to support such a claim.
The court then turned to the conversion claim. A civil lawsuit for “conversion” is similar to a criminal prosecution for theft. The main difference is that a conversion lawsuit is filed by a person from whom property was taken against the person who allegedly took the property, while a theft case is filed by the government against the alleged perpetrator.
The court evaluated the three elements of a conversion claim (plaintiff’s right to possession of the property, defendant’s wrongful act or disposition of property rights, and damages). It concluded that the patient had alleged sufficient facts to support this claim also.
The pharmacy’s motion to dismiss was denied. This does not mean that the pharmacy will lose the lawsuit. It simply means the alleged facts, if proven by the patient, can support liability of the pharmacy.
Discussion
Pharmacists are obligated under the law to investigate suspicious circumstances before honoring controlled substance prescriptions. Unfortunately, these investigations sometimes can be misinterpreted by prescribers and patients. And pharmacists are sometimes overly aggressive in the way they do their investigations and in the accompanying statements they make.
As best practice, pharmacists should adhere to the following suggestions based on case law:
- ▪
Talk with the patient (or the patient’s representative).
- ▪
Talk with the prescriber (or the prescriber’s representative).
- ▪
Never make any disparaging remarks about the patient, the prescriber, or the medication.
- ▪
If suspicions are not resolved, then you may decline the prescription with apologies and the explanation that it cannot be honored based on pharmacy policy. Return the prescription to the patient.
- ▪
If the document presented is confirmed to be forged or otherwise illegal, then call the police and let them do their job. If the police instruct that the prescription should be confiscated, then do so briefly until they arrive to take possession of it as evidence.
- ▪
Do not fill an illegal prescription, even if the police instruct that this be done. It is against the law to knowingly fill an illegal prescription.
- ▪
If threatened, then cooperate. Never say or do anything that may result in harm to pharmacy staff.
Filed under: General Problems
This is crazy,,,this whole illegal involvement, of the dea.cdc.hhs.etc into the field of medicine has made a mess of medicine,,It literally has brought it back to the Dark ages,,This poor soul went into withdrawals i bet,,on top of his original medical condition,,,This is why,,I believe,addiction psychiatry/psychiatry should of never ever been FORCED onto grown adults,Thee forced involvement of psychiatry always harms the medically ill,,,via delay or even obviously denial of effective medical care,,,,,jmo,maryw.