Archives

10 April 11, 2007

Henri R. Manasse, Jr., PhD., Sc.D.
Executive Vice President, Chief Executive Officer
Secretary, Board of Directors

Dear Dr. Manasse:

On behalf of the Montana Pharmacy Association (MPA) and the MPA Board of Directors, I am writing to inform you of our discussion and decision regarding the ASHP  Board of Directors’ decision to deny MPA petition for affiliation.

We are disappointed in the decision that the ASHP Board has taken, not because of the decision to deny MPA affiliation, but rather, because of the direction ASHP is taking to further fractionate the profession of pharmacy.  MPA feels very strongly that our position and our petition is in compliance with ASHP governing documents and guidelines.

To rebut:

1. We would argue MPA does, indeed, have a health-system element, both from a delegate status and from an active, working status.  Our Board consists of 4 members all practicing in a health-system.  Further, a significant number of our general membership consists of hospital and health-system pharmacists. MPA prefers to recognize patient care practice by pharmacists; the environment in which that occurs is not relevant.   We are integrating different components of our profession toward common goals such as improved patient care and good pharmacy practice, whether it be ambulatory or hospital.  Our continuing education programs contain diverse, up-to-date, and evidence-based presentations that pertain to health-system pharmacists, ambulatory care pharmacists and community-based pharmacists.

2. MPA governance is an open discussion, vote-ruled, progressive board without fractionation.  We do not plan to demarcate governing issues or legislative policy nor do we plan to establish separate programs. We think that accomplishes little for the profession of pharmacy and disagree with the direction that ASHP is taking. 

3. Additionally, and for the much the same reasoning, we will not segregate our finances. We are one profession serving many needs.  We would gladly send delegates to ASHP conferences for input and networking, but it would come from MPA, not from a fractionated component within our association.

4. We disagree vehemently with ASHP’s “…autonomy in setting professional practice and legislative policies….” We have open dialogue with Senator Max Baucus – D (MT), who chairs the Senate Finance Committee.  He was emphatic in telling us the profession of pharmacy must speak with one united voice, not multiple organizations serving themselves.  MPA submitted and adheres to standards of practice for the profession of pharmacy in Montana. Additionally, we have, in fact, established effective legislative mechanism at all levels of government for all components of pharmacy.

MPA has restructured membership, guiding principles, the board of directors, and standards of practice to allow for the growth of the profession of pharmacy such that patient care is improved and that individual pharmacists are credentialed and recognized as providers of care. Moreover, we are eliminating seams and demarcations as much as possible. Pharmacists caring for patients are pharmacists caring for patients, no matter what or where the environment. It is unfortunate but readily apparent from your letter Dr. Manasse, that ASHP does not agree with us. However, MPA feels that it is acting with the integrity that is demanded by the profession of pharmacy and stands with current petition.  Certainly, we are open to continuing dialogue.

Respectfully,

Vince Colucci, Pharm.D., BCPS
Associate Professor, The University of Montana CHPBS
President, Montana Pharmacy Association

cc:            Montana Pharmacy Association Board of Directors