Dismissed for sharing a prescription

stevemLS

Let's put an end to the CD/non CD element of this.

I have looked it up in the BNF (British National Formulary - the UK medicines "bible"), at 10mg/5ml oramorph is a Prescription Only Medicine, not a controlled drug. At higher strengths it is a CD.

Undervalued

Lioness_Twinkletoes wrote: »

I totally disagree. If (and there does seem to be some confusion as to whether it is or not) it's not a controlled drug it would be akin to my asking a colleague for a paracetamol or Ibuprofen. If it though, that is a different ball game. Would be useful to know what the OP profession is. That is bound to have some bearing on it.

Sorry, not at all!

Paracetamol etc and be bought by anybody for their own use and, in restricted quantities, can be bought almost anywhere without going to a pharmacy.

Technically however, it is illegal to give even these to somebody else.

Next you get drugs which can only be bought from a pharmacy (again for your own use).

After that come drugs which can only be sold under the direct supervision of a pharmacist.

Then we get drugs which can only be obtained with a doctor's prescription.

Finally we get to so called "controlled" drugs where even tighter rules apply.

What we are talking about here falls just short of the highest category because it is relatively dilute. In a fractionally stronger dose it would be in the top category.

So, it is very different from "a couple of paracetamol" although, technically, supplying even that would be illegal!

Another_not_new_user

Lioness_Twinkletoes wrote: »

I totally disagree. If (and there does seem to be some confusion as to whether it is or not) it's not a controlled drug it would be akin to my asking a colleague for a paracetamol or Ibuprofen. If it though, that is a different ball game. Would be useful to know what the OP profession is. That is bound to have some bearing on it.

We are getting off the actual subject again, but it is nothing akin to your asking a colleague for a paracetamol. It is not even akin to asking a colleague for an oramorph. We are talking about a bottle of the stuff! Whether money changed hands or not, I was very specific in the word I used previously - that is the illegal supply of a drug, a morphine based drug at that. It doesn't need to be crack cocaine!

Another_not_new_user

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Can you produce proof that that is a medical drug - rather than a "recreational" drug? I presume that particular drug IS only taken as a medical drug?
.

You presume incorrectly. I don't need any medical training to know that. The difference between medical drugs and "recreational drugs" is one of legal definition and supply route. Almost all "recreational drugs" can have medical uses - and provable medical uses - and vice versa.


One of my current drugs - medically prescribed and filled by prescription from a pharmacist - is a controlled substance, and it would be entirely illegal for me to sell one on a street corner. Or in fact to give it away. My doctor informs me that taken "recreationally" it produces euphoria and "highs". I have frequently asked if I can have that version of it because it really isn't working like that for me! But I must assume that I need to take more of it, or more of it at one time, to get the effect of its "recreational" use, something I wouldn't do because I understand how dangerous and addictive it is, even at "medical levels".


Equally, there has been a long standing campaign to make cannabis legal for medical use, and there is a body of evidence to support such a use. But it hasn't happened in the UK yet, so it remains illegal to use it even for medical purposes.


The fact is that if, setting aside whether a drug is "controlled" or not (which is entirely a red herring), if I gave ONE of my pills to someone that would be both illegal and extremely stupid. Simply because they are painkillers does not mean that they should be used for the specific type of pain, or for that person and their current medical state; and the fact that they may have had the same drug in the past does not mean that a doctor would prescribe it again. Prescriptions are issued on a personal basis taking into account the persons current state of health and symptoms - not what might have been the case six months ago or twelve months ago. If I gave a full bottle of them to someone, I am supplying a drug illegally. And no differently in law than if I was doing it on a street corner for a price.


And if I did that in the workplace, which seems to be the case here....

NYM

Putting aside the drugs issue for a moment...

chloe15 wrote: »

No sorry nothing like that! This colleague had spine problems also and when he saw me doubled over in agony he went and got this painkiller for me from home as he knew I'd had it before and wanted to help me. They've dismissed him also

What reasons have they given him for his dismissal ?
Did it have anything to do with leaving work to get you the medication ?

chloe15 wrote: »

...With me they've listed lots of gross misconduct including reporting for work whilst unfit etc. I was not unfit I was in a lot of pain and very tired, they are even using the fact I got a lift to work against me saying I knew I was unfit which is rubbish, I was following the advice on the pack which says don't drive until you know the effects!

Were all those reasons related to your medical condition ?

btw...How you choose to travel to and from work should not be their concern.

Undervalued

NYM wrote: »

btw...How you choose to travel to and from work should not be their concern.

It can be under some circumstances.

Sorry, but the popular misconception that your responsibility to your employer stops the moment you leave the premises is just that - a misconception.

NYM

Undervalued wrote: »

It can be under some circumstances.

Sorry, but the popular misconception that your responsibility to your employer stops the moment you leave the premises is just that - a misconception.

I've no argument with your second point and don't dispute it, however, I'd be interested to hear of some examples of your first point.

patman99

Given that the employer was fully aware of the employee's disability (the slipped disc) that the op may even have a case for a claim under the Equalities Act.

As for the technicalities around the supply of painkillers, I used to work for Siemens and on my induction, the First Aider mentioned that as they were not allowed to give-out painkillers, the company had installed coin-operated paracetamol dispensors by the First Aid room, but they were always empty and were never filled-up as 'so many people on the shop floor carry painkillers, you will always find someone who has one to hand'.

Undervalued

NYM wrote: »

I've no argument with your second point and don't dispute it, however, I'd be interested to hear of some examples of your first point.

This is getting well off topic so briefly a couple of examples....

Hitchhiking home in company uniform.

Motorcycling to work without a helmet.

Both could be taken as bringing the company into disrepute but only one is illegal!

Undervalued

patman99 wrote: »

Given that the employer was fully aware of the employee's disability (the slipped disc) that the op may even have a case for a claim under the Equalities Act.

Why?

A disability requires only a "reasonable adjustment" not a licence to act unlawfully!