Should Pharmacies be Held Accountable for Prescription Drug Abuse?
Should pharmacies be held liable for prescription drug abuse by their patients when it causes harm to the public and they have the information readily available that the patient may be abusing the drugs?
- article by Khoi Nguyen
As part of the effort to combat the dramatic rise in prescription drug abuse, a 
movement may be underway to put more of the responsibility on the
pharmacies that supply drugs of abuse to people who are addicted. According to The Wall Street Journal, a lawsuit is underway in Nevada that names Wal-Mart Stores, Walgreen, CVS, Caremark, and Rite Aid Corp. as defendants.
A woman who killed a pedestrian while driving did so while high on prescription drugs supplied to her by pharmacies that received letters by the state board in Nevada warning them that she could be abusing the drugs.
Growing Concern of Prescription Drug Abuse and the Industry’s Responsibility
According to congressional testimony last year from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, in 1991, 40 million prescriptions for opiates (such as OxyContin and Vicodin) were dispensed by U.S. retail pharmacies. By 2007, that number of prescriptions has exploded to 180 million. At the same time as this growth in prescription drug consumption, pharmacists have more information available about each individual patient from state-wide prescription tracking databases (33 states have these). The question arises as to the legal and ethical responsibility of pharmacists who can access this information.
The National Association of Boards of Pharmacy convened a task force recently to discuss pharmacies' roles in prescription-tracking programs. In light of the recent surge in abuse of prescription drugs, they are also considering development of new guidelines concerning pharmacists’ responsibilities to the public.
The National Association of Chain Drug Stores has acknowledged the prescription drug problem at one of their recent conferences. They referred to the prevention of prescription drug abuse as “the new focus in the war on drugs” and that initiatives were underway looking to retail pharmacies to be part of the solution.
Possible New Responsibilities of Pharmacists and Industry Changes
The Nevada case could carry significant legal and ethical consequences to the retail pharmaceutical industry. They already are responsible for individuals, such as when they supply the wrong drug or an incorrect dosage. However, this case could also open them up to broader responsibilities to the public at large and increased litigation. This could lead to such things as higher insurance and prescription costs to help offset the costs of more lawsuits. Pharmacies may elect to not stock certain drugs that are heavily abused. Pharmacists will have more to consider about whether to fill a prescription. There could be cases where pharmacists may refuse to fill a prescription due to fears of litigation and the customer could be harmed.
Ultimately, these task forces, prescription drug monitoring programs, and associations’ main goal should be identifying drug abusers and getting them the help they need in overcoming their problem. Rehabilitation for drug addiction has been shown to be the more effective and less costly method of addressing the growing phenomenon of prescription drug addiction in the United States.
The pharmacists should speak with patients they feel are at risk and assisting them in obtaining the treatment they need. They have the information at their disposal and the professional knowledge necessary to make these informed decisions and “dispense” the needed advice.
