Drug use at work

Re: Drug use at work

Utlendigur — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 20:45:15 GMT

Was there actually 14ml diazepam in the cupboard - ie do you check the stock or just the records. Just thinking of the time we "lost" 1000 diazepam tablets. The drug order had been sent, but not the prescription. Drug order arrived, minus the diazepam, but this wasn't picked up by the staff member who unpacked it, and she updated the whole order on the PMS so the stock level showed as > 1000. It wasn't picked up for some weeks until there no tablets left. Cue panic and some frantic detective work...

Re: Drug use at work

grumpyoldman — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 20:20:57 GMT

What will actually happen is a couple of fat spotty CSOs will rock up in a Vectra Estate , mooch about a bit check the security of the DDC , before asking loads of questions about their mothers knackered hyperthyroid cat ,They will make a report ,then sod of to a lay-by to while away the rest of their shift sucking on a magnum of their choice ,moaning about how much vets earn and charge, and how undervalued they are by a society that really owes them far more holidays and money.

The point ,is that they have been, and who ever is taking the drugs will think twice for a while at least.

Re: Drug use at work

Martin Atkinson — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 18:53:16 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

Do I take it that what you're actually saying is that lawlessness has become so rife, the police are no longer bothering to prosecute? Or are you saying it is no longer illegal?

[/quote]He is saying that 'laws are for the blind obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men'!

Re: Drug use at work

Hannah Wynne Richards — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 18:10:11 GMT

Do I take it that what you're actually saying is that lawlessness has become so rife, the police are no longer bothering to prosecute? Or are you saying it is no longer illegal? Those are 2 totally different things.

Wynne

Re: Drug use at work

Bob Russell — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 17:58:41 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

By waived, do you mean that it's no longer illegal, or that the law isn't enforced?

Wynne

[/quote]

It is not considered in the public interest to prosecute for possession. It is not illegal to take diazepam that has not been prescribed. Possession with the intent to sell is completely different.

IMO the fact that the boss has agreed to be banned from the DD cupboard means he or she has delegated responsibility, presumably to the practice manager.

If inadequate steps are taken to deal with the problem then the situation changes considerably. I don't believe the Police are the right people to deal with this as nobody is being hurt except the person taking the drugs. The RCVS have created a clear route involving the DC Health Protocol that can be used in this situation. A mixture of help and disciplinary action.

If it is considered that the medicines are being sold on (is there someone taking advantage of the situation?) then clearly Police involvement is more in order.

The real question is 'has anyone done any more about this?'. If the stuff is still going missing then further action is required.

Re: Drug use at work

Robin Grimmer — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 17:25:39 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]

[quote user="Robin Grimmer"]

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]

1. new boss

2.new job

3. call the police and get a forensic exam of the D/D CUPBOARD asap.

4. other peoples addiction problems are not your problem .....just escape !!!!

[/quote]

Yes, call the cops! Then your conscience is clear. You shouldn't have to feel worried, stressed or anxious about someone else's drug problem.

[/quote]

For a moment I thought you were being ironic. Please tell me you are.

FFS there's some diazepam unaccounted for. That's all.

[/quote]

Deadly serious. It's nearly 14ml of diazepam, that's 7 vials vanished in a week. The boss has a history of drug abuse. There's no point going to the practice manager who is below in the food chain. Anon doesn't mention any partners. I would approach the boss first and see if there is a simple explanation but if not then definitely involve the police.

Re: Drug use at work

Hannah Wynne Richards — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 16:47:14 GMT

By waived, do you mean that it's no longer illegal, or that the law isn't enforced?

Wynne

Re: Drug use at work

Bob Russell — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:58:06 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

It is a police matter because taking diazepam (unless it's been prescribed by a doctor) is a serious criminal offence.

Wynne

[/quote]

Not at all. From drugscope:

5. Minor Tranquillisers (librium, valium etc) are controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act as Class C drugs but the possession offence is waived so that it is not illegal to possess or use them without a prescription. It is an offence to sell or supply them to another person. The exception is temazepam and rohypnol tranquillisers which are illegal to be in possession of without a prescription.

Not serious, not really an offence. Much more important in this situation is the welfare of the possessor IMO!

Taking non-prescribed diazepam is not illegal!

Re: Drug use at work

Hannah Wynne Richards — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:40:35 GMT

It is a police matter because taking diazepam (unless it's been prescribed by a doctor) is a serious criminal offence.

Wynne

Re: Drug use at work

Bob Russell — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:21:25 GMT

A senior police officer stated (in relation to the Shipham enquiry) that he was not worried about vets and controlled drugs because we were more likely to hurt ourselves than anyone else!

Someone helping themselves to feed a drugs problem is not a police matter. Someone helping themselves to sell on the open market is!

I am assuming the comment was tongue in cheek, in response to some of the string em up high comments.

Could argue that asking for a share of the diazepam might reduce any worry, stress or anxiety!

Re: Drug use at work

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:05:25 GMT

[quote user="Robin Grimmer"]

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]

1. new boss

2.new job

3. call the police and get a forensic exam of the D/D CUPBOARD asap.

4. other peoples addiction problems are not your problem .....just escape !!!!

[/quote]

Yes, call the cops! Then your conscience is clear. You shouldn't have to feel worried, stressed or anxious about someone else's drug problem.

[/quote]

For a moment I thought you were being ironic. Please tell me you are.

FFS there's some diazepam unaccounted for. That's all.

Re: Drug use at work

Francisco Gomez — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 14:31:18 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]

You don't need to make addiction your problem but there is nothing to stop you supporting if you wish! Clearly don't get too drawn into the problem!

[/quote]

Re: Drug use at work

Robin Grimmer — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 10:06:19 GMT

[quote user="grumpyoldman"]

1. new boss

2.new job

3. call the police and get a forensic exam of the D/D CUPBOARD asap.

4. other peoples addiction problems are not your problem .....just escape !!!!

[/quote]

Yes, call the cops! Then your conscience is clear. You shouldn't have to feel worried, stressed or anxious about someone else's drug problem.

Re: Drug use at work

Bob Russell — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 09:38:02 GMT

If this is a nice job in a generally happy practice then why would anyone feel they should leave because someone else has a drug problem?

The trigger for drug abuse is as likely to be outside work as work itself so does not indicate a poor working environment. Assuming abuse is the cause of the loss, it may be that the practice will close ranks and help the person in trouble. I would hope that would be the response here.

Find a new boss and job if you want to but don't be pushed out. If you feel there is an inadequate response from the powers that be then take things up another level or leave.

You don't need to make addiction your problem but there is nothing to stop you supporting if you wish! Clearly don't get too drawn into the problem!

Re: Drug use at work

grumpyoldman — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 23:39:10 GMT

1. new boss

2.new job

3. call the police and get a forensic exam of the D/D CUPBOARD asap.

4. other peoples addiction problems are not your problem .....just escape !!!!

Re: Drug use at work

Nhombokisheni — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 21:24:41 GMT

small point of correction. "one" actually refers to Anon, not me.

I was just basically asking him/her to consider his own expectations of his staff should they note something is amiss.

Sorry it wasn't very clear.

Re: Drug use at work

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 16:12:22 GMT

Hi Nhombokisheni,

I've been following your posts with interest - thinking 'that's a very erudite and knowledgeable student' (because you have selected 'student' as your membership type and the 'student' badge is therefore displayed adjacent to your posts)

[quote user="Nhombokisheni"]As one who runs a branch,[/quote]

Crikey, you really are a distinguished student!

Just joking. Any chance you could change your profile settings to display the correct membership type (eg GP - small animal practice).

Re: Drug use at work

Niall Taylor — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 12:56:15 GMT

[quote user="Michael Coe"]No I have not misunderstood the OP! I totally understand that "anon" is an employee and is in a difficult situation...[/quote]

Well, maybe I have misunderstood, but it sounds like you're throwing the book at Anon and it's them that's in trouble, not the alleged offender!

[quote user="Michael Coe"]RCVS Codes of conduct for Veterinary Surgeons state:

- Page 34 - Section 4.7 - Prescription or supply of ....

- Page 34 - section 4.8 - ........Misuse of drugs regulations 2001[/quote]

Well, you haven't actually said what it is that is stated, or what edition of the CoC you are using but the nearest fit I could find in the, now online, guidelines is sections 4.3 to 4.8 and is solely concerned with the guidelines around 'Prescription of Veterinary Medicines', not what do do in the circumstances Anon is concerned about.

A more relevant section might be Section 17 on Veterinary Teams and Leaders which states:

17.4 Veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses who have concerns about the professional conduct (including health and performance) of a colleague are encouraged to discuss the matter with the appropriate senior person, for example, the appointed senior veterinary surgeon of the practice. If the matter cannot be resolved with such an approach, any concerns should be brought to the attention of the RCVS Professional Conduct Department. [my bolding]

Section 20 on whistleblowing is more concerned with guidelines on what to do in cases where substance abuse is interfering with fitness to practice, and while that might be a concern here, it is absolutely not what the OP was concerned with.

This is a real world situation and we have to think of Anon's welbeing, not just that of the alleged offender. Suggesting to Anon they bear any responsibility for this is wrong. There may be a place later for a broader discussion of drug use in practice and whistleblowing etc... but that's not going to help Anon at this point, it might make things worse infact by putting unwarranted pressure on him/her!

Niall

Re: Drug use at work

Nhombokisheni — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 11:29:44 GMT

In my opinion the fact that these are weekly inspections means you should already have an inhouse procedure for dealing with descrepances. Otherwise there is no point in having scheduled checks when no corrective measures are defined. So, I would follow the laid down procedures....full stop.

You clearly do not have any proof its the boss....so I would avoid taking any action that smacks of "witch hunting". As one who runs a branch, I believe you would agree with me that if say, your practice mnager picked an anomaly..he/she should really bring it to your immediate attention before going elsewhere.

Because your boss has a history that does not automatically make him the culprit. Infact if he finds out you avoided him, and he is not the one who did this, you may find yourself in more complicated waters. Trust is an important aspect of our way of life in this profession.

So I suggest approach it as you would expect any of your other colleagues to approach it. As I said, follow in house policy and maintain a very neutral position until you have evidence to point fingers.

Hope this helps.

Re: Drug use at work

Bob Russell — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 11:02:13 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

Evelyn and Bob. The boss IS the problem. The boss has committed a criminal offence.

If AnOn does nothing, he/she could be charged with being an accesory after the crime.

Wynne

[/quote]

He has done something as soon as it is reported to an appropriate person within the practice. Good or not, a practice manager has been delegated to manage the practice!

People are only charged when it is considered in the public interest. Why on earth would anyone want to charge someone in this situation?

Report the problem, document it and let those in control deal with it (or not deal with it) as they feel fit.

Re: Drug use at work

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 19:59:37 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

Evelyn and Bob. The boss IS the problem. The boss has committed a criminal offence.

If AnOn does nothing, he/she could be charged with being an accesory after the crime.

Wynne

[/quote]

Wynne.

Firstly, he doesn't know that the partner in question has taken the diazepam solution, or if he has that it wasn't for a good reason, or who has taken the stuff, or if maybe there's an innocent explanation. All he knows is that a substantial number of millilitres have gone missing, and there seems to be no record to explain why.

Secondly, although it's not quite clear from the OP, it seems the senior partner who is forbidden to have access to the Controlled Drugs is not the sole boss, not the only partner.

Thirdly, nobody is suggesting that Anon does nothing.

Re: Drug use at work

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 19:50:19 GMT

Consider.

Machine minder on the double-acting flange sprocket planishing machine at Aythornthwaite's Brass and Ferrous Patent Spigot and Handwheel Co. Ltd. notices that somebody must have opened a guard and twiddled a knob underneath a drive belt while the machine was in motion. He suspects the flange sprocket department manager who has been known to do this in the past. He has a duty, both legal and moral, to bring this to the attention of management. He can do this by going to the factory safety committee, or by going to the factory manager, or by going to Young Mr. Aythornthwaite directly, or by going to the lady who's known officially as the HR manager (the lettering on her door says "Personnel" but it's been covered by an A4 sheet of paper, held by Sellotape, with "Human Resources" printed in the largest type they can get out of the laser printer). His union also advise him, quite rightly, to write down exactly what he found and what he did, lest he later be accused of removing the guard himself.

And, er, that's it. He doesn't need to investigate further, or stick a fine hair across the guard securing screw to see if it's tampered with again, or contact the Health and Safety Executive, or go to the police.

Of course if safety breaches go on and on, and nobody seems to do anything, he can and maybe should contact the HSE, or the police, or his union, or the Heckmondwike and District Weekly Bugle (incorporating the Heptonstall Argus), or the Daily Mail....

Re: Drug use at work

Hannah Wynne Richards — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 19:06:43 GMT

Evelyn and Bob. The boss IS the problem. The boss has committed a criminal offence.

If AnOn does nothing, he/she could be charged with being an accesory after the crime.

Wynne

Re: Drug use at work

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 18:57:58 GMT

[quote user="Michael Coe"]Drug abuse at work is a growing problem in all Healthcare industries due to the recession,including Peoples Metal Health etc.It is a subject that Professional people will have to deal with at sometime in their career.[/quote]

Yes, we know that and I'm sure Anon does too. I don't see the special relevance in the particular case or in advising (suggesting to) Anon as to what he should do, or, his specific question remember, "where does he stand legally and ethically".

[quote user="Michael Coe"]The problem has become "anon" problem due to the fact that they are a UK Veterinary Surgeon and know prescription Drugs are going missing in large quantities![/quote]

Quite so, as he has acknowledged by asking the question in the first place. But to what extent is it "his" problem – as a junior employee – to the extent of carrying out an investigation all by himself, monitoring everything all by himself, contacting the police all by himself? No.

Once he's reported it to someone suitably senior – a senior partner would be best – I doubt myself the suitability of the "practice manager" (but most on this forum know my opinion of "practice managers") – he's done his duty. And, of course, he needs to comply with whatever instructions may come to him as a result from the senior partner. There is no reason for him to do more, other than discreetly remembering, as it were.

[quote user="Michael Coe"]In terms of the profession Anon has a duty to protect their own reputation /career.[/quote]

Dunno about duty, but he'd certainly be pretty stupid not to!

[quote user="Michael Coe"] In terms of Employment law this would be a duty under their Employment Contract to protect their employer under Health and Safety at Work Act's and other legal obligations.[/quote]

Sure, as far as in his power and by following normal channels. As we've said.

Unless, in the fullness of time, he finds good grounds to suspect that there's a criminal conspiracy going on within senior management, It's ridiculous to suggest he should be going to the police. In my opinion, of course.

Re: Drug use at work

Bob Russell — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 15:51:41 GMT

An employee has absolutely no duty to protect an employer or even fellow employees from themselves. As a professional person this employee has a degree of duty to report discrepancies and assist in any enquiries that may be made.

We all have a duty to report potential dangers at work under rafts of legislation. It is not an employee's responsibility to investigate or correct those dangers once reported. Clearly we all carry an additional responsibility for our own actions but even there, the ultimate responsibility usually lands on the shoulders of the employer.

Anon is not prescribing the medication nor is he or she misusing the drugs. Therefore responsibility is limited.