Pharmacy Technician Suspended for Eight Months Following Sexual Assault Conviction

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) Fitness to Practise Committee investigated a pharmacy technician who had been convicted of sexual assault on a female in July 2013.

The incident took place on June 19, 2013, at Mile End Underground Station. A plainclothes police officer observed the pharmacy technician behaving suspiciously, paying close attention to female commuters.

The officer witnessed the registrant deliberately pressing his groin into a young woman wearing denim shorts while on the train. Despite there being sufficient space for passengers to stand without physical contact, the registrant made repeated attempts to press himself against her.

The police officer arrested the pharmacy technician on the train, and he was later charged and convicted.

Findings:

The Fitness to Practise Committee found that the registrant’s conviction demonstrated serious misconduct, including:

• Sexual assault as a deliberate and repeated act:
  • CCTV and witness testimony confirmed that the behaviour was intentional.
  • His actions were deemed predatory and inappropriate.
• Public Confidence in Pharmacy Undermined:
  • Sexual assault is one of the most serious offences a healthcare professional can commit.
  • The conviction resulted in the registrant being placed on the Sex Offenders Register for five years.
• Lack of Full Insight:
  • Initially, the registrant minimized the severity of his actions.
  • Despite later admitting the full facts, his early responses suggested limited recognition of the harm caused.
• Regulatory Restrictions Imposed:
  • He was barred from working with children and vulnerable adults under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006.
  • Despite these restrictions, he sought to continue working as a pharmacy technician, arguing that he posed no risk to patients.

Given the serious nature of the offence, the committee ruled that the registrant’s fitness to practise was impaired.

GPhC Determination on Impairment:

The GPhC emphasized that sexual offences are fundamentally incompatible with healthcare professions.

Key considerations included:

• Public protection and confidence:
  • Patients must be able to trust pharmacy professionals, and any conviction of this nature severely damages that trust.
• Criminal Convictions and Professional Conduct:
  • Even if the offence was committed outside of the workplace, the professional reputation of the pharmacy sector was harmed.
• Rehabilitation and Risk of Recurrence:
  • The registrant had completed a Sex Offenders Treatment Programme, but his insight into the seriousness of his offence remained questionable.
  • Statements made after conviction still suggested minimization of responsibility.

To maintain public confidence in the profession, the committee ruled that a sanction was necessary.

Sanction:

The committee imposed an eight-month suspension, considering the following factors:

• Aggravating Factors:
  • The conviction was for a serious sexual offence involving deliberate and repeated misconduct.
  • The registrant had been previously warned by the police for similar behaviour a year earlier.
  • His initial attempts to downplay the offence raised concerns about full insight.
• Mitigating Factors:
  • The registrant had expressed remorse and completed rehabilitation programmes.
  • There was no evidence of inappropriate behaviour towards patients.
  • His employer had confidence in his abilities as a pharmacy technician.

The committee rejected removal from the register, believing that the registrant could demonstrate rehabilitation if he fully accepted responsibility for his actions.

A review hearing was required before reinstatement, and the committee set the following expectations:

1. Full insight into the impact of his offence on the victim and the profession.
2. Completion of all probationary and treatment requirements.
3. Evidence of continued professional development (CPD) and testimonials to demonstrate personal growth.

Learning Points for Pharmacy Professionals:

This case highlights critical lessons for all pharmacy professionals regarding professional behaviour and public trust.

1. Sexual Misconduct is Incompatible with Pharmacy Practice:
   • Any conviction for a sexual offence will result in serious consequences for registration.
   • Even when no patients are directly affected, the damage to public trust is severe.
2. Honesty and Full Insight Are Essential in Regulatory Proceedings:
   • The registrant’s initial attempts to downplay his actions made his case worse.
   • Professionals facing allegations must demonstrate full accountability and understanding of the consequences.
3. Convictions Have Long-Term Consequences:
   • The registrant was placed on the Sex Offenders Register and barred from working with vulnerable groups.
   • Pharmacy professionals must be aware that criminal convictions may prevent them from returning to the profession.
4. Public Confidence in the Profession Must Be Protected:
   • The GPhC prioritizes maintaining trust in pharmacy services.
   • Any behaviour that compromises public confidence will result in disciplinary action.
5. Sanctions Allow for Rehabilitation, But Removal is Always a Possibility:
   • The registrant avoided removal, but a review hearing was required to ensure he was fit to return to practice.
   • Professionals who commit serious offences must demonstrate long-term rehabilitation and professional development.