Prescribing: legal, ethical and professional considerations

In Prescribing hub

Follow this topic

Bookmark

Record learning outcomes

Practising as a new prescriber or prescribing after a time away can make even familiar decisions feel unexpectedly nerve-racking. The answer is not to try to remember everything at once, but to rebuild a reliable way of thinking: am I the right person to prescribe, do I have enough information, is this the right treatment for this patient, and can I make sure it is used safely?

As a pharmacist independent prescriber, you have broad legal authority to prescribe, subject to a small number of statutory restrictions – but legal authority is only the starting point. Each decision must also sit within your current clinical competence, professional standards, the available evidence and local governance arrangements.

This is particularly important if you qualified some time ago or are returning to an unfamiliar area of practice. Confidence should not come simply from knowing that you once passed the course -- it comes from being able to explain why you assessed, prescribed, monitored or referred as you did.

The GPhC's 2025 guidance makes clear that pharmacist prescribers are accountable for both prescribing and deprescribing decisions. A useful question to ask yourself is: “Could I justify this decision, using the clinical record, to the patient and to a colleague?” If the answer is uncertain, that is a prompt to pause, check or ask for support.

Once you are satisfied that the decision is within your competence, make sure you have the information needed to prescribe safely. This means confirming the patient's identity and presenting problem, reviewing their relevant history, medicines, adherence and allergies, and considering whether an examination, test result or independent record check is required.

Only then can you decide whether treatment is indicated and weigh its likely benefits against its risks.

The same standard applies whether the consultation takes place face to face or remotely. Remote prescribing introduces additional questions about identity, location, privacy and what can reliably be verified. Photographs, questionnaires and self-reported measurements may sometimes be sufficient, but they will not be appropriate for every patient or every medicine.

If a physical examination, diagnostic test or fuller review of the clinical record is necessary, it should happen before the prescription is issued.

Shared decision

Having gathered the necessary information, prescribing should be a shared decision. Valid consent must be voluntary and informed, and the patient must have capacity to make that decision at that time. Explain the purpose of the treatment, its likely benefits and possible harms, the reasonable alternatives -- including no treatment -- and the practical implications of monitoring or follow-up.

These conversations need to reflect the individual patient rather than follow a standard script. A rare adverse effect may be highly relevant if it could affect the patient's wellbeing, while a treatment that appears straightforward clinically may create a burden that the patient considers unacceptable.

Understanding what is important to them is part of assessing whether the prescription is appropriate. Make reasonable adjustments, use an interpreter where appropriate, and follow the relevant capacity legislation and safeguarding procedures. If someone else is involved in the conversation, clarify their authority to contribute.

Shared decision-making does not, however, mean agreeing to prescribe whatever is requested. Sometimes the right decision is not to prescribe. If a medicine is not indicated, if you do not have enough information, or if you believe the risks are unacceptable, explain your reasoning clearly. Discuss safer alternatives, provide appropriate safety-netting advice and document the conversation.

Managing conflicts of interest

You should also consider whether anything other than the patient's clinical needs could be influencing the decision. This may be a risk when you can both prescribe and profit from supplying a medicine, when a service depends on converting consultations into sales, or when a friend, colleague or family member asks you for treatment.

Any conflict of interest should be recognised and managed in line with organisational policy. If your objectivity could reasonably be questioned, stepping away may be the safest and most professional course of action.

Only after working through the clinical and ethical decision should the practical act of prescribing take place. Check that your independent prescriber annotation is current, your indemnity covers the service and medicine involved, and you are using an authorised prescribing route.

Every prescription must meet the legal requirements for its type, with additional requirements applying to controlled drugs. Electronic systems may identify missing information, but responsibility for the prescription's accuracy and appropriateness remains with the prescriber.

Pharmacist independent prescribers can prescribe controlled drugs within their competence, except cocaine, dipipanone or diamorphine when used to treat addiction. As rules and NHS arrangements differ across the UK, it is valuable to check the current BNF, legislation and local policy.

Monitoring and follow-up

Issuing the prescription is not the end of the process. A safe plan must also cover monitoring, communication and continuity of care. Be clear about who will review the patient's response, adverse effects and test results, when that review will happen and what should prompt them to seek urgent help.

If you cannot put a safe monitoring and follow-up plan in place, you should not prescribe simply because the medicine itself is familiar.

Good continuity of care will often require communication with the patient's regular prescriber or wider healthcare team. The clinical record connects all these stages: it is not simply defensive paperwork, but a handover to the wider team.

It should show the presenting problem, relevant findings, medicines and allergies, your clinical reasoning, the options discussed, the patient's decision, the prescription issued, and the arrangements for monitoring, follow-up, communication and safety-netting. If there was uncertainty, record it and explain why the final decision was made, so another clinician can understand what happened and continue the plan safely.

If something does go wrong, the priority is to reduce harm. Contact the patient, arrange a clinical review, correct or stop treatment where appropriate, and involve senior or emergency support when needed.

Report the incident through local safety systems and the MHRA Yellow Card scheme where relevant, and be open and honest in line with the professional duty of candour. Near misses deserve attention too, as they can reveal a weakness in the process before a patient is harmed.

Take a step back

Before signing any prescription, it can help to take a final brief pause. Have I confirmed who the patient is and what I am treating? Do I have the history, examination findings, test results, medicines and allergy information I need? Is this lawful, within my current competence and covered by appropriate governance and indemnity arrangements?

Have we discussed the benefits, material risks and reasonable alternatives? Are the dose, duration, monitoring, follow-up, communication and safety-netting clear? Could another clinician understand my record and continue the plan?

Qualifying as a new prescriber or returning to prescribing after a period away is not about reaching a point at which you never feel uncertain. Safe prescribers recognise uncertainty early, use reliable sources, ask for help and know when to refer. Never think you're on your own.

Jane Portlock is Professor of Pharmacy Postgraduate Education at the University of Reading