|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Pharmacy giant Walgreen Co. has agreed to pay $7.5 million to settle a consumer protection lawsuit alleging that it put people’s health at risk by allowing a phony pharmacist to handle more than 745,000 prescriptions in the Bay Area, prosecutors said on Monday.
“Consumers depend on pharmacies to make sure that the person behind the counter preparing and giving out medical prescription drugs is trained, competent and licensed to do so. Their lives may depend on it,” Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney Tiyen Lin said in a statement.
Santa Clara County prosecutors filed the lawsuit with the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office after they learned that Walgreens had employed Kim Thien Le as a pharmacist for over a decade, even though she wasn’t licensed by the California State Board of Pharmacy.
The complaint alleges that Walgreens failed to vet Le, 44, of Milpitas, thoroughly when it promoted her to positions requiring a license and failed to make sure that its internal systems were strong enough to prevent an employee from evading them.
It alleges that Le, who worked as a pharmacist in Milpitas, San Jose and Fremont, performed one or more of the pharmacist-required steps for more than 745,000 prescriptions, including over 100,000 prescriptions for controlled substances such as oxycodone, fentanyl, morphine and codeine.
Le’s 15-year employment with Walgreens ended in October 2017.
Last July, the California Attorney General’s Office charged Le with felony counts of impersonating pharmacists, stealing their identities and obtaining money under false pretenses between 2006 and 2017.
Her case is pending in Alameda County Superior Court.
“This case serves as a cautionary tale for every health care provider that hires people into positions requiring a professional license,” Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley said in a statement.
“The burden is on the company to make sure its employees are properly licensed and to complete a thorough background check. My office will be vigilant in protecting consumers and enforcing licensing laws.”
O’Malley said that once the matter came to light, Walgreens took immediate steps to re-verify the licenses of its pharmacy employees around the country and instituted other remedial measures.
The civil judgment, which was filed in Alameda County Superior Court, requires Walgreens to ensure licensure compliance by implementing a verification program, posting proof of licensure, conducting annual audits and submitting an annual compliance report.
The judgment also requires Walgreens to pay approximately $7.5 million in penalties, costs and remedial payments.
O’Malley said Walgreens and its counsel worked cooperatively with prosecutors and regulators to implement the changes.
Is any of this money going to Walgreens’ customers? Or only to the lawyers and government?
Be careful.
There are a lot of phony professionals nowadays.
How many people actually do a thorough check of educational credentials?
This state is full of people who have dubious credentials from universities and schools from overseas.
It is easy to pay off people for certifications, degrees, and references because many people who approve these degrees and certifications have been paid off.
In the past, our system was largely honor based.
People from other countries have been taking advantage of our system for decades but we have only recently started realizing this.
Be careful who you hire.
Peer reviewed scientific articles have also come under closer scrutiny since it is easy to pay off people to review them.
As phony as she is, I hope she at least had some schooling. ALL licenses should be verified in any profession. It’s common sense.
Googling “Kim Thien Le” shows a picture of someone who is a Registered Nurse … don’t know if this is the same person. But a nurse would have some acquaintance for pharmacology one would think.
I don’t know much about pharmacists, but isn’t what they do basically just deciphering a doctor’s request, then pattern matching a string on the prescription and a dosage and number to bottles of drugs stored on-site, then counting them out, then labelling it and doing the payment transaction. If asked questions they seem to rely on their experience or can look up relevant information in reference guides.
Can someone explain the offense here? Did she get prescriptions wrong?
In other words, it came to someone’s notice that she was operating illegally, Walgreen’s bad, but what was her training and what was the actual harm and damages except to show that someone who is not a licensed pharmacist can do the job of a pharmacist to some extent or another?
What is the fine in proportion to? Is it related to how much salary Walgreens saved by not paying her as much as a pharmacist?