Klasick Karma: Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right.

What is your professional philosophy?

Based on the new California law 11162. 1 (a) (15) as related to serialized prescription numbers required January 1, 2019, and the massive push back by consumer groups, CPHA, Medical Board of California, angry prescribers, disgruntled patients, pharmacy chains setting and changing their standards weekly, and the fact that the California State Board of Pharmacy has set a no infraction, no enforcement grace period window until July 1, 2019, what is a pharmacist to do when a prescription is provided for a controlled substance in a non-compliant format?

Should we follow our internal instincts for patient care? Follow the law as written in black and white? Follow leniency guidelines established by employers by adding notations to the corresponding responsibility checklists?

It's been a mess for everyone, ever day since the new law started.

So, I ask "What is your professional philosophy"?

Policy before law before good judgment?

Policy before good judgement before law?

Law before policy before good judgment?

Law before good judgment before policy?

Good judgment before policy before law?

Good judgment before law before policy? This is mine, and it hasn't changed.

If it is in prudent judgment to provide a controlled substance from a prescription form that is non-compliant for any of the 15 requirements of California Health & Safety Code 11162.1, and you can defend your actions in court (with documentation) then I say **fill the prescription against the law or company policy in the best interest of the patient.

**I must include without saying, fulfill all reasonable steps, obligations, documentation and efforts to follow-up with the precriber to make the prescription service provided justified.