GPhC must reconsider its approach to handling antisemitism

As someone who is not Jewish, I feel compelled to support the protestation of Jonathan Hoffman and Graham Phillips (GPhC fitness-to-practise case did not address antisemitism) against the ruling of the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) in the case of alleged antisemitism.

The impact of any potentially racial slur may, indeed, be limited to those who can interpret it, but it will surely be understood by the group to whom it is directed.

However, more alarming is what I perceive to be the evident failure of the GPhC to judge culpability on the intent rather than on the likely impact of the remark, which all parties agree the defendant made.

I believe, among other requirements, suitability to remain on the pharmacy register must be dependent on a commitment to address and treat with equal respect all with whom a registrant comes into professional or personal contact — irrespective of race or any other irrelevant parameter.

How effectively racism is projected should not impair its condemnation.

Peter Lowe, fellow, Royal Pharmaceutical Society