- Email: [email protected]
The DEA Mission
The DEA Mission
By Peter B. Bensinger
tion can serve the professions ' self-interests and the public good. Additionally, voluntary compliance can serve to minimize the effects of the federal regulations which so many of you consider unnecessary, if not onerous. State and local law enforcement agencies and practicing pharmacists cite prescription fraud as a substantial part of the diversion of legally obtained drugs. DEA has responded by placing more stringent controls on the dispensing of controlled drugs by pharmacists. While these restrictions have served to somewhat curtail the fraudulent prescription problem, it continues to flourish. The pharmaceutical associations have recommended the use of triplicate prescriptions as a viable tool in combatting this problem. DEA has not taken the position that triplicate prescriptions are necessary for federal regulation. Four states-California, Illinois, Idaho and New York-now utilize a system of triplicate prescriptions. The system in New York computerizes the identification of patients, the drug prescribed and the indications for the use of the medication . The Federal District Court in New York ordered the state agency to discontinue this practice based on the Constitutional guarantee of the right of a patient's privacy. New York State will appeal that ruling, but I do not foresee its being overruled at the appellate level. Another problem which continues to confront pharmacists all across the country is pharmacy theft. Not only has there been substantial property loss, but many private businessmen and practicing pharmacists have lost their lives. The DEA launched an in-depth study of the nature and scope of these crimes, and in October 1974, it initiated the Pharmacy Theft Prevention Program on a pilot basis in St. Louis, Missouri. We selected St. Louis because of the severity of the problem and the interest and support of law enforcement, pharmacy and other public agencies. All pharmacy crimes occurring over a year's period were analyzed through on-site interviews and review of police files . Data from this effort were fed into a computer, and
the results of the analysis were compiled to determine cost-effective means of suppressing these kinds of thefts. By February 1975, we had sufficient information to conduct a series of seminars for all St. Louis area pharmacists. These seminars stressed techniques for determining theft and additional techniques for assisting the local police in apprehending the perpetrators. All local police jurisdictions were committed to increase their presence in and around the pharmacies involved. DEA Compliance Investigators conducted a follow-up survey of the pharmacies in the test area, and the results of the survey were provided to the pharmacy owners for their use in improving pharmacy security. Let me emphasize that the Pharmacy Theft Prevention Program is a community action program. DEA is convinced that the solution to this problem can be found at the local level. There have been calls to make pharmacy thefts federal crimes . DEA is opposed to that because it is our firm conviction that these types of violations require instantaneous response for successful interdiction . Moreover, they require the versatility of a local police force which has the necessary immediate resources, expertise and knowledge of the local area. Burglaries are not peculiar to pharmacies but are wreaking havoc in all types of retail establishments throughout the country. One of the strongest arguments in support of making pharmacy theft a federal crime is that bank robberies are so classified . Unfortunately, the fact that they are federal crimes has not had the desired deterrent effect , and the number of bank robberies continues to climb . In fact, the savings and loan institution on the ground floor of the DEA building in Washington has been robbed twice since January 1, 1976. There are approximately 525,000 licensed registrants of narcotics and dangerous drugs in the country today . Anyone of them is a possible point of diversion of legally manufactured drugs . The national compliance force of DEA numbers only about 200 . To ( Continued on page 405)
Peter B. Bensinger
Presented at the APhA House of Delegates Meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana , April 8, 1976.
Peter B. Bensinger assumed the duties of the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration in January 1976. Prior to this position , Bens inger was the chief of the Crime Victims Division of the Il linois Attorney General 's office . He also served as executive director of the Chicago Crime Commission in 1973 and as director for the Department of Corrections in the state of Illinois from 1970-1 973 . He is a member of numerous local , state and federal commissions and generally is considered one of the nation 's foremost experts on corrections , drug abuse prevention and their role in the formulat ion of public policy .
402
Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association
A commitment to a reasonable, positive and even-handed program of regulation
The profession of pharmacy plays a major role in the movement of legally produced and dispensed drugs from manufacturer to patient. Because the Drug Enforcement Administration has the responsibility of regulating the manufacture and movement of controlled substances, inevitably, what DEA does affects the conduct of the pharmacist's practice. In such a close and important relationship, communication between the practicing pharmacists and personnel in the Drug Enforcement Administration is essential. Just a few days after my confirmation by the Senate, I met with representatives of the pharmaceutical and distribution industries. Although it was an informal meeting, each of us was cognizant of the monitoring and regulation activities DEA performs in relation to those industries. Insofar as pharmacists are concerned, the DEA has monitoring and regulatory responsibilities, but it has more . It has the public interest concern to work with pharmacists in attempting to achieve voluntary compliance and self-regulation with federal law . DEA and the pharmaceutical associations have the same objective for the handling of controlled substances. The pharmacist's purpose is to assure the physician's patient receives the prescribed medication so that health may be maintained or restored. DEA's purpose is to assure that those drugs which are abusable are adequately controlled, so that they are used only for medically super,vised purposes. Put that way, it seems quite simple. DEA controls the drugs, through regulation on the manufacturer and wholesaler unti I it reaches the pharmacist. Then the pharmacist receives the drug, waits for a prescription order to be presented by a patient, verifies that it is from a licensed and registered physician, and then provides the patient with the prescribed medicine. Of course, DEA must know that the pharmacy is adequately supervised and has proper security, so it also registers the pharmacy. The manufacturer, wholesaler, physician and pharmacy are registered; therefore, control of the system is complete. As such, there should be no problem with abuse of legally produced controlled drugs. There exists between DEA and the pharmacy profession an ambivalent relationship. On the one hand, we monitor and regulate you, and on the other, we rely on your professional pride to police yourselves. The monitoring and regulatory activities are mandated by the Controlled Substances Act. Voluntary compliance and self-regula-
By Peter B. Bensinger
tion can serve the professions ' self-interests and the public good. Additionally, voluntary compliance can serve to minimize the effects of the federal regulations which so many of you consider unnecessary, if not onerous. State and local law enforcement agencies and practicing pharmacists cite prescription fraud as a substantial part of the diversion of legally obtained drugs. DEA has responded by placing more stringent controls on the dispensing of controlled drugs by pharmacists. While these restrictions have served to somewhat curtail the fraudulent prescription problem, it continues to flourish. The pharmaceutical associations have recommended the use of triplicate prescriptions as a viable tool in combatting this problem. DEA has not taken the position that triplicate prescriptions are necessary for federal regulation. Four states-California, Illinois, Idaho and New York-now utilize a system of triplicate prescriptions. The system in New York computerizes the identification of patients, the drug prescribed and the indications for the use of the medication . The Federal District Court in New York ordered the state agency to discontinue this practice based on the Constitutional guarantee of the right of a patient's privacy. New York State will appeal that ruling, but I do not foresee its being overruled at the appellate level. Another problem which continues to confront pharmacists all across the country is pharmacy theft. Not only has there been substantial property loss, but many private businessmen and practicing pharmacists have lost their lives. The DEA launched an in-depth study of the nature and scope of these crimes, and in October 1974, it initiated the Pharmacy Theft Prevention Program on a pilot basis in St. Louis, Missouri. We selected St. Louis because of the severity of the problem and the interest and support of law enforcement, pharmacy and other public agencies. All pharmacy crimes occurring over a year's period were analyzed through on-site interviews and review of police files . Data from this effort were fed into a computer, and
the results of the analysis were compiled to determine cost-effective means of suppressing these kinds of thefts. By February 1975, we had sufficient information to conduct a series of seminars for all St. Louis area pharmacists. These seminars stressed techniques for determining theft and additional techniques for assisting the local police in apprehending the perpetrators. All local police jurisdictions were committed to increase their presence in and around the pharmacies involved. DEA Compliance Investigators conducted a follow-up survey of the pharmacies in the test area, and the results of the survey were provided to the pharmacy owners for their use in improving pharmacy security. Let me emphasize that the Pharmacy Theft Prevention Program is a community action program. DEA is convinced that the solution to this problem can be found at the local level. There have been calls to make pharmacy thefts federal crimes . DEA is opposed to that because it is our firm conviction that these types of violations require instantaneous response for successful interdiction . Moreover, they require the versatility of a local police force which has the necessary immediate resources, expertise and knowledge of the local area. Burglaries are not peculiar to pharmacies but are wreaking havoc in all types of retail establishments throughout the country. One of the strongest arguments in support of making pharmacy theft a federal crime is that bank robberies are so classified . Unfortunately, the fact that they are federal crimes has not had the desired deterrent effect , and the number of bank robberies continues to climb . In fact, the savings and loan institution on the ground floor of the DEA building in Washington has been robbed twice since January 1, 1976. There are approximately 525,000 licensed registrants of narcotics and dangerous drugs in the country today . Anyone of them is a possible point of diversion of legally manufactured drugs . The national compliance force of DEA numbers only about 200 . To ( Continued on page 405)
Peter B. Bensinger
Presented at the APhA House of Delegates Meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana , April 8, 1976.
Peter B. Bensinger assumed the duties of the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration in January 1976. Prior to this position , Bens inger was the chief of the Crime Victims Division of the Il linois Attorney General 's office . He also served as executive director of the Chicago Crime Commission in 1973 and as director for the Department of Corrections in the state of Illinois from 1970-1 973 . He is a member of numerous local , state and federal commissions and generally is considered one of the nation 's foremost experts on corrections , drug abuse prevention and their role in the formulat ion of public policy .
402
Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association
A commitment to a reasonable, positive and even-handed program of regulation
The profession of pharmacy plays a major role in the movement of legally produced and dispensed drugs from manufacturer to patient. Because the Drug Enforcement Administration has the responsibility of regulating the manufacture and movement of controlled substances, inevitably, what DEA does affects the conduct of the pharmacist's practice. In such a close and important relationship, communication between the practicing pharmacists and personnel in the Drug Enforcement Administration is essential. Just a few days after my confirmation by the Senate, I met with representatives of the pharmaceutical and distribution industries. Although it was an informal meeting, each of us was cognizant of the monitoring and regulation activities DEA performs in relation to those industries. Insofar as pharmacists are concerned, the DEA has monitoring and regulatory responsibilities, but it has more . It has the public interest concern to work with pharmacists in attempting to achieve voluntary compliance and self-regulation with federal law . DEA and the pharmaceutical associations have the same objective for the handling of controlled substances. The pharmacist's purpose is to assure the physician's patient receives the prescribed medication so that health may be maintained or restored. DEA's purpose is to assure that those drugs which are abusable are adequately controlled, so that they are used only for medically super,vised purposes. Put that way, it seems quite simple. DEA controls the drugs, through regulation on the manufacturer and wholesaler unti I it reaches the pharmacist. Then the pharmacist receives the drug, waits for a prescription order to be presented by a patient, verifies that it is from a licensed and registered physician, and then provides the patient with the prescribed medicine. Of course, DEA must know that the pharmacy is adequately supervised and has proper security, so it also registers the pharmacy. The manufacturer, wholesaler, physician and pharmacy are registered; therefore, control of the system is complete. As such, there should be no problem with abuse of legally produced controlled drugs. There exists between DEA and the pharmacy profession an ambivalent relationship. On the one hand, we monitor and regulate you, and on the other, we rely on your professional pride to police yourselves. The monitoring and regulatory activities are mandated by the Controlled Substances Act. Voluntary compliance and self-regula-