Posted on: Thu 01-05-2025

Tensions are flaring once again in Nigeria’s healthcare system—this time over the controversial introduction of the consultant pharmacist cadre in two federal institutions in Lagos. The Nigerian Medical Association (NMA), Lagos chapter, has firmly drawn its battle lines, rejecting the move and issuing a seven-day ultimatum to the medical directors involved. But as the dust begins to rise, one thing is certain: this isn’t just a disagreement over job titles—it’s a reflection of deeper fault lines within Nigeria’s fragile healthcare ecosystem.

In a communiqué signed by Dr. Babajide Saheed and Dr. Jimoh Hassan, NMA Lagos doesn’t mince words. They describe the appointment of consultant pharmacists at Federal Medical Centre (FMC), Ebute Metta, and the Federal Neuropsychiatric Hospital, Yaba, as "dangerous," “unilateral,” and “clinically valueless.” Their fear? That the move not only threatens the existing clinical structure, but could destabilise patient care and ignite inter-professional chaos.

Let’s be honest: the Nigerian health sector has long struggled with turf wars—between doctors, pharmacists, nurses, and other professionals. What should be a collaborative environment often descends into bitter battles over hierarchy, influence, and recognition. And this latest episode is no different. While the role of pharmacists in healthcare is undeniable, the title “consultant” traditionally evokes clinical authority—a territory many physicians believe should remain strictly within their domain.

But here’s the bigger question: Are we rejecting progress because it challenges tradition, or are we rightly defending the sanctity of patient-centred care?

The NMA’s concerns aren’t without merit. They argue that the new cadre offers no direct contribution to patient diagnosis or management, and instead risks blurring professional lines. The fear is that this could undermine existing medical protocols and fuel dangerous confusion about roles in clinical settings. When lives are at stake, clarity isn't optional—it's essential.

Still, the blanket dismissal of the consultant pharmacist concept raises another issue: Are we stifling necessary evolution in team-based care? Pharmacists today are trained not just to dispense medication, but to provide critical insight into drug interactions, therapeutic alternatives, and patient adherence—all of which have a direct impact on outcomes. Ignoring this expertise because of historical hierarchies could be short-sighted in a system already overburdened and under-resourced.

Yet the NMA’s stance is unequivocal: reverse the appointments or face industrial action. The association has not only threatened a strike but is also moving swiftly to escalate the matter to the Federal Ministry of Health and suspend any honours for the medical directors who dared cross the line.

The concern about "dangerous precedence" is real—but so is the urgent need for innovation and collaboration in our failing health system. If handled poorly, this standoff could devolve into yet another cycle of strikes, shutdowns, and ultimately, patient suffering—the very outcome both sides claim to want to avoid.

What is desperately needed now is not more ultimatums, but honest dialogue. Rather than shutting the door on the idea, perhaps it’s time for a serious, national-level conversation: What does true interdisciplinary healthcare look like in 21st-century Nigeria? And how can we protect professional standards without stifling progress?

If this issue becomes another case of “us versus them,” everyone loses—especially the patients.

---

---