CVS vs. DEA

3CATSAILOR

Well-Known Member
I am glad to see this. Hopefully they won't just get a slap on the wrist.



FROM THE NEWS:

CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (CVS) has agreed to pay $8 million to the United States to resolve allegations that its Maryland pharmacies violated the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) by dispensing controlled substances pursuant to prescriptions that were not issued for a legitimate medical purpose.

The settlement agreement was announced today by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein and Special Agent in Charge Karl C. Colder of the Drug Enforcement Administration – Washington Field Division.

“Pharmacies that dispense controlled substances have a duty ensure that prescriptions they fill were issued for legitimate medical purposes,” said U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein. “Doctors and pharmacists are the gatekeepers of the effort to prevent the abuse and diversion of pharmaceutical drugs for non-medical purposes.”

“The abuse of prescription drugs has rampantly spread throughout our communities,” stated DEA Special Agent in Charge Karl C. Colder. “This abuse has directly resulted in the escalation of heroin addiction and related overdoses. Today’s settlement sends a clear message to all pharmacies that it is essential to dispense controlled substances in compliance with DEA’s record keeping requirements. DEA is dedicated to combat the prescription drug abuse problem in Maryland and throughout the country and to hold nationwide chains, like CVS, accountable.”

The CSA authorizes the United States to seek civil penalties for a pharmacy’s failure to fulfill its corresponding responsibility to dispense only those prescriptions that have been issued for a legitimate medical purpose by a health care provider acting in the usual course of professional practice. Knowingly filling an illegitimate prescription subjects a pharmacy to civil penalties under the CSA.

According to the settlement agreement, CVS acknowledged that between 2008 and 2012 certain CVS pharmacy stores in Maryland dispensed controlled substances, including oxycodone, fentanyl and hydrocodone, in a manner not fully consistent with their compliance obligations under the CSA and related regulations. This included failing to comply with a pharmacist’s liability to ensure the controlled substance prescriptions were issued for a legitimate medical purpose. This settlement caps off an investigation that began as part of the DEA’s crackdown on prescription drug abuse in Maryland.

U.S. Attorney Rod J. Rosenstein commended the DEA’s Office of Diversion Control, Baltimore Division for its work in the investigation. Mr. Rosenstein thanked Assistant United States Attorney Thomas F. Corcoran, who handled the case.
 

BernieP

Resident PIA
in a manner not fully consistent with their compliance obligations under the CSA and related regulations. This included failing to comply with a pharmacist’s liability to ensure the controlled substance prescriptions were issued for a legitimate medical purpose.

As a layman, I'd be curios to know how a pharmacist can ensure that the prescription I am handing him is for a legitimate medical purpose. What it sounds like is a way to grab some cash. If there is wrong doing, then the person committing the crime should be punished. This smacks more of a law that allows the DEA to collect a fee when some criminal passes a forged prescription
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
As a layman, I'd be curios to know how a pharmacist can ensure that the prescription I am handing him is for a legitimate medical purpose. What it sounds like is a way to grab some cash. If there is wrong doing, then the person committing the crime should be punished. This smacks more of a law that allows the DEA to collect a fee when some criminal passes a forged prescription

Well, silly, your average meth head doesn't have $8 million to give to the government. Of course they would prosecute CVS instead.

Wouldn't it be nice if we'd actually punish the actual criminals in this country instead of the people and businesses they take advantage of?
 

ginwoman

Well-Known Member
As a layman, I'd be curios to know how a pharmacist can ensure that the prescription I am handing him is for a legitimate medical purpose. What it sounds like is a way to grab some cash. If there is wrong doing, then the person committing the crime should be punished. This smacks more of a law that allows the DEA to collect a fee when some criminal passes a forged prescription

MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY - how would the pharmacist know? sheeze......
 

PrchJrkr

Long Haired Country Boy
Ad Free Experience
Patron
MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY - how would the pharmacist know? sheeze......

CVS in LTown had some butch looking woman behind the counter who eyed me up and down before telling me my post-op prescription would be ready in 7 hours. I took it to RiteAid and they couldn't fill it until the next day. I had to crawl back to Sasquatch at CVS. It's no wonder the surgeon gave me the script a week before surgery.
 

officeguy

Well-Known Member
MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY - how would the pharmacist know? sheeze......

The first ones to know that there is a candy-man in town are the local pharmacists. Once the 20-somethings show up with scripts for narcotics that you usually see in an end-stage cancer patient, they know what's up. The next step up are the wholesale orders people at the chain pharmacies. They see the patterns across a whole region. So yes, CVS knew what they were doing and knew what actions they were supposed to take both under MD CDS diversion regs and DEA regs.
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
The first ones to know that there is a candy-man in town are the local pharmacists. Once the 20-somethings show up with scripts for narcotics that you usually see in an end-stage cancer patient, they know what's up. The next step up are the wholesale orders people at the chain pharmacies. They see the patterns across a whole region. So yes, CVS knew what they were doing and knew what actions they were supposed to take both under MD CDS diversion regs and DEA regs.

State it with authority and no facts are needed huh?
 

officeguy

Well-Known Member
State it with authority and no facts are needed huh?

Look up 'In the matter of Brookville Pharmacy' Case# PI-13-061/13-461

One of a number of 'candyman' enforcement cases in recent years. The board of pharmacy considers it a deviation from the standard of care to fill large numbers of schedule II prescriptions from the same provider without investigating further.

Any pharmacist in the state knows the boards stance on this. The feds work under a similar framework, they just hand out stiffer penalties.
 
Last edited:
Top