PEBC Pharmacy Law and Ethics Practice Questions

Answer: A) Records of receipts and of each prescription dispensed, kept for at least 2 years and available for inspection

The Controlled Substances Regulations (in force October 1, 2026, replacing the Narcotic Control Regulations, the Benzodiazepines and Other Targeted Substances Regulations and Parts G and J of the Food and Drug Regulations) require pharmacies to record controlled substances received and each one dispensed (including the prescription details) and to keep these records for at least 2 years, available for inspection by Health Canada. The same record-keeping rules now cover all classes of controlled substances, including benzodiazepines and stimulants. Provinces may require longer retention.

Why the other options are wrong

• B) Dispensing must be recorded too, not just receipts.
• C) All controlled substances, including benzodiazepines and stimulants, have record-keeping requirements.
• D) The federal minimum is 2 years, not 1.

Key point: Controlled substances: record what comes in and what goes out; keep it 2 years.

Answer: A) They may be sold from any retail outlet without professional supervision

Unscheduled drugs can be adequately selected by the patient using the product labelling and may therefore be sold from any retail outlet without professional supervision. Pharmacist-only sale after assessment describes Schedule II, sale from the pharmacy self-selection area describes Schedule III, and sale on prescription describes Schedule I.

Why the other options are wrong

• B) Sale by a pharmacist after assessment describes Schedule II.
• C) Sale only from the pharmacy self-selection area describes Schedule III.
• D) Sale on prescription describes Schedule I.

Key point: Unscheduled drugs: any retail outlet, no professional supervision needed.

Answer: B) Contain it, assess the risk, notify the patient and commissioner where required, fix the process

Provincial and federal privacy laws require organizations to contain a breach, assess the risk of harm, notify affected individuals (and the privacy commissioner when required, e.g., for a real risk of significant harm under some laws), and prevent recurrence (e.g., preprogrammed fax numbers, verifying numbers). An accidental breach is still a breach, even if the recipient is a clinic.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) An accidental disclosure is still a privacy breach that needs a response.
• C) Internal handling alone doesn't meet notification and prevention obligations.
• D) Waiting leaves the information uncontained and delays required steps.

Key point: Privacy breach: contain, assess, notify, prevent recurrence.

Answer: B) Destroy controlled substances at the pharmacy or witness their destruction

Under the Controlled Substances Regulations, pharmacy technicians may destroy controlled substances at the pharmacy (or hospital) or act as a witness to their destruction, in addition to receiving verbal prescriptions from practitioners, signing for receipt of controlled substances and transferring prescriptions. Extension/renewal and therapeutic substitution are pharmacist activities (where provincial law permits), and technicians cannot prescribe.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) Extension or renewal of controlled-substance prescriptions is a pharmacist activity, not a technician one.
• C) Therapeutic substitution requires professional judgment and is a pharmacist activity where provincial law allows.
• D) Technicians cannot prescribe controlled substances, even in an emergency.

Key point: CSR technicians may receive verbal orders, sign for receipt, transfer and destroy/witness; not order.

Answer: C) Ensure timely access per the provincial regulator's policy

Every Canadian pharmacy regulator allows conscientious objection only if the patient is not abandoned and still gets timely, respectful access; the exact mechanism is set provincially (e.g., Ontario's OCP requires participating in a timely effective referral, while BC's CPBC requires following the employer's process and cooperating with patient-initiated transfers of care without requiring a referral). Emergency contraception is time-sensitive, so access must not be delayed. Why not the others: A: Delay can defeat a time-sensitive treatment and does not secure timely access. B: This abandons the patient and breaches professional obligations in every province. D: Imposing or discussing personal beliefs with the patient is inappropriate under provincial codes of ethics. Key takeaway: Conscientious objection is allowed only with timely, non-judgemental access for the patient, arranged as the provincial regulator's policy requires.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) Asking her to return tomorrow delays a time-sensitive drug and does not secure timely access.
• B) Refusing and leaving her to find another pharmacy abandons the patient and breaches professional duties.
• D) Sharing personal moral views to change her mind is inappropriate under provincial codes of ethics.

Key point: Conscientious objection is allowed only if the patient still gets timely, non-judgemental access.

Answer: B) Refuse, because access without a professional need is a privacy breach

Personal health information may be accessed only for a legitimate professional purpose related to the person's care. Looking up records out of curiosity or for a friend ('snooping') is a serious privacy violation and professional misconduct, even if nothing is shared. Asking a colleague to do it is equally a breach.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) Accessing the record is itself a breach, whatever is shared afterwards.
• C) Being a customer of the pharmacy doesn't create a reason to access his records for a friend.
• D) Having a colleague access it is still unauthorized access.

Key point: Access a record only when you need it to care for that patient. Curiosity is a breach.

Answer: B) Dispense once the nurse practitioner confirms the drugs are for MAID

The Criminal Code permits physicians and nurse practitioners to provide MAID. The practitioner must inform the pharmacist, before the drugs are dispensed, that they are intended for MAID. Pharmacists who dispense in accordance with the law are exempt from criminal liability but do not administer MAID themselves. A second independent assessment is part of eligibility, not a co-signature on the prescription. A pharmacist with a conscientious objection must follow the provincial regulator's policy on referral and continuity of care.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) Nurse practitioners are permitted to provide MAID under the Criminal Code.
• C) Pharmacists may dispense but do not administer MAID.
• D) The second assessment confirms eligibility; it is not a co-signature requirement.

Key point: MAID: physicians and NPs provide it; pharmacists dispense when informed of the purpose.

Answer: D) Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act

PIPEDA applies to private-sector organizations handling personal information in commercial activities, except where a province has substantially similar legislation. The federal Privacy Act applies to federal government institutions, and the Access to Information Act provides access to government records. The Protecting Canadians from Unsafe Drugs Act (Vanessa's Law) amended the Food and Drugs Act to strengthen drug safety oversight and does not address privacy.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) The Privacy Act covers federal government institutions, not private businesses.
• B) The Access to Information Act gives access to government records.
• C) Vanessa's Law amended the Food and Drugs Act on drug safety; it does not govern personal information.

Key point: PIPEDA = private sector (federal). Privacy Act = federal government. Many provinces have their own health privacy laws.

Answer: A) The indication is not a required label element, so it can be removed at her request

Dispensing labels must identify the patient, the drug and strength, quantity, directions for use, the prescriber, the prescription number and date, and the pharmacy. The indication is not a required element; including it can help patients but should reflect the patient's wishes about privacy. The pharmacist can remove it and document the patient's preference.

Why the other options are wrong

• B) The indication is not a required label element.
• C) The prescriber's permission isn't needed to omit an optional element at the patient's request.
• D) Whether or not the prescriber wrote it, the indication is not required on the label.

Key point: Required label elements don't include the diagnosis. Adding the indication is optional and patient-driven.

Answer: B) Accept the gift graciously and share it with the team

A small, modest token of appreciation that does not create an expectation of special treatment or influence professional judgment can generally be accepted graciously. Professional boundary concerns arise with gifts of significant value or those that create an obligation, such as promising preferential service. A blanket refusal may offend the patient unnecessarily, and a written receipt is not required.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) A blanket refusal is not required and may offend the patient; small modest gifts are generally acceptable.
• C) Promising priority service in return creates an obligation and crosses a professional boundary.
• D) A written receipt is not required for a small gift.

Key point: Small, modest gifts are OK if they create no obligation or special treatment.