Abstract Objective This analysis determined and compared pharmaceutical scheduling arrangements in six selected countries and explored how these different scheduling arrangements affect the availability of medicines to the public for self-medication. Method A comparison of the pharmaceutical scheduling requirements for medicines in six countries was undertaken in September 2003. The six countries of comparison were Australia, Canada, France, New Zealand (NZ), the United States (US), and the United Kingdom (UK). The World Self-Medication Industry website, in September 2003, listed 216 medicines available in 27 countries. Of these, 104 medicines were available in each of the six countries selected for the study. As different scheduling arrangements pertain to different forms (external, internal) or doses and pack sizes, the total number of medicines and medicine forms for comparison was 119. The scheduling of each of the 119 products was determined and compared across the six countries. Results Of the 119 medicines and medicine forms available, Australia and NZ have 38 and 34 ‘prescription-only’ medicines and 81 and 85 medicines available without a prescription respectively. UK, Canada and France have 47, 53, and 55 ‘prescription-only’ medicines and 72, 66 and 64 medicines available without a prescription. US, which has only two schedules, ‘prescription-only’ and ‘general sale’, has the highest number of ‘prescription-only’ drugs (66) and the least number of medicines available without a prescription (53). Conclusion The results indicate that there is a tendency for more products to be made available without a prescription in countries that have schedules with pharmacy involvement (Australia, NZ, Canada, France and UK) and a matching tendency for preparations to be held in ‘prescription-only’ schedules in the USA where ‘pharmacy-only’ schedules do not exist. The presence of ‘pharmacy-only’ schedules provides a structure whereby greater consumer access to medication is available.