Pubdate: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 Source: Tempest Magazine Copyright: 2001 Tempest Magazine, Inc. Contact: 401 E. 8th St., Sioux Falls, SD 57103 Fax: 605-338-5355 Author: Bob Newland Note: Newland has a bi-weekly column titled The Emperor's Tailor Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) Politics: The Ceaseless Argument Over Who Gets To Do What To Whom, For How Long, And Against What Degree Of Dissent. PROSECUTOR WANTS TO JAIL QUADRIPLEGIC Last July, Sioux Falls police arrested quadriplegic Matthew Ducheneaux at a concert in Yankton Trail Park when he lit a joint. Ducheneaux said he was using the marijuana as medicine, and produced a note written on a medical prescription sheet by Sioux Falls physician Robert Seidel: "Matthew is a quadriplegic. He uses marijuana for muscle spasms caused by his paralysis." Sixteen years ago, Ducheneaux broke his neck in a car wreck. He can speak well and make facial expressions. Aside from that, the only intentional movement he can make is with a couple of fingers on his right hand. He functions with the aid of friends and some pretty amazing technology. "Spastic paralysis syndrome" is common among the paralyzed. The nearly-completely severed spinal cord sends erratic messages to numb muscles, which then sometimes contract so violently that they dislocate joints and tear muscles. For Matthew, as for thousands of other "'plegics", smoking cannabis -- marijuana -- makes the tremors stop almost instantly. No one denies this. After his 1985 accident, Ducheneaux was prescribed prescription drugs, like valium, which stops the tremors. Valium has side effects; stupor, hair loss, and liver toxicity. Other drugs effective for spastic paralysis are even more toxic. No one denies this. He learned of the therapeutic value of cannabis. Cannabis stops the tremors and makes him feel better. Cannabis has no known toxicity. It doesn't make one's hair fall out. To the degree Matthew Ducheneaux can function in society with his paralysis, cannabis is an aid. Almost no one denies this. Three medical cannabis users testified to South Dakota legislative committees less than two months ago about their personal knowledge of cannabis' ability to reduce nausea from cancer radiation therapy, reduce general pain due to a dislocated spine, and reduce anxiety and seizures associated with post-traumatic stress syndrome. A credible poll of South Dakota voters in January found that 81per cent believe that South Dakota law should reflect the obvious common sense in allowing sick, disabled and dying people -- under a doctor's recommendation -- to use whatever medicine works for them, including marijuana. 95 per cent said that medical cannabis users should not be jailed for such use. A just-released poll in New Mexico, commissioned by the Lindesmith Center, found remarkably-similar results. In 1988, Matthew Ducheneaux applied to the Drug Enforcement Agency for consideration as a "compassionate use" exemption from government's official position that "marijuana has no known medical use". That program currently supplies 300 government-grown joints per month to each of eight patients in the U.S. He was accepted, on the condition that he find a local pharmacy to store and dispense the cannabis. The DEA required that the pharmacy provide a 24-hour armed guard for its cannabis, which would be stored in a safe alongside the pharmacy's drawers full of methamphetamine, quaaludes, demerol, cocaine, and morphine (which do not require an armed guard). Sioux Falls pharmacists all declined the honor. All legal common-sense avenues closed, Ducheneaux provided for the day when he'd be busted. He found a compassionate, sensible, knowledgeable and courageous family physician who would at least some slight cover -- a note that he was aware of Matthew's use and implicitly agreed with it. An outright "prescription" by a doctor for marijuana is illegal. In just the past five years, voters in eight states have approved medical marijuana use issues on their ballots. Last June, Hawaii approved medical cannabis legislatively. Knowing all this, Minnehaha County Prosecutor Dave Nelson continues to attempt to punish Matthew for trying to feel better. We ache for superlatives to characterize the absurdity of this situation. I found the word "absurd" in my thesaurus: Nouns: absurdity; imbecility, nonsense, inconsistency, insanity, fatuity, stupidity, asininity, ludicrousness, ridiculousness, ridiculosity, comicality, blunder, muddle, bull, Irish bull, sophism, bathos, letdown, travesty, parody, caricature, lampoonery, foolery, buffoonery, mummery, monkey trick, monkey shine, moonshine, doubletalk, twaddle, gibberish, fustian, empty talk, poppycock, stuff and nonsense, folly, rashness, irrationality, paradox (see CONCEALMENT). Verbs: be absurd; play the fool, talk nonsense, talk through one's hat, go from the sublime to the riduculous, make a fool of (oneself), burlesque. Adjectives: absurd; nonsensical, preposterous, senseless, inconsistent, incongruous, ridiculous, foolish, silly, without rhyme or reason, farcical, ludicrous, asinine, inane, stupid, screwy; unintelligible, confused. Pick any number of the synonyms, string them together, and you may arrive at a temporarily satisfactory summary of current government drug policy. But perhaps the most revealing tack is to do as the thesaurus suggests, "see concealment". Nouns: concealment: smoke screen, masquerade, cloak, veil, lie, misprision, underhand dealing, gobbledygook, doubletalk, (to mention a few). Verbs: conceal: hide, secrete, lock up, bottle up, cover, screen, draw the veil, mask, camouflage, muffle, smother, suppress, stifle, withhold, bamboozle, skulk, slink, hoodwink (and more). Now, we're getting somewhere. These are the true synonyms for government policy with respect to prohibition of some consciousness-altering substances (as opposed to the sanction and promotion of some others). In a newspaper story about Ducheneaux last August, term-limited Representative Roger Hunt said, "There is not any pharmaceutical marijuana at this time. There have been studies showing smoking marijuana is harmful. Also, marijuana is addictive like tobacco, and then we have to say we have a model, the tobacco industry. That is an area we don't want to get involved with." "Legislation allowing medicinal marijuana use in other states is so full of loopholes, it prevents law enforcement from making arrests for any kind of pot use," Hunt said. "If we're talking of marijuana for medical purposes, someone is blowing smoke at us." Hunt's statements use the typical government gobbledygook to screen and smother the real isues. This smarmy little tick was instrumental in forming state criminal statutes and punishment codes for eight years in Pierre. God bless term limits. The thing about ticks, though, is that there are always more. Dean Krogman lobbies for the South Dakota State Medical Association (state affiliate of the AMA) at the legislature. Doneen Hollingsworth is So. Dak. Secretary of Health. Both told legislative committees in January that there were FDA-approved drugs (produced by major pharmaceutical companies) which were better and safer than cannabis for any of the wide range of syndromes for which cannabis has been shown to be of benefit. Well, let's examine that. FDA-approved drugs, administered by FDA-approved doctors, kill about 120,000 people per year because of unexpected side-effects or unexpected synergistic conflicts with other FDA-approved drugs. Marijuana kills no one. Never has. In 1937, the AMA's lobbyist opposed the proposed (and subsequently enacted) prohibitive tax on marijuana in Congress. One of the reasons some physicians feel comfortable with suggesting cannabis to some folks is that -- while it doesn't work for everyone with similar syndromes or illnesses -- if it doesn't work, it at least doesn't cause any harm. Current House Speaker Scott Eccarius of Rapid City, an eye surgeon, seems to be vying for Hunt's record of inanity: "Drugs already available are more effective than marijuana (for glaucoma, one of the conditions for which cannabis is beneficial). To treat glaucoma with marijuana, he said in January, "You'd literally have to be stoned all the time." Eccarius also said he was worried that legalizing marijuana or hemp would be a "Trojan horse" that would lead to general legalization of marijuana. "I'm opposed to it," he said. Eccarius didn't mention whether, if he had glaucoma, he'd rather be "stoned" or blind. As for his worry about general legalization of marijuana, well, does common sense have any place in this discussion? Is Eccarius saying that God provided us an unspeakably dangerous herb with absolutely no benefits? Or is he saying that any investigation into the suggestion that the herb does, indeed, have benefits, might lead to our knowledge that the herb does, indeed, have benefits? The fact is that cannabis, used therapeutically, approximates the results of a wide array of prescription remedies. It's cheaper -- even at black-market prices -- than most prescription drugs (see "concealment"). It has almost no harmful effects. Its worst known side-effect is a temporary sense of well-being, or euphoria, unsettling to some people who aren't used to it. And that seems to be why government hates it. A drug which makes one feel better seems to be okay with government if it doesn't actually make one feel better (see "absurd"). Francis L. Young, a DEA Administrative Law Judge, said in a 60-page opinion on the subject in 1988: "Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for the DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance in light of the evidence in this record." On the other hand, Prosecutor Nelson, former-Representative Hunt, and Speaker Eccarius amply demonstrate the harmful effects of marijuana. They've been driven senseless, inconsistent, incongruous, ridiculous, foolish, silly, farcical, ludicrous, asinine, inane, stupid, screwy, unintelligible, and confused by it. And one would presume they don't even smoke it. There is one note of encouragement on the Ducheneaux case as Tempest goes to press. On March 8, Sioux Falls Magistrate Patricia Riepel seemed disposed to grant a defense motion to allow a "greater necessity" defense strategy to Matthew. Essentially, this will allow Matthew and medical experts to testify that the use of marijuana, in this instance, prevents a greater harm. Her opinion will be released about the time this issue of Tempest hits the streets. If the defense can present the jury with the facts at his trial in June, Matthew will be acquitted. Then, we taxpayers will simply be left with a bill for a case which never should have been prosecuted. See more about Matthew Ducheneaux at http://www.sodaknorml.org/. Bob Newland's journey is published at http://www.nakedgov.com/.