Pubdate: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 Source: Ventura County Star (CA) Copyright: 2004 The E.W. Scripps Co. Contact: http://www.staronline.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/479 Cited: Raich v. Ashcroft http://angeljustice.org/ Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Angel+Raich Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) POT'S CATCH-22 ON THE DOCKET High Court Should OK Patient Use. Eight years ago, 56 percent of California voters approved Proposition 215, allowing sick people to use marijuana for medical purposes when approved by a physician. In all, 35 states have approved similar legislation. The only problem is that the federal government still outlaws the use of marijuana, for any reason, which has created enormous legal headaches for sick individuals, doctors and law enforcement. Fortunately, the legal Catch-22 will be addressed this winter when the U.S. Supreme Court at last considers whether the federal government can prosecute sick people who use marijuana on the advice of their doctor. The Star supported Proposition 215 and hopes the Supreme Court rules for common sense. There is no reason that doctors can legally prescribe controlled substances such as cocaine and morphine -- Schedule II drugs -- but not marijuana -- a Schedule I drug. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 -- the government's legal foundation in its fight against drug abuse -- places all substances into one of five schedules, based on the substance's medical use, potential for abuse, and safety or dependence liability. A Schedule I drug is defined as having a high potential for abuse, no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, or lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. A Schedule II drug also has a high potential for abuse, but has an accepted medical use. Marijuana does, in fact, have an accepted medical use, as confirmed by a 1999 yearlong study by the Institute of Medicine at the National Academy of Science, ordered by none other than former federal drug czar Barry McCaffrey. That study concluded that marijuana may be effective in easing chronic pain, nausea and vomiting caused by chemotherapy, poor appetite, wasting caused by AIDS or advanced cancer, and muscular spasms associated with multiple sclerosis. The study also rebutted arguments that allowing the medicinal use of marijuana would lead to the use of other illegal drugs or encourage the public to use it. Sadly, the discussion of how marijuana is categorized is not based on science, but on the federal government's illogical, "just-say-no" mind-set. The U.S. government has gone to extreme lengths to thwart the will of residents in 35 states who have authorized the medical use of marijuana. From 1997 until October 2003, for example, doctors who even discussed marijuana with their patients were threatened with the revocation of federal licenses they need to prescribe medicine. However, in October, the Supreme Court let stand a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that doctors have a constitutional right to advise ill patients about the benefits of marijuana. Now, the Bush administration is appealing a case it lost last year involving two California women who say they need marijuana for their health. One plaintiff, Angel Reich, 38, of Oakland, suffers from a brain tumor, scoliosis and chronic nausea, and her doctor has recommended marijuana for her treatment. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in their favor in December saying that the federal law outlawing marijuana does not apply to people who are using marijuana upon the recommendation of their doctor. Most Americans don't like the idea of sick people being prosecuted for using something their doctors recommend and which the government's own study has admitted has a valid medicinal use. It is time for the Supreme Court to square state and federal laws and to get the U.S. government to stop harassing sick people. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake