Pubdate: Thu, 19 May 2005
Source: Providence Journal, The (RI)
Copyright: 2005 The Providence Journal Company
Contact:  http://www.projo.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/352
Author: Jeremiah S. Jeremiah, Jr.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/opinion.htm (Opinion)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)

R.I. MEDICAL-MARIJUANA BILL'S PROBLEMS

THE USE of marijuana for medicinal purposes continues to be a subject of 
great debate. This topic has become a salient one for Rhode Island because 
a state Medical Marijuana Act is under consideration.

As chief judge of the Family Court, founder and past president of the New 
England Association for Drug Court Professionals, and a board member of the 
National Association for Drug Court Professionals, I am concerned about the 
lack of clarity in this proposed act.

Although there is still much dissension over the scientific findings on the 
medical use of marijuana, there is little dispute that stringent 
regulations are required in this matter.

Upon examining the proposed act, I see few safeguards. Qualified patients 
could have up to 12 marijuana plants, as well as 2 1/2 ounces of usable 
marijuana, but the bill does not refer to how patients would acquire these 
marijuana plants. This detail is important, because marijuana continues to 
be a controlled substance. Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, 
cannabis is classified as a Schedule I drug, indicating a high potential 
for abuse. In the proposed Rhode Island Medical Marijuana Act there are no 
provisions for physicians to prescribe a Schedule I drug. Such a drug may 
only be recommended, by written certification, qualified by certain medical 
conditions.

Given that patients cannot obtain marijuana as they do other prescriptions, 
how will cannabis be obtained, delivered and transported? These are 
questions yet unanswered that must be addressed by regulation.

Assuming that patients could obtain 12 marijuana plants, where would they 
be grown? Under the current proposal, these plants could be grown in a 
backyard. This concern is not to imply that patients who grew marijuana 
would be interested in any illegal activity, yet it points to the need to 
address concerns of access. Under such conditions, marijuana could easily 
be stolen or misused in some fashion. Where are the restrictions on the 
disposal of "unusable marijuana," including "seeds, stalks and roots of the 
plants"? These parts are deemed "unusable" for medical purposes, yet should 
not be seen as benign or insignificant. In fact, such parts are often 
sought for their psychoactive properties and/or use in plant reproduction.

Physicians alone cannot effectively monitor marijuana use. Because 
marijuana can be only recommended, not prescribed, traditional checks and 
balances may be missing.

Would effective monitoring fall upon law enforcement? Law enforcement needs 
clarification on how to differentiate medical use from illegal possession: 
How would law enforcement obtain information on reasons for possession and 
respect a patient's right to privacy?

Although provisions are made for patients to have a registered 
identification card, obtained from the state Department of Health, it may 
be difficult for law enforcement to verify the authenticity of some cards.

At this time, there are no requirements for such cards to have pictures. 
This is only recommended in the proposed act. In the proposal, the 
Department of Health could release information to law enforcement simply by 
confirming a random identification number. Such a procedure raises concerns 
when juxtaposed with other provisions in the proposed act, which allow up 
to 10 days before a card can be reported as lost. The proposed act also 
states that if the Health Department fails to issue a "valid registry card 
in response to a valid application submitted pursuant to this chapter 
within twenty days of its submission, the registry identification card 
shall be deemed granted and a copy of the registry identification 
application shall be deemed a valid registry identification card."

How is the Health Department to know if an application is valid? The 
proposed act allows 15 days for the department to verify or reject an 
application. Delays in operations are at times inevitable; therefore, the 
assurance of the validity of such applications may pose unforeseen 
challenges. Efficiency is a priority for the patient, yet an application 
should not be approved before all qualifications are met.

Finally, even if the state's Medical Marijuana Act does pass, there would 
continue to be complications with federal laws. Given this, the proposed 
act states, "Any state or local law enforcement official who knowingly 
cooperates with federal law enforcement agents to arrest, investigate, 
prosecute, or search a registered qualified patient or a primary caregiver 
or his or her property for acting in compliance with this chapter shall 
have his or her employment suspended or terminated."

Such conditions may weaken law enforcement's authority to differentiate 
medical from non-medical marijuana use.

Marijuana is a much-sought-after drug of adolescents. Since the start of 
the Rhode Island Juvenile Drug Court, in 1999, the recorded number of 
arrests for marijuana possession is staggering. Records of the Juvenile 
Drug Court Diversion Program (designed to curtail first-time drug 
offenders) show that of 646 drug arrests, 511 involved marijuana. The 
Juvenile Drug Court Post Adjudication Program, which handles more serious 
offenses, records that out of 415 cases, 291 included marijuana charges.

In many of these cases, marijuana charges accompanied other charges, such 
as possessing a firearm, being disorderly, theft, truancy, driving under 
the influence, and possession of other serious drugs.

Thus, marijuana may not be viewed in the same light as other restricted 
drugs used for medical purposes, such as prescription opiates, 
benzodiazepines or barbiturates. Marijuana's classification as a Schedule I 
drug and the apparent lack of clarity in the proposed regulation are strong 
concerns regarding this legislation.

The issue of medical marijuana remains complex, and it is important enough 
to deserve our prompt attention. It is equally important to assess whether 
assisting one party will create conditions that jeopardize other parties. 
Prudent regulation of marijuana cannot be viewed as a formality; rather, it 
is a necessity -- one that ensures safety for young citizens and compassion 
for those who search for a medicinal adjunct for medical problems.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake