Pubdate: Sun, 10 Aug 2014
Source: Tampa Tribune (FL)
Copyright: 2014 The Tribune Co.
Contact: http://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-letters/submit/
Website: http://tbo.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/446
Page: 2
Section: Views

DO VOTERS WANT TO UNSHACKLE POT?

Polls indicate Florida voters are overwhelmingly in favor of a
constitutional amendment that will legalize the medical use of marijuana.

That is both understandable and alarming.

Although Amendment 2 is being depicted as an effort to provide relief
to the suffering, it is rife with loopholes that likely will result in
the wideA-spread use of an unsafe drug.

Parents, in particular, should be upset be-cause the amendment
includes no age limits or requirements for parental consent.

Indeed, the vaguely written constitutional initiative, the entirety of
which you will not see in the ballot summary, opens the door to all
kinds of mischief and abuse.

The amendment, for instance, allows marijuana to be used for
debilitating medical "conditions" and lists cancer, AIDS, glaucoma and
a few other serious diseases. But it concludes the treatment can be
given for "other conditions for which a physician believes that the
medical use of marijuana would likely outweigh the potential health
risks for a patient."

That is a loophole large enough to drive a Volkswagen van
through.

People might be able to obtain marijuana for a toothache, sore knee or
anxiety.

Does anybody doubt that there will be unscrupulous health officials
who would capitalize on the lax rule?

As Tampa OB-GYN Dr. Madelyn Butler says, "Welcome to pill mills part
two." Under the amendment, a physician certifies someone is eligible
for marijuana just by stating in his or her "professional opinion the
patient suffers from a debilitating medical condition."

The patient can then obtain the marijuana from approved centers with
the aid of a certified "caregiver."

The amendment's language gives physicians and health care officials a
virtual free pass for abuse. It states physicians "shall not be
subject to criminal or civil liability or sanctions under Florida law
for issuing a physician certification to a person diagnosed with a
debilitating medical condition...."

A similar protection is provided for medical marijuana treatment
centers and their employees.

In other words, irresponsible physicians and marijuana center
administrators and employees would be immune from any liability,
regardless of how recklessly they distribute the drug.

Moreover, the amendment's only require-ment for becoming a "caregiver"
is that the individual at least be 21 years old.

Similarly, no standard is established for marijuana's content, though
its potency varies dramatically.

The amendment calls for the Department of Health to develop rules for
such matters, but there is no guarantee rigorous restrictions would be
adopted a=C2=80" or even possible because of the amendment's language.

Former Florida Supreme Court Justice Kenneth Bell tells us the courts
are likely to read the amendment's provisions broadly because they
will have become a "constitutional right."

Even the justification for the amendment is debatable.

Dr. Butler says a prescription capsule a=C2=80" Marinol a=C2=80" that inc
ludes
the primary active ingredients in marijuana is available for patients
with cancer, AIDS and other diseases.

The Florida Medical Association, which rep-resents 20,000 physicians,
opposes the measure as strongly as law enforcement
organizations.

When announcing its position last week, FMA President Alan B.
Pillersdorf, stated: "We have come together to reject an amendment
that does not have the proper regulations in place, apA-proves an
unsafe method of drug delivery and puts a substance that has drug
abuse potential in the hands of Floridians ..." It is one thing to be
compassionate; it's another to be reckless.

Florida voters should think seriously about whether they want to
enshrine in the state constitution a loosely worded amendment
unshackling the use of a potent drug.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt