Legislation of Medical Marijuana

                                           Legislation of Medical Marijuana

Introduction

The discussion surrounding the legalization of the controversial medical marijuana in Florida led people to the ballot in 2014. The author of the article, “medical marijuana legislation in Florida: the recommendation vs. prescription for healthcare providers,” Nicole Santamaria, focuses on the legalization process of marijuana for medical use in Florida, published in 2016.  The article points out the issues surrounding the legislation of marijuana into law. Following the contradiction of cannabis being an illegal substance under the Controlled Substance Act, physicians find themselves in a dilemma on whether to discuss or even administer marijuana to patients in fear of breaking the law and being convicted (Cerdá, Wall, Keyes, Galea, & Hasin, 2012).  This article argues that Florida, as a state, should focus on helping their health workers alleviate their fears of breaking the law. This will put them in a position to discuss the medical uses of marijuana with their patients freely and administer it when necessary. Case studies by clinical and health workers have proved that cannabis has medicinal value and can be used to relieve chronic pains, suppress high levels of depression, epilepsy, schizophrenia, nausea, and vomiting due to chemotherapy. Therefore, there is a need to consider the legislation of medical marijuana following its recommendation versus the prescription distinctions for health care providers under the law.

Analysis

Despite an attempt by citizens of Florida to vote in the legalization of marijuana, cannabis remains to be an illegal substance under the law. More often, marijuana is said to be a dangerous drug and that the sale or any distribution of marijuana is a serious crime that calls for conviction. It has been categorized under Schedule 1 drugs that cannot be accepted for medical use and are high potential for abuse. In her article, Nicole points out that the federal government maintains the position that marijuana has not yet met the criteria for it to be used for medical treatment and hence not safe for consumption. Although there is encouraged research for medicinal purposes of marijuana, there is no assertion that any research has reached the standards of categorizing cannabis as a medical drug. It is, therefore, a violation of the federal law in the United States for an individual or a group of people to distribute or process marijuana, whether for medical use or any other use. The motion is supported by two memos, The Ogden Memo and The Cole Memo, that do not support the notion that cannabis is illegal (Salomonsen-Sautel et al., 2012). Still, on the other hand, they do not accept the marijuana medical legality.

The position of health providers regarding the legal use of marijuana for medical purposes, according to this article, is not stable. Despite the researches done and marijuana credited for its therapeutic value, cannabis has not been accepted by the community at large and has not been stamped for approval. Researchers in the field of medicine who wish to undertake studies to prove the medicinal value of marijuana have to submit their letters and protocol to the national institute on drug abuse (NIDA) and apply for the license.  This is unlikely when researching other substances hence proving that marijuana is considered illegal content. Although marijuana is legalized, physicians must conduct training regarding training to ensure they make informed decisions. This helps them explain the risks and benefits of medical marijuana to patients who inquire about it during treatment.

The author also describes Florida’s medical marijuana laws that were passed to legalize cannabis. One of the regulations includes the Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act of 2014 (CMCA) that authorized the use of cannabidiols to a particular group of patients who qualified after being diagnosed with diseases that could be cured by the medicine. The law stated that terminally ill people, especially those ailing from cancer, were qualifiers to use medical cannabis. The patients should also have been treated for the past three months without recovery so that medical marijuana could be administered. The author also points out that the CMCA law needed that patients should sign a voluntary agreement consent that they would take risks and side effects that came along with using the medical cannabis and consider taking an alternative medication (Wilkinson et al., 2016).

The article clearly explains the dilemma that health workers are faced concerning obtaining and how to use marijuana. The federal government had to revoke prescription licenses of physicians who tried to recommend medical marijuana to their patients (Mikos, 2009). This act brought about conflict of interest in recommendation versus the prescription of medical cannabis. The proposal of medical marijuana was taken into account to be similar to the order of the same drug, and any physician endorsing the use had to obtain medicine for their patients. It was merely agreed upon that recommendation was not fully prescription since the physician cannot anticipate what the patient will do with the proposal to use medical marijuana. Nevertheless, they would be held accountable for aiding in the acquiring of the illegal substance and hence breaking the federal law.

The author also explains the medical value of medical cannabis. It is worth to mention that research has shown that marijuana contains over 100 chemicals popularly known as cannabinoids. The substances are related to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which has the mind-altering effect that makes one “high” after consuming cannabis. Low levels of THC may be induced to a patient to help reduce inflammation, chronic pain, and also control muscle problems. Extracts from marijuana also treat ailments related to seizures, mental disorders, and help increase appetite, especially to patients who have HIV/AIDS (Wang, Roosevelt & Heard, 2013). However, it should be noted that there are risks related to chronic or excessive use of the drug; these would include extreme cases of increased schizophrenia and other mental disorders and severe respiratory problems. It would, therefore, be necessary for a patient to discontinue the use of medical marijuana should such symptoms occur.

The author vividly describes the challenges surrounding the legalization of medical marijuana in Florida. She dug deep into the law to obtain the facts behind the federal government’s unwillingness to legalize marijuana. The information recorded is sufficient for anyone willing to conduct further research regarding the same topic. Knowledge of the law is the crucial point that aids in realizing the hindrances behind the legalization of marijuana in Florida. The government has not yet found enough evidence to support the medical facts about cannabis, and that’s why it is reluctant to legalize it.

The author has pointed out well that research has been done and verified that marijuana is capable of being used to cure chronic pains when used in the right dosages. The article is useful in explaining the use of marijuana in medical terms. The report is written in clear and straightforward language that is easy to understand. Any person in quest for knowing the challenges behind the legalization of marijuana can refer to this article.

Response

It could be agreed upon that the issues discussed in the article need to be addressed with urgency. I agree with the author in need to look into the legalization of medical marijuana in Florida following the therapeutic benefits that come along with it. The author can seek to source information about the laws and the process of legislation of marijuana from government organizations and NGOs responsible for the process to improve the viability of information presented in the article.

Conclusion

The focus on politics behind a physician recommending and prescribing medical marijuana to a patient and whether they aid the patient in breaking the law should not be a barrier to them treating the patient. The focus should instead be on the government providing enough education to both the healthcare provider and the patients on the possible risks and benefits likely to arise from the use of medical cannabis. However, this has not been the case in Florida as the government still considers marijuana to be an illegal substance and cannot be used as a therapeutic substance. Physicians, therefore, remain to be criminal liabilities of breaking the law by recommending patients to use and obtaining marijuana.

The study suggests that legalizing marijuana for its medical use could make the healthcare providers in Florida feel more comfortable when recommending patients to use marijuana for medicinal purposes. This step would make patients more informed since they will be aware of the benefits and risks associated with medical marijuana. Considering the health benefits that come along with the drug, the federal government should take step-in legalizing marijuana and help those patients whose ailments could be treated using medical cannabis. This would result in healthier people and a more robust economy.

References

Cerdá, M., Wall, M., Keyes, K. M., Galea, S., & Hasin, D. (2012). Medical marijuana laws in 50 state: investigating the relationship between state legalization of medical marijuana and marijuana use, abuse, and dependence. Drug and alcohol dependence, 120(1-3), 22-2

Mikos, R. A. (2009). On the Limits of Supremacy: Medical Marijuana and the States’ Overlooked Power to Legalize Federal Crime. Vand. L., Rev., 62, 1419.

Salomonsen-Sautel, S., Sakai, J. T., Thurstone, C., Corley, R., & Hopfer, C. (2012). Medical marijuana use among adolescents in substance abuse treatment. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 51(7), 694-702.

Wang, G. S., Roosevelt, G., & Heard, K. (2013). Pediatric marijuana exposures in a medical marijuana state. Jama Pediatrics, 167(7), 630-633.

Wilkinson, S. T., Yarnell, S., Radhakrishnan, R., Ball, S. A., & D’Souza, D. C. (2016). Marijuana legalization: impact on physicians and public health. Annual review of medicine, 67, 453-466.