With elections looming just around the corner, the issue of medical marijuana is heating up big time in Massachusetts. Ballet Question 3
offers voters the opportunity to legalize medical marijuana in the state. If it
passes, it validates the substance as a credible form of compassionate care. However, it also may open a Pandora’s box of unintended consequences, especially
regarding youth access to marijuana, and as a parent, that’s a big if. I'm still sitting on the fence...
In theory, medical marijuana seems a worthy addition to a
select arsenal of pain relief.
Anecdotal evidence shows that marijuana is
extremely effective at relieving the pain/nausea from diseases such as cancer
and multiple sclerosis and with less toxicity than many harsh drugs currently in
use. So how can we deny that small dose of mercy? If it were my father, my
husband, a close friend, I would do anything to help relieve chronic suffering.
While there are drugs currently approved to deliver some of the same properties
of marijuana, like Marinol, they are generally deemed far less effective. It’s
perhaps this humanitarian plea for compassionate care that is my only real
selling point for legalizing, but it’s a doozy.
My list of cons is longer, but the majority of my concerns
stem from ambiguity in the proposed methodology for controlling and overseeing how all this could work. It’s
the unintended consequences that are the most troubling. As a parent, my
primary concern is that if the experience of other states holds, legalizing
medical marijuana will surely increase the access of marijuana to youth.
Legalizing medical marijuana sends a message to kids that it is a safe
substance for recreational use, yet scientific research shows that smoking
marijuana can have pronounced harmful effects on the developing adolescent
brain.
I also find the language regarding who can be prescribed how
much marijuana by whom and for what conditions troublingly vague. Some states are grappling with large
percentages of medical marijuana falling into the hands of more recreational
users. And ultimately, oversight of the 35 dispensaries planned statewide, a
huge proportion of which will be centered in this area, appears questionable.
The Massachusetts Department of Health, clearly overtaxed as it is, evidenced
by the recent scandal over forensic lab testing, doesn’t seem fully prepared to
add this dicey responsibility to its list. And what about patients unable to
travel to dispensaries who are allowed to grow their own marijuana? Who
monitors that?
Opponents of the question frequently dispute marijuana as
medicine, since it hasn’t been approved by the FDA as such. I don’t have issues
with the claim that marijuana has significant medicinal properties, but I would
feel more comfortable if the FDA would expedite the investigation to approve it
for medicinal use with a commitment to strongly regulate quality control and
dispense through licensed pharmacists. However, with current laws and policies thwarting research that could lead to FDA approval, that doesn’t seem to be in
the cards any time soon, which is why states are taking the proposition upon
themselves. But ultimately, are states perhaps shooting themselves in the foot
to circumvent a frustratingly cumbersome system? Embedded in Question 3 are a
host of other unanswered questions that could use more time and planning before
we in Massachusetts are pressed to decide yes or no.
There’s a lot to consider – none of us should be cavalier
about the decision, but give this ballot question a lot of careful thought as to
all the possible consequences. Is the time right to finally recognize the
benefits marijuana can provide for people suffering from chronic pain? If not
now, when – and how?
Two weeks to decide…
No comments:
Post a Comment