Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Should we legalize drugs?
Now_Im_Not_Banned:
--- Quote ---California Physicians & Medical Marijuana
On November 5, 1996, the people of California passed Proposition 215. Through this Initiative Measure, Section 11362.5 was added to the Health & Safety Code, and is also known as the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. The purposes of the Act include, in part:
"(A) To ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where the medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the person's health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief; and
(B) To ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician are not subject to criminal prosecution or sanction."
Furthermore, Health & Safety Code section 11362.5(c) provides strong protection for physicians who choose to participate in the implementation of the Act. - "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no physician in this state shall be punished, or denied any right or privilege, for having recommended marijuana to a patient for medical purposes."
The Medical Board of California (MBC) and the California Medical Association (CMA) worked together to develop this statement since medical marijuana is an emerging treatment modality. The MBC wants to assure physicians who choose to recommend medical marijuana to their patients, as part of their regular practice of medicine, that they WILL NOT be subject to investigation or disciplinary action by the MBC if they arrive at the decision to make this recommendation in accordance with the accepted standards of medical responsibility. The mere receipt of a complaint that the physician is recommending medical marijuana will not generate an investigation absent additional information indicating that the physician is not adhering to accepted medical standards.
These accepted standards are the same as any reasonable and prudent physician would follow when recommending or approving any other medication, or therapeutic intervention or prescribing any drug that requires a prescription** and include the following:
History and good faith examination of the patient.
Development of a treatment plan with objectives.
Provision of informed consent including discussion of side effects.
Periodic review of the treatment's efficacy.
Consultation, as necessary.
Proper record keeping that supports the decision to recommend the use of medical marijuana.
In other words, if physicians use the same care in recommending medical marijuana to patients as they would recommending or approving any other medication, therapeutic intervention or prescription drug treatment** they have nothing to fear from the Medical Board.
Here are some important points to consider when recommending medical marijuana:
1. Although it could trigger federal action, making a recommendation in writing to the patient will not trigger action by the Medical Board of California.
2. A patient need not have failed on all standard medications, in order for a physician to recommend or approve the use of medical marijuana.
3. The physician should determine that medical marijuana use is not masking an acute or treatable progressive condition, or that such use will lead to a worsening of the patient's condition.
4. The Act names certain medical conditions for which medical marijuana may be useful, although physicians are not limited in their recommendations to those specific conditions. In all cases, the physician should base his/her determination on the results of clinical trials, if available, medical literature and reports, or on experience of that physician or other physicians, or on credible patient reports. In all cases, the physician must determine that the risk/benefit ratio of medical marijuana is as good, or better, than other medications that could be used for that individual patient.
5. A physician who is not the primary treating physician may still recommend medical marijuana for a patient's symptoms. However, it is incumbent upon that physician to consult with the patient's primary treating physician or obtain the appropriate patient records to confirm the patient's underlying diagnosis and prior treatment history.
6. The initial examination for the condition for which medical marijuana is being recommended should be in-person.
7. Recommendations should be limited to the time necessary to appropriately monitor the patient. Periodic reviews should occur and be documented at least annually or more frequently as warranted.
8. If a physician recommends or approves the use of medical marijuana for a minor, the parents or legal guardians should be fully informed of the risks and benefits of such use and the parents consent to that use.
Physicians may wish to refer to CMA's ON-CALL Document #1315 titled "The Compassionate Use Act of 1996", updated annually for additional information and guidance. (http://www.cmanet.org/publicdoc.cfm/4)
Although the Compassionate Use Act allows the use of medical marijuana by a patient upon the recommendation or approval of a physician, California physicians should bear in mind that marijuana is listed in Schedule I of the federal Controlled Substance Act, which means that it has no accepted medical use under federal law. However, in Conant v. Walters (9th Cir.2002) F3d 629 the United States Court of Appeals recognized that physicians have a constitutionally-protected right to discuss with, and recommend to their patients all potentially beneficial treatments. Physicians could exceed the scope of this constitutional protection if they conspire with, or aid and abet, their patients in obtaining medical marijuana.
--- End quote ---
WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING THIS WHOLE TIME...Thank you, and have a nice day. 8)
ecrazy:
^^Who The Fuck Cares about the Medical Board Of California?? IT WILL STILL TRIGGER ACTION BY ANY FORM OF LAW ENFORCEMENT!!! LMAO @ You thinking your right still!!! hahahahahahahahahaha!
Your the only one Arguing against Facts, There is no "LEGAL" Anything you idiot...Fuckin Spoiled Ass Retired Druggies, never get anything, your so fuckin stubborn, its becoming pathetic.
Now_Im_Not_Banned:
--- Quote from: User on May 10, 2006, 02:33:39 PM ---^^Who The Fuck Cares about the Medical Board Of California?? IT WILL STILL TRIGGER ACTION BY ANY FORM OF LAW ENFORCEMENT!!! LMAO @ You thinking your right still!!! hahahahahahahahahaha!
Your the only one Arguing against Facts, There is no "LEGAL" Anything you idiot...Fuckin Spoiled Ass Retired Druggies, never get anything, your so fuckin stubborn, its becoming pathetic.
--- End quote ---
Are you really this stupid? You got sonned, just shut the fuck up and admit you don't know what you're talking about. And no, not just any law enforcement can fuck with you, they gotta be feds...LEARN HOW TO READ AND YOU WILL UNDERSTAND MORE...............
>>>>> http://sierra.uchastings.edu/cohen/marijuanaarticle.PDF
Knowledge is power!
ecrazy:
--- Quote from: Now_Im_Blowed on May 10, 2006, 04:03:19 PM ---
--- Quote from: User on May 10, 2006, 02:33:39 PM ---^^Who The Fuck Cares about the Medical Board Of California?? IT WILL STILL TRIGGER ACTION BY ANY FORM OF LAW ENFORCEMENT!!! LMAO @ You thinking your right still!!! hahahahahahahahahaha!
Your the only one Arguing against Facts, There is no "LEGAL" Anything you idiot...Fuckin Spoiled Ass Retired Druggies, never get anything, your so fuckin stubborn, its becoming pathetic.
--- End quote ---
Are you really this stupid? You got sonned, just shut the fuck up and admit you don't know what you're talking about. And no, not just any law enforcement can fuck with you, they gotta be feds...LEARN HOW TO READ AND YOU WILL UNDERSTAND MORE...............
>>>>> http://sierra.uchastings.edu/cohen/marijuanaarticle.PDF
Knowledge is power!
--- End quote ---
LAW ENFORCEMENT = ENFORCER OF LAW (not just state laws, not just local laws, ALL LAWS!!!)
LMAO!!!!!!! "ONLY FEDS"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!
how sad little elior, how sad indeed!
Just Another Sunny day in California:
--- Quote from: Now_Im_Blowed on May 10, 2006, 11:54:09 AM ---
--- Quote from: Another Sunny Day in California on May 09, 2006, 06:34:48 PM ---i think User is winning this one 8)
nice points, both of you guys
--- End quote ---
How is he winning if it's a FACT that you can get weed prescribed from a doctor LEGALLY? You're just mad cuz you got sonned in this very thread and you had no response...So now you're just riding his lame-ass arguments...When will you kids ever learn? 8)
--- End quote ---
dude i agreed that both of you have very good facts but even though it's Legal to have prescribed weed from a doctor for medical purposes, it doesn't really make weed 100% legal does it? because you can still be convicted from it.
and i'm not mad, i made this topic to hear what YOU guys had to say, i already have my opinion on this matter, therefore your response doesn't affect me one bit. My focus isn't on whether weed should be legalized or not because they're are good facts for both sides but to legalize all illegal drugs OR do something about these Tobacco companies who make billions and billions of dollars while killing their very consumers and then targeting children to regain those consumers who in the last year or so died from Lung Cancer, Stroke, Cardiovascular Disease or etc.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version